The body of the character exists at declaration.
The eight cards do not exist at declaration.
Search found 3031 matches
- Sun Oct 22, 2023 12:59 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Prowess of Age and The Tormented Earth (could vs would)
- Replies: 16
- Views: 1743
- Sun Oct 22, 2023 12:57 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Ioreth And Well-Preserved
- Replies: 4
- Views: 491
Re: Ioreth And Well-Preserved
Untapping effects are not healing effects, so you cannot use something which untaps to heal a wounded character.
A healing effect may untap at its leisure.
A healing effect may untap at its leisure.
- Sun Oct 22, 2023 12:54 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Reluctant Final Parting - where Quickbeam may be played?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 464
Re: Reluctant Final Parting - where Quickbeam may be played?
Another case of ICE imprecision. Read "site at which the ally can be played" as "site listed on the ally card."
- Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:02 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Post/common effect - convention
- Replies: 24
- Views: 861
Re: Post/common effect - convention
Children use grammar rules before they go to school, not knowing that they use grammar rules and even not knowing that there is such thing as grammar. Some people break grammar rules, knowing or not knowing that grammar rules exist. For me it looks like ICE, even if not deliberately, was using some...
- Wed Oct 11, 2023 9:09 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Post/common effect - convention
- Replies: 24
- Views: 861
Re: Post/common effect - convention
Having to remove it from the game only for acting like weariness of the heart seems harsh too :) If not, there would never be a reason to include Weariness of the Heart. @ Konrad: The point is simply that the use of paragraphs is arbitrary. There is no reason to assume deliberate function in one in...
- Tue Oct 10, 2023 8:14 am
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Post/common effect - convention
- Replies: 24
- Views: 861
Re: Post/common effect - convention
There isn't any regularity. Compare Will of Sauron with Fellowship. One is indented and the other is not. It means nothing other than that they didn't feel like a new paragraph.
- Mon Oct 09, 2023 1:09 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Post/common effect - convention
- Replies: 24
- Views: 861
Re: Post/common effect - convention
That is the default way to understand it, yes.
- Sun Oct 08, 2023 1:42 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Post/common effect - convention
- Replies: 24
- Views: 861
Re: Post/common effect - convention
It's for both, in the absence of any statement that indicates it's for only one of the uses. This would be the general policy of dealing with discard/remove clauses on any card in the game.
- Sat Oct 07, 2023 8:18 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Post/common effect - convention
- Replies: 24
- Views: 861
Re: Post/common effect - convention
In this case, it is the ambiguities of the English language. I do not believe the presence or absence of a line break is meant to have rules significance; it is more likely that such is simply formatting to make the text more readable/better balanced within the confines of the text box.
- Mon Oct 02, 2023 9:56 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Active conditions of effect of Black Arrow
- Replies: 21
- Views: 1095
Re: Active conditions of effect of Black Arrow
Now you've got me going back to the very beginning with these stupid passive condition rules. ICE's vague language strikes again! And I believe the answer lies in the MELE glossary: Condition, passive: An action that causes another action to take effect. The triggered action will be the first decla...
- Mon Oct 02, 2023 8:02 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Active conditions of effect of Black Arrow
- Replies: 21
- Views: 1095
Re: Active conditions of effect of Black Arrow
I've said it before and I'll say it again: timing rules are a mess. or simply use common sense. If this was meant to be self-cancelling, the card would simply start like "Warrior only. If bearer is a Man, tap to...", or even more simply "Man Warrior only. Tap to..." If common se...
- Mon Oct 02, 2023 1:07 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Active conditions of effect of Black Arrow
- Replies: 21
- Views: 1095
Re: Active conditions of effect of Black Arrow
I've said it before and I'll say it again: timing rules are a mess.
- Thu Sep 28, 2023 3:24 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Active conditions of effect of Black Arrow
- Replies: 21
- Views: 1095
Re: Active conditions of effect of Black Arrow
Help me out, here: Annotation 9 talks about an action resolving when that action has been created by a passive condition.
9a talks about a *condition* resolving.
How on earth does a condition even resolve? Declared actions resolve, not conditions.
What is 9a *actually* talking about?
9a talks about a *condition* resolving.
How on earth does a condition even resolve? Declared actions resolve, not conditions.
What is 9a *actually* talking about?
- Fri Sep 22, 2023 12:57 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Results of action caused by passive condition vs Ongoing effect
- Replies: 7
- Views: 429
Re: Results of action caused by passive condition vs Ongoing effect
The reason I ask is that enough difficulties arise from it that I'd rather be certain it was something ICE officially said, rather than something ICE implied as a response to something else.
- Fri Sep 22, 2023 8:16 am
- Forum: Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)
- Topic: Results of action caused by passive condition vs Ongoing effect
- Replies: 7
- Views: 429
Re: Results of action caused by passive condition vs Ongoing effect
But who said it, and in what context?