Page 2 of 2
Re: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:26 pm
by Konrad Klar
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: ↑Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:45 pm
It does not have a target during m/h hazard phase in the existing version, but I assumed we agreed that was due to sloppy wording, not on purpose.
In Shapeshifter's version it does have a target. The AA exists at the site, whether it's detainment or not (or existent vs. a particular company)
I think that purpose of the card (in 2nd effect) was affecting an automatic-attack
faced by a minion company.
It is OK if a card overcomes a limitation imposed by rules as long it does it explicitly. Practice used in hazard cards that may be revealed On Guard is using a clause "if placed On Guard it may be revealed [under that or another conditions]".
Text of FEAR! FIRE! FOES! lacks of such clause.
Shapeshifter's version cures a headache by cutting a head. It changes a target in such way that the target exists in M/H phase, so such clause is no longer needed.
At first glance it only adds a features to the card (the card may be also played in M/H phase for 2nd effect, not only placed On Guard) not removing anything. But it is not true.
Company may face AA not only when it enters a site. It may face it again (e.g. in result of Troll-purse). Shapeshifter's version cannot be revealed under such condition. My version (that introduces a minimal changes) can.
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: ↑Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:45 pm
According to rules, if it modifies the automatic-attack (and FFF does), special privilege is that you can reveal it as on-guard card. Or are you implying that because Framsburg's AA is not specified during M/H phase, no AA is specified during M/H phase? That would make a whole class of cards unuseable.
According to rules, if the company plays a card that potentially taps the site On Guard may be revealed.
And if that would be all on the topic, the rest of restrictions regarding a revealing On Guards would be meaningless (e.g. feel free to reveal Darkness Under Tree).
Hero Framsburg's AA has no type (race) until faced (and if opponent plays a creature as that AA). That actually makes a whole class of cards unusable as a cards that would affect the attack (and similar automatic-attacks). The class is: a hazard cards that target an attack of given type (race).
Re: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!
Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:21 pm
by Shapeshifter
I would like to support my version with Rulings Digest #117. I put (what for me is) the important part in this digest in bold letters.
Rulings Digest #117 wrote:5. A question has arisen regarding what cards may be played on attacks and what cards may be played on automatic-attacks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, we distinguish between (a) attacks (whether due to creatures or automatic-attacks or whatever else) and (b) automatic-attacks which are not being faced. The latter may exist when the former do not. For example, a company traveling to the Lonely Mountain is not currently facing the automatic-attack at the site, even though the automatic-attack is part of the text of a card that is currently in play. Our ruling is as follows:
(I) Resources that are playable on
* attacks (a) can be used on automatic-attacks only when a company is facing them, but are subject to restrictions as per the CRF.
* automatic-attacks (b) can be used on automatic-attacks at any time.
(II) Hazards that are playable on attacks (a) or automatic-attacks (b) can be used on automatic-attacks during the movement/hazard phase (or revealed as on-guards).
So, for example, it is possible to do any of the following:
- During the movement-hazard phase, play Not at Home to reduce the number of strikes of an automatic attack.
- During the movement-hazard phase, play Dragon's Desolation to increase the prowess of an automatic attack.
- During the movement-hazard phase, play Exile of Solitude on an automatic attack
- During the site phase while facing the automatic-attack, play Old Thrush to reduce the prowess/body of an automatic attack.
- During the site phase while the automatic-attack is being faced, reveal Dragon's Desolation on guard to increase the prowess of the attack.
- During the site phase while the automatic-attack is being faced, reveal Exile of Solitude on guard to attempt to capture a character.
However, it is not possible to do any of the following:
- During the movement-hazard phase, play Old Thrush to reduce the prowess/body of an automatic attack.
Re: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!
Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2018 9:24 pm
by Konrad Klar
I did not say that a version you are proposing is invalid. I think that it is something more than a necessary errata.
However I do not know what Rulings Digest #117 hast to do with your proposal.
Re: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!
Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2018 5:48 am
by Shapeshifter
If I did not get you wrong you are arguing that FFF's 2nd effect was ment by ICE to be revealed as an on-guard card because the card text says (bolded text by me): "Alternatively, playable on a detainment automatic-attack a minion company is facing".
I myself do not see this as a reasoning for ICE's original intend. I see it simply as sloppy wording - nothing more. ICE could have ment but did not write:
"Alternatively, playable on a detainment automatic-attack a minion company might be facing later this turn" or something in that direction. We just do not know.
In short terms: I don't read into the original text of FFF's 2nd effect anything about limiting it to an on-guard effect.
Regarding RD#117: FFF's 2nd effect (i.e. the card) is playable on an automatic-attack, therefore it can be used on automatic-attacks during the movement/hazard phase or revealed as an on-guard card. This is what I aim to apply to my suggested interpretation.
Re: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!
Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2018 10:57 am
by Thorsten the Traveller
Not that it is a justification in itself, but in current (tournament) practise people do play FFF and follow up with a Tidings of Bold Spies, a good combo especially with Whole Villages Roused or Awaken Defenders. But since combos are always tricky, the on-guard use is still more frequent. Moreover, the combo is used vs hero companies mostly and for its first ability.
We cannot ask creators, and the ROC must make a choice between sticking as close as possible to the current card text, or to the current way of playing (or the preferred way of playing, as determined by a vote). Even if we'd ask the creators, we might not get a clear answer, their processes were also hasty and in the distant past.
Re: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!
Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:31 am
by CDavis7M
Konrad Klar wrote: ↑Fri Apr 13, 2018 3:08 pm
FEAR! FIRE! FOES! wrote:Playable on a Free-hold [-me_fh-] or Border-hold [-me_bh-]. An additional automatic-attack is created at the site this turn: 5 strikes with 8 prowess (detainment, no attack type). Alternatively, playable on a detainment automatic-attack a minion company is facing. The attack becomes normal (not detainment) and has -1 prowess. The Brandybucks were blowing the Horn-call of Buckland...-LotRI
Alternative effect of the card targets a target not existing in M/H phase. An automatic-attack is not faced in M/H phase.
Nothing in text of the card overcomes a conditions of revealing On Guard cards.
There are many cards that override the on-guard rules. Usually these cards will mention "on-guard" if they can only be used on-guard. This card does not mention "on-guard" but the only way the alternative effect can be played is if revealed on-guard. So then clearly the card can be used on-guard.
The fact that the alternative effect of
FEAR! FIRE! FOES! can never be played during the movement/hazard phase is surely sufficient to override the rule that "
An on-guard card may only be revealed if it could have also been played during the movement/hazard phase."
That the alternative effect of
FEAR! FIRE! FOES! targets an entity that would never exist during the movement/hazard clearly indicates that this card is usable on-guard and that you don't need to meet the requirement that "
targets of the card must have existed during the movement/hazard phase in order for the card to be revealed."
But now the CoE Errata lets the card be used during the movement/hazard phase: "
Alternatively, playable on a detainment automatic-attack.". That definitely goes against the Brandybucks being on-guard.