Draft of CoE Digest #202 Q4 - Await the Advent of Allies

[Manuel]

In order to contribute to this thread please follow these rules:

1) The thread will be open until Nov 22.
2) There will be a maximum of one reply per forum user, and that reply cannot be edited. We want to actively avoid starting "flame wars", so please speak your peace, let others speak their peace, and that's it.
3) After the review period, the ROC will carefully consider everyone's contributions, revise the draft as appropriate, and then the Digest will be published and official.

Can I play Await the Advent of Allies on a moving character or on a character at a haven?

There has been a long-standing debate about how the text of Await the Advent of Allies should be interpreted, whether with a “literal” approach or a “thematic” approach. Since there aren’t any previous digests that cover this situation, this committee has decided to put an end to this discussion and edit the card’s text so that it reflects the author’s intention. We even reached out to Ichabod, who was kind enough to reply to us and told us that the best way to go would be changing the active condition of the card.

Here is the new official text:

AWAIT THE ADVENT OF ALLIES

Permanent‐event

Playable on a non‐Wizard character with a mind of six or less at a non-Haven site. Character must stay at its current site. Target character does not count against general influence and its marshalling points do not count. Discard this card when you play a resource that taps the site, when you play a resource that requires the site, when the character is discarded, or when the character becomes wounded. Cannot be duplicated on a given character.

[Mordakai]

Seems reasonable. The other interpretation was pretty weird.

[Bandobras Took]

I merely wish to mention that reaching out to Ichabod was a good idea.

[Theo]

I hate to use up my one post, but realistically I'll be lucky if I get to think about this any more before the deadline.

I think while you are planning an overhaul errata, you should change "Character must stay at its current site" to "The character's company may not move."

1) "Stay"ing at a site is only mentioned once in the rules, and in a context it suggests it refers to the decision to not move during the organization phase. This suggests a possible argument about whether the character could be moved through other means than playing a site face down during the organization phase, such as with Farmer Maggot or another company joining with Great-road or something similar.

2) "Stay" also appears in the rules in the context of cards not being removed from play. While I think "at the current site" helps contextualize, I think it would be better to avoid the ambiguity of people wondering whether, for example, the character cannot be returned to hand. I suppose changing "the character is discarded" with "the character leaves play" could clarify that instead; "When the character is discarded" is otherwise meaningless to state.

I think the order should be character-specific discard reasons first. E.g.: "when the character leaves play or becomes wounded, or when you play a resource that taps or requires the site."

=====

I think while you are planning an overhaul errata, it could be helpful to clarify what "requires the site" means. I believe CDavis had a theory that anything that requires a character necessarily is played at (requires) the site because the characters require a site unless they are moving, so he thought Lucky Strike should discard AtAoA. https://discord.com/channels/6880583535 ... 0930280448
If that kind of inherited requirement doesn't qualify, where is the cutoff? Cards like Eagle-mounts don't directly require the site to be played, but do have a requirement to be played that depends on the site. Or Not at Home canceling a creature keyed to the site. Or Not at Home effecting an automatic-attack. Or A Chance Meeting allowing a character to be brought into play at "any" qualifying site. Or Deeper Shadow to change a site symbol.

To me, none of these examples should discard AtAoA according to my understanding of "requires" as informed by ICE netreps' guidance---well, I guess I could believe Deeper Shadow could---but I acknowledge others may have other opinions.

I don't know how one would tap the site with a resource without requiring the site.

[Konrad Klar]

I think while you are planning an overhaul errata, it could be helpful to clarify what "requires the site" means. I believe CDavis had a theory that anything that requires a character necessarily is played at (requires) the site because the characters require a site unless they are moving, so he thought Lucky Strike should discard AtAoA.

And if the site in question happens to be Bree then Marvels Told requires Bree, because sage requires Bree unless he is elsewhere.
Some theories are absolutely safe, because there is no method of proving or disproving them.

Someone may care about whether some theory is explaining anything, is usable.
E.g. whether it creates some definition that matches some situations and does not math other situations, or rather it covers all possible situations.
"a resource that is played at the site or on the site" covers less than "a resource that requires the site".

[dirhaval]

First, emoji is not a response right?

Second, reviewing the MEDM player's guide; card statements made were to save general influence, wizardless deck, and/or to play one faction. Likely at the end of the game since there would be no next turn for the player that would use-up general influence.

My thoughts: may move to the site to use another MEDM resource Fireworks after tapping the site when playing a faction. Good sites include those in the Shire, Minas Tirith (two factions, palantir). Choice of Luthien is a MEDM card.
Has anyone tried AtAOA at a tapped surface site so keep it in play while others go down?

Third, I feel that any resource played would result the text "... at the site" not being included. Lucky Strike does not need a site; Lucky Search does.
Cards with "an untapped site" in card text include: Anduril, Dreams of Lore,Far-sight,Reforging,Make's Map, Dragon-lore.
Hour of Need {MEDM} seems like a resource needing a site. Withdrawn to Mordor needs the on-guard on a site, but it fails needing a site.
Would AtAoA be discarded if Rescue Prisoners is stored at a ? yes, needing a site. Maybe kept character there to heal at a home site while keeping his pal's company hazard limit low without joining; then hoping to draw faction later that turn, the play a character next turn at that home site?

Would decks at Worlds played a part? Seeing the World winning deck of 1996, includes Stirring Bones, so guide likely was out already; includes Assassin, Slayer, Chill Douser. So maybe creators knew combat/concealing cards, would be needed?

4th; card image is Elendil awaiting Gil-galad at Weathertop. Surely, the High King of the sister-realms knew of the risk of assassins?
Card is meant to wait until a card is drawn to tap the site. Card is discarded if target is wounded. Big risk if Concealment discards the card. Escape would discard the card; not waiting if you run away? A Chance Meeting would discard right?

[Manuel]

Thanks everyone for your contributions. The RC will study them carefully and come up with a final digest soon.