Actions created by playing an item

Any rule erratum or clarification submission for the upcoming 2019 ARV should be posted here.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Theo wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2019 3:40 am Just want to tie this back to extra agent actions, which occur "each time" an agent takes a normal action. Not that there was much original guiding text there either.
Why would you want to tie this issue back to agent movement? Because of the use of "each time" ?
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:06 am "Immediately untap all unwounded characters in Gandalf's company." The word "immediately" implies that it happens immediately upon playing the card. This is not the case. The characters do not untap until resolution of the card. "Immediately" is used in many cards and has no meaning.
No. The word "immediately" does not imply that.
It means that there are no media between.
And yes.
The action is enclosed between other Narya's actions.
But because Narya does not say "immediately after" or "immediately before" the word is meaningless.
Narya itself may be also enclosed between other actions in its chain of effects.
The characters untap when "Immediately untap all unwounded characters in Gandalf's company." is executed as they would untap if the phrase would be "untap all unwounded characters in Gandalf's company."
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

The proposal is just way too far gone for such a simple issue. There is no such thing as a "nested chain of effects within another chain of effects." The only "nesting" of chains of effects in the Rules is nesting within the Strike Sequence which has its own special rules.

Plus, this is an effect of an item. It's not an event. There is no way for the effect to happen within a chain of effects and certainly not "nested." Many items can establish active conditions for declaring actions. Some items establish passive conditions for actions being declared.

There is no issue with the rules.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

If you are playing anything to affect the Spider attack from Rescue Prisoners then you are doing it in nested chain of effects.
Not before/after, not in response to Rescue Prisoners. You are interrupting the chain of effects in which Rescue Prisoners has been declared/is resolving.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Konrad Klar wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 4:43 pm If you are playing anything to affect the Spider attack from Rescue Prisoners then you are doing it in nested chain of effects.
Not before/after, not in response to Rescue Prisoners. You are interrupting the chain of effects in which Rescue Prisoners has been declared/is resolving.
Resolution of an attack involves resolution of one or more strikes. And resolution of strikes can include resolution of one or more actions. And actions can be taken between strikes. But the rules don't refer to playing cards or taking actions taken during combat as a "nested chain of effects."

Also, the spider attack of rescue prisoners is not the same as the trap attack of Forgotten Scrolls. Rescue Prisoners is a permanent events, meaning that is effects are immediately implemented. Rescue Prisoner states "The company faces a spider attack (2 strikes with 7 prowess)." There is nothing to indicate when the attack happens, so the attack is immediately implemented.

Forgotten Scrolls is a minor item. Unlike Event cards, Item cards do not have actions that are resolved in the order listed on the card in the same chain of effects. They are just played and they may have effects. Some items boost an attribute, some items have active conditions for taking an action, some items have a passive condition creating an attack, and one item has a passive condition to discard the item if bearer is wounded.
Konrad Klar wrote: Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:37 pm Texts of some item cards state that some action happens after playing the item.
Timing of the actions is uncertain, especially if playing of such item is one of actions of chain of effects that contains other actions, or if such item is played in result of other action (e.g. in result of Bounty of the Hoard, or Thing Stolen).
There is no confusion. Items are not events. The effects of items do not resolve in the chain of effects like an Event. When Forgotten Scrolls/Lost Tome comes into play, so does the effect "After this item is played, the bearer faces an attack." This effect is not an immediate action. The action is triggered by a passive condition (there is no active condition in the text). Therefore, the trap attack by Forgotten Scrolls/Lost Tome happens after the chain of effects in which Bounty of the Hoard was resolved and caused Forgotten Scrolls/Lost Tome to be played. The play of Forgotten Scrolls triggers its own effect.
Konrad Klar wrote: Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:39 am Attack is created not "if this item is played" but "After this item is played".
So I think that in this case there is not action caused by passive condition that potentially could be produced later. So rules that govern actions caused by passive conditions are not applicable.
By what reasoning does the use of "if" vs "after" make an action be triggered by a passive condition or not? I think use of "if" vs "after" as no meaning in the context of passive conditions. All that needs to be done is establish that an action is triggered by some condition in the game.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:16 pm By what reasoning does the use of "if" vs "after" make an action be triggered by a passive condition or not? I think use of "if" vs "after" as no meaning in the context of passive conditions. All that needs to be done is establish that an action is triggered by some condition in the game.
Difference is like a difference between setting a condition and setting an action.
Action that has to happen "after X" will happen unconditionally.
Action that has to happen "if X" will not happen "if X" condition will not occur.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:16 pm Forgotten Scrolls is a minor item. Unlike Event cards, Item cards do not have actions that are resolved in the order listed on the card in the same chain of effects.
Just that.
However some non-events may cause actions described in their text.
Whether some of the actions are activated by passive conditions or rather have to happen at given point of game is matter of this dispute.

Corpse-Candle causes ccs at given point of game. Are the ccs caused by passive condition?
Knights of the Prince causes tapping of characters at given point of game. Is the tapping caused by passive condition?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Konrad Klar wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2019 6:10 am
CDavis7M wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:16 pm By what reasoning does the use of "if" vs "after" make an action be triggered by a passive condition or not? I think use of "if" vs "after" as no meaning in the context of passive conditions. All that needs to be done is establish that an action is triggered by some condition in the game.
Difference is like a difference between setting a condition and setting an action.
Action that has to happen "after X" will happen unconditionally.
Action that has to happen "if X" will not happen "if X" condition will not occur.
But with Forgotten Scrolls, the attack action would happen unconditionally even if it used "if" instead of "after." So it seems there is no issue?

-----
Konrad Klar wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2019 6:59 am
CDavis7M wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 7:16 pm Forgotten Scrolls is a minor item. Unlike Event cards, Item cards do not have actions that are resolved in the order listed on the card in the same chain of effects.
Just that.
However some non-events may cause actions described in their text.
Whether some of the actions are activated by passive conditions or rather have to happen at given point of game is matter of this dispute.

Corpse-Candle causes ccs at given point of game. Are the ccs caused by passive condition?
Knights of the Prince causes tapping of characters at given point of game. Is the tapping caused by passive condition?
Corpse-candle states: "If this attack is not canceled, every character in the company makes a corruption check before defending characters are selected." There is no condition for triggering this effect later. So this effect (making Corruption Checks) is implemented when Corpse-candle resolves. The effect is still conditioned upon "If this attack is not canceled" - but this is a condition for implementing the effect and not a condition for triggering the effect (there is no passive condition established). So the effect is implemented at resolution (which happens to be before defending characters are selected). The phrase "before defending characters are selected" is more of a restriction on assigning strikes than it is a timing requirement for making the CCs.

Knights of the Prince states: "Unless the attack is canceled, all untapped characters in defending company are tapped following this attack." The phase "following the attack" means that the tapping actions for untapped characters cannot happen at resolution of Knights. But, resolution of the attack (all of its strikes) is an action that can be a passive condition for triggering the tapping actions.

Either the effect has a trigger (active or passive) to let it be implemented later or it does not and it is implemented at resolution.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2019 7:29 am But with Forgotten Scrolls, the attack action would happen unconditionally even if it used "if" instead of "after." So it seems there is no issue?
That would be a difference.
And that would make Forgotten Scrolls a strange card that checks for fact whether it has been played.
CDavis7M wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2019 7:29 am The phase "following the attack" means that the tapping actions for untapped characters cannot happen at resolution of Knights.
The phrase "following the attack"means that the tapping actions for untapped characters cannot happen during facing the attack. But Knights of the Prince is creature, not attack.
CDavis7M wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2019 7:29 am But, resolution of the attack (all of its strikes) is an action that can be a passive condition for triggering the tapping actions.
Such thing may be a passive condition. It may be also action that is executed at time of execution of Knights of the Prince.
If not "following the attack" then the order of tapping and attack would be uncertain.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Returning to Forgotten Scrolls:
i do not know whether it is intended, but if the Trap attack wold be action caused by passive condition, then character that has played Forgotten Scrolls could avoid it if he would lost Forgotten Scrolls, or leaved active play in the chain of effect in which Forgotten Scrolls has been played.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

From what I can see, there is no way for that to happen.
Post Reply

Return to “2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions”