Ride Against the Enemy (type of attack)

The place to ask and debate all rules issues related to MECCG.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Against the Shadow: Ride Against the Enemy
Rarity: Common, Precise: C3

Hazard: Short-event

Playable on a company moving through a [-me_wi-] if you have a character in your hand. Reveal the character. A single-strike hazard creature attack is made with the attributes of the revealed character, except the prowess is increased by 7. Other cards have no effect on this attack. The attack is detainment if the revealed character and the company are both minion or both hero. If defeated, place the character in your opponent's Marshaling point pile-he receives the character's Marshaling points as kill points. Otherwise, discard the character.
Does the attack has a type?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

MELE wrote:Attribute: A characteristic of a character or attack: prowess, body, race, a character’s listed skills, direct influence, mind, marshalling points, special abilities.
The attack is with all the attributes of the revealed character, including race.
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
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Is the character's race the same as the cards keyword? No but I think it's enough as the card is not specifically asking for a keyword. The character might be of elf race and the attack is an attack. Is an elf-race attack different from an elf-keyword attack? Yes... but it is the same difference.

I was looking through the METW creatures recently and it seems clear enough to me that Wolves are a wolf attack because the title of the card is wolves. It was also an animal attack though it was changed to be double wolves. And Giants were already Giants from the title before they were Giants from the keyword. Many cards refer to the title rather than the keyword (Galadriel lacks the Galadriel keyword). And that's OK. At least, this is how I think the designers originally thought before they recognized the clarity and consistency of keywords.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

But what is the problem?

That accidentally "A single-strike hazard creature attack [that] is made with the attributes of the revealed character, except the prowess is increased by 7." may have mind or DI?
Or that a race of character does not translate to type of attack?
I am suspecting that if Dark Quarrels (in CvCC) is able to cancel an attack of company containing only Men, Trolls, Orcs, then there is such translation.

P.S.
I asked the question from 1st post because I read definition Race in Glossary and I forgot to read definition of Attributes. :roll:

EDIT: "consisting" > "containing"
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
dirhaval
Posts: 791
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:39 am

Thought I read somewhere that if you play the character,
and it's text reads you lose xMP if eliminated, then you the hazard player lose that MP.
Is that right?
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Right.
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

dirhaval wrote: Wed Nov 23, 2022 1:49 am Thought I read somewhere that if you play the character,
and it's text reads you lose xMP if eliminated, then you the hazard player lose that MP.
Is that right?
Nope. There is a difference between a character being "eliminated" and an attack with attributes of a revealed character being "defeated" resulting in the character being placed in the opponent's MP pile. The rules tell you how characters can be eliminated (by corruption and body checks).

The effect "-2 marshalling points if eliminated," for example, counts when the character is eliminated as it states. It does not count when the character is in the opponent's MP pile, and not when an attack with the attributes of that character is defeated such that the character goes into the opponent's MP pile, etc. etc.

The character card can never end up eliminated by the effect of Ride Against the Enemy.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Wed Nov 23, 2022 4:39 am The rules tell you how characters can be eliminated (by corruption and body checks).
Good news for those who play The Ithil-stone.

As curiosity.
Lidles Eye wrote:1 · THE VICTORY CONDITIONS
The game ends when one of the following occurs during play:
1. If your Ringwraith is "eliminated" (i.e., through combat or corruption) - your opponent wins.
[...]
So character is placed in your opponent's Marshaling point pile, gives him kill MPs, but is not eliminated?
OK.
If a reason is omission of a word "eliminated" then also the character may be copy/manifestation of unique card already in play. The restriction that revealed character may not be copy/manifestation of unique card already in play is omitted too.
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: Wed Nov 23, 2022 6:31 am
CDavis7M wrote: Wed Nov 23, 2022 4:39 am The rules tell you how characters can be eliminated (by corruption and body checks).
Good news for those who play The Ithil-stone.
Sure, a card can use the word "eliminate" and cause a card to be eliminated. But if a card does not use "eliminate" then nothing is eliminated.
Konrad Klar wrote: Wed Nov 23, 2022 6:31 am
Lidles Eye wrote:1 · THE VICTORY CONDITIONS
The game ends when one of the following occurs during play:
1. If your Ringwraith is "eliminated" (i.e., through combat or corruption) - your opponent wins.
[...]
So character is placed in your opponent's Marshaling point pile, gives him kill MPs, but is not eliminated?
OK.
If a reason is omission of a word "eliminated" then also the character may be copy/manifestation of unique card already in play. The restriction that revealed character may not be copy/manifestation of unique card already in play is omitted too.
I wonder why you say that. The rules state "If a card states that it is “unique” or that it “may not be duplicated,” only one such card (or its effects) may be in play at a time." Surely revealing a character card is different from playing a character card. But also, simply revealing a character card from hand is different from the effect of Ride Against the Enemy which not only causes the character card to be revealed but also creates an attack with its attributes and then moves the character card to the opponent's MP pile or to your discard pile. The character is being "played with" during the resolution of Ride Against the Enemy. The revealed character is briefly "in play" without being "played" from hand.

I don't see why the Unique rules would not apply. The Unique rules also apply to short-events which are also briefly in play as they resolve.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Strict blur.
Where one may conclude that copy/manifestation of unique card in play may not be revealed, and where other or the same one may conclude that after defeating attack with attributes based on attributes of character, the character card placed in MP pile gives kill MP but is not considered eliminated.

Other explanation: revealed copy/manifestation of unique card in play may not be placed in MP pile, regardless of result of facing of the attack created by Ride Against the Enemy.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

dirhaval wrote: Wed Nov 23, 2022 1:49 am Thought I read somewhere that if you play the character,
and it's text reads you lose xMP if eliminated, then you the hazard player lose that MP.
Is that right?
It depends on your framework. CoE Digest 105 said this. If your framework is to follow CoE rulings, it is right.

I agree with CDavis7M that this was an incorrect ruling for the reasons he gives.
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/
dirhaval
Posts: 791
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:39 am

What about the definition of "manifestation"?

That is if that character is already if play, and the revealed character cannot be
used, then is then that not a manifestation of the character? But if it just revealing
and not playing, then you can show a character already in play. Therefore, it could
be argued that the character in the MP pile is not unique for it was n'ver in play
and n'ver stored, but act as a MP counter only.

I also read the definitions of "defeat" and "eliminated" for creatures.
Nice way to get rid of good characters if you ask me.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

dirhaval wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 1:25 am Therefore, it couldbe argued that the character in the MP pile is not unique for it was n'ver in play
and n'ver stored, but act as a MP counter only.
We could get into the rules changes (or, non-changes?) between METW and MELE for the MP pile... I didn't really think it had any application but maybe here is a case.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Dark Minions: Long Dark Reach
Rarity: Rare, Precise: R3

Hazard: Short-event

Playable on a moving company with at least one [-me_wi-] in its site path if you have at least 10 cards in your play deck. Reveal the top seven cards of your play deck. One revealed Nazgûl, Dragon, or a non-unique creature (your choice) immediately attacks the company (regardless of its playability requirements). The creature must be be playable in a region besides [-me_cs-] . If the creature could not normally be played on the company, modify its prowess by -4. Shuffle all unused cards and return them to the top of your play deck.
Authors forgot to include in text of the card what they said later:
CRF, Errata (Cards), Long Dark Reach wrote:The creature does not count against the hazard limit. A creature must be played if
there is one available.
and even later there was theories that the attack may evade effect of Stealth.

What they did not include (but should) in text of Ride Against the Enemy?

That revealed character is actually "played with" as CDavis7M suggests?
That character card that is placed in MP pile and gives kill MP is eliminated character's card?

Both? None?
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 Dec 05, 2022 5:24 pm Authors forgot to include in text of the card what they said later:
CRF, Errata (Cards), Long Dark Reach wrote:The creature does not count against the hazard limit. A creature must be played if
there is one available.
By the way, this is not errata but a clarification. I'm not sure what you are copying from by my copy of the CRF has these statements in the "Rulings by Card" section, not in the "Complete errata listing" section. And of course, these statements are not errata because they don't give any changes to the published text.
Konrad Klar wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 5:24 pm and even later there was theories that the attack may evade effect of Stealth.
The clarification is not saying that the creature is actually played. The creature is still merely revealed. The original card text is still present. Sometimes looking at the original question which prompted the ruling is helpful, if it can be found.

Here is the original question. They are asking about whether the creature must attack, not whether the creature is "played" vs "revealed."
From: ich...@cstone.net (Ichabod)
Subject: Re: [METW] Long Dark Question
Date: 1997/02/28
Message-ID: <ichabod-2802972115460001@dialin58.cstone.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 222221696
References: <Pine.OSF.3.95.970228115852.14574A-100000@plato.ucs.mun.ca>
Organization: The Game Cave
Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.misc

In article <Pine.OSF.3.95.970...@plato.ucs.mun.ca>,
Bruce Mason <bma...@morgan.ucs.mun.ca> wrote:

>The card Long Dark Reac lets you look through your top 7 cards to find a
>creature to play. Does playing that creature count against the hazard
>limit (i.e. one hazard to play LDR and one to play the creature).

The creature does not count against the hazard limit.

>Also, do you *HAVE* to play a creature? What if you turn up just one
>creature and you don't want to play it?

If you turn up one creature, it attacks automatically. The only choice
you have is which creature attacks if there is more than one.
Then Ichabod confirmed with ICE, and it is still clear that the creature is revealed and not played.
From: ich...@cstone.net (Ichabod)
Subject: [METW] Confimations and Reversals
Date: 1997/03/17
Message-ID: <ichabod-1703971628560001@dialin18.cstone.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 226266623
Organization: The Game Cave
Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.misc

These were things I said I would check on with ICE, and I finally got the
chance to. First the confirmations:

...

2) Long Dark Reach: The creature merely needs to be keyable to a region
that is not a Coastal Sea region. If it is keyed to such a region by
name only, that is sufficient. Any Doors of Night effects apply to its
playability. And, yes, you must play a creature if there is a playable
one revealed.
And then it goes into the CRF as an official ruling, but unfortunately it's shortened and summarized and some of the meaning is lost.
From: ich...@cstone.net (Ichabod)
Subject: [METW] CRF 4, part 3 (cards)
Date: 1997/05/15
Message-ID: <ichabod-1505972345520001@0.0.0.0>
X-Deja-AN: 241819258
Organization: The Game Cave
Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.misc

...

Long Dark Reach
-=- The creature does not count against the hazard limit.
-=- If the creature is keyable only to regions by name, that is sufficient.
-=- A creature must be played if there is one available.
----------
Konrad Klar wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 5:24 pm What they did not include (but should) in text of Ride Against the Enemy?

That revealed character is actually "played with" as CDavis7M suggests?
That character card that is placed in MP pile and gives kill MP is eliminated character's card?

Both? None?
By the way, I was looking into the rule changes between MELE and METW and at first I thought there were differences in language only, but maybe this situation is part of the reason for the changes. The revised rules are broader in scope. If you're interested, take a look at the changes in Section 2 on the out of play and MP piles and see the changes for MELE. And then you can compare the rules on handling eliminated characters and the uniqueness rules in METW vs MELE. The MELE glossary also has some bits in it.
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)”