Desire All for Thy Belly (clarification)

Any rule erratum or clarification submission for the upcoming 2019 ARV should be posted here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Proposed regulation:

"Player cannot opt to remove from game a card that represents a previously discarded in the same turn a site of origin of one of its companies."
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
the JabberwocK
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1156
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

I don't understand.

The cards are taken from the top of opponent's play deck. So how is a site of origin previously discarded in same turn on the top of the play deck?
User avatar
the JabberwocK
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1156
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Okay, I just read your other topic (Aware of Their Ways) and see your intent....

Player A exhausts his play deck and reshuffles, after which Player B plays Desire All for Thy Belly and chooses same site of origin (Wondrous Maps, etc.), after which Player A must return same company to site of origin. I wonder if this has ever happened in an actual game, haha!

My reply here would be the same as stated in the Aware of Their Ways topic... the necessity is dependent on interpretation of another rule and it should first be determined the result of that ballot item.

(Aside, assuming Option #2 of When a Company is At a Site were adopted, I still personally think I would rather not see this proposal pass. Why not let the hazard player decide the merits of playing Aware of Their Ways/Desire All for Thy Belly when it could potentially have such an effect, and if hazard player chooses to play one of these cards and chooses an available Wondrous Maps, etc. that was a company site of origin, then that company may not legally be returned to site of origin that turn and any such effect would fizzle.)
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

the Jabberwock wrote: Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:08 am ...then that company may not legally be returned to site of origin that turn and any such effect would fizzle.
Who says? Sometimes it is bad company composition that forces a return to site of origin. Which disallowed state takes precedence?
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
User avatar
the JabberwocK
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1156
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Theo wrote: Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:26 am Who says? Sometimes it is bad company composition that forces a return to site of origin. Which disallowed state takes precedence?
Fair enough. Nonetheless, my thoughts are the same as posted in the Aware of Their Ways topic. The odds of this happening are so slim that I have a hard time thinking it is worth asking the community to vote on.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

The proposal is not needed.

Nothing in the rules prevents the company from taking Wondrous Maps from the out-of-play pile in order to return to their site of origin. There is no requirement that the site must come from the discard pile or the location deck when being "returned to origin".
Post Reply

Return to “2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions”