In the heart of his Realm

The place to ask and debate all rules issues related to MECCG.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Sauron wrote:
Each company moving in a Dark-domain [d] draws one less card at the start of its movement/hazard phase (to no minimum). Additionally, any sage at a site in a Dark-domain [d] or Gorgoroth, or moving with a Dark-domain [d] or Gorgoroth in his site path, loses his sage skill. No character at a site in a Dark-domain [d] or Gorgoroth, or moving with a Dark-domain [d] or Gorgoroth in his site path, can use spells, light enchantments, or rituals. Discard when any play deck is exhausted.
Jambo wrote:What happens during the other phases other than the m/h phase? Does it have to activate every phase, every turn, every m/h phase, or what?
I would say once in play and resolve keeps checking continously like in a loop.

Are you in a site X, Y, Z or Moving in X, Y, Z. If yes then lose skill if no, then not.

Again and again in a loop

Again this is my own feeling on this. I need to look up in the rules if this is how it works.
Is this mechanism that you're suggesting based on any official ruling or rules section? I.e. one which suggests that cards can work in this way, continuously working in loops, resolving and resolving indefinitely, phase after phase of a player's turn?

Passive conditions cause actions, right? Can actions be continuous or are they immediate, i.e. they have an effect, which once resolved, then means the action is concluded? If an action can't be continuous, then how can ItHoHR be creating passive conditions that result in actions?
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3157
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

The phrase "No character (snip) can use spells, etc." is not an action. Therefore it is not triggered by a passive condition, since passive conditions cause an action to occur.

Therefore one cannot respond to it -- nothing's declared.

Likewise, "cannot be borne by a character with less than 6 prowess" is not an action, nor is "no environment cards can be played" from Balance Between Powers. Also "No characters may be brought into play at this site" for Geann-a-lisch.

A phrase like "automatically cancels a spell, etc" would be an action and therefore enter that impenetrable morass of timing/condition rules.

Edit:
To further clarify, in the case of this card, whether losing a sage skill is a passive condition or not is irrelevant, since Marvels Told is a ritual and may not be played by a character moving in a dark-whatever. This is not an action triggered by a passive condition. You just plain can't play it.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4517
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

I generally agree with you.
To further clarify: ostensible (disputed) passive condition is here character/sage moving through [-me_dd-] or Gorgoroth or at site in [-me_dd-] or Gorgoroth.
Losing of sage skils and inability of playing spells, rituals, light enhantments are ostensible actions caused by this passive conditions.

P.S. Voices of Malice is not ritual, The Cock Crows and (sometimes) Palantir of Osgiliath does not require sage skill. Ancient Secrets too. :)
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3157
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

I don't think gaining or losing a skill is an action.
Magic Ring Of Courage wrote:Magic Ring. Playable only with a Gold Ring and after a test indicates a Magic Ring. Gives the bearer warrior skill. If the bearer is already a warrior, he gets +2 to prowess. May not be duplicated on a given character.
Gaining Warrior skill is not an action here; otherwise any character would get the +2 because the "gaining warrior skill" action would resolve and trigger the "+2 prowess" action. Same sort of thing; gaining/losing attribute is not an action: play of the card is the action. Once the card is played, no further action needs be declared.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4517
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Yes. I don't disagree.
I've wrote about ostensible passive condition and ostensible action.
About objects affected by continuous effect mistaken for passive condition and about continuous effect mistaken for action.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

The comparison with Flotsam and Jetsam in particular is interesting if we're to assume for a moment that the effects are activated in this continual loop checking fashion.

If there's a passive condition in FaJ, created by the requirement to have the playdeck below a certain number of cards, then arguably this card can never work as intended. Each turn (or is it each phase?) it will check the playdeck's card number, and if it's below the stated amount, activate its 'action'. Therefore, one might conceivably be able to respond to this each time with a smoke rings or whatever...
Last edited by Jambo on Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4517
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

:)
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

For what it's worth I asked the NetRep (Mark) to make a ruling on this. I think that's important given that Konrad, who's also involved in the NetRep, disputes the current interpretation, and with good reasoning too.
Wacho
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:51 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA

Bandobras Took wrote:The phrase "No character (snip) can use spells, etc." is not an action. Therefore it is not triggered by a passive condition, since passive conditions cause an action to occur.

Therefore one cannot respond to it -- nothing's declared.

Likewise, "cannot be borne by a character with less than 6 prowess" is not an action, nor is "no environment cards can be played" from Balance Between Powers. Also "No characters may be brought into play at this site" for Geann-a-lisch.

A phrase like "automatically cancels a spell, etc" would be an action and therefore enter that impenetrable morass of timing/condition rules.

Edit:
To further clarify, in the case of this card, whether losing a sage skill is a passive condition or not is irrelevant, since Marvels Told is a ritual and may not be played by a character moving in a dark-whatever. This is not an action triggered by a passive condition. You just plain can't play it.
I agree with Ben. This phrase is clearly a continuing effect. You can't even take the prohibited cards out of your hand and place them on the table. Consider if instead of Marvel's Told what would happen if a wizard tried to play Vanishment. Vanishment wouldn't be cancelled and discarded, you would have to put the card back in your hand because it is an illegal play. I think this makes it clear that there is no passive condition here. A passive condition would have to be activated by the play of a card.

As far as the other phrases of ItHoHR, I think those do set up passive conditions. The first phrase and the last are pretty clear. They have a clear condition and action. 1st phrase -- Condition: move through DD; Action: draw one less card. Last phrase -- Condition: play deck exhausted; Action: discard ItHoHR. The second phrase is the interesting one. I think it too has a condition and an action. Condition: sage in or moving through DD or Gorgoroth; Action: lose sage skill. What I find interesting is that there is no duration specified. It doesn't say until end of turn, until next m/h phase, while this card is in play, or whatever. Does this mean he loses his sage skill forever? I don't think that is the case but it could be literally read that way.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4517
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Wacho wrote:What I find interesting is that there is no duration specified. It doesn't say until end of turn, until next m/h phase, while this card is in play, or whatever.
So again, what is duration of:
"...receives an automatic-attack: Wolves - 3 strikes with 7 prowess" (1st effect of Fell Winter)?
Is it not obvious that continuous effects created by a card in play lasts so long as long the card is in play (if it requires an additional conditions, so long as the card and that conditions are in play - Doors of Night and 2nd effect of Fell Winter)?
If losing of [something] would be "action", why opposite effect - receiving of [something] - would not be "action" too?
Wacho wrote:1st phrase -- Condition: move through DD; Action: draw one less card.
I don't understand. It is an irony? :?
Drawing of a card may be considered action, but "drawing one less card" is action too?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Wacho - I'd be interested to hear how you think Flotsam and Jetsam works in terms of passive vs continuous effects.
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3157
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Wacho wrote:Condition: sage in or moving through DD or Gorgoroth; Action: lose sage skill.
I don't believe gaining/losing a skill is an action.
Memories Stolen wrote:Dark enchantment. A non-Wizard character facing a strike from a Dragon hazard creature attack loses all skills while bearing this card.
If losing a skill is an action, then the effect of this card will always start any chain of effects, which would be silly.
Wacho
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:51 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA

Bandobras Took wrote:
Wacho wrote:Condition: sage in or moving through DD or Gorgoroth; Action: lose sage skill.
I don't believe gaining/losing a skill is an action.
Memories Stolen wrote:Dark enchantment. A non-Wizard character facing a strike from a Dragon hazard creature attack loses all skills while bearing this card.
If losing a skill is an action, then the effect of this card will always start any chain of effects, which would be silly.
I'm not really clear on your reasoning here Ben. Memories Stolen works in a similar way to corruption cards. Your character has the card played on him and you lose the skills. You are not continually losing your skills just as a character who has a corruption card played on him is not continually receiving corruption points.

@Jambo--Flotsam and Jetsam seems to me a clear example of a passive condition. There is an effect that allows you to search through your play deck for example (Smoke Rings or something) and this cards cancels it. You can still play your card, but it just won't do anything. Is there a problem with this interpretation?

My use of the word action seems to be tripping you guys up, so let me replace my terms of Condition and Action with Trigger and Effect. It seems clear to me that for a card to be utilizing passive conditions there has to be a trigger and an effect. Three of the four phrases on In the Heart of His Realm have this. The phrase about not being able to play spells does not.

Hmmm....It occurs to me I may have been a little too quick considering the first two parts of ItHoHR to be passive conditions. Drawing cards happens simultaneously with the revealing of a new site not in the following chain of events (Annotation 25b) Therefore drawing one less card can't be an effect that is triggered, otherwise it would happen too late. Since the losing skills phrase is similar it seems likely to have the same characteristics. I'll think about this some more.
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3157
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Wacho wrote:
Bandobras Took wrote:
Wacho wrote:Condition: sage in or moving through DD or Gorgoroth; Action: lose sage skill.
I don't believe gaining/losing a skill is an action.
Memories Stolen wrote:Dark enchantment. A non-Wizard character facing a strike from a Dragon hazard creature attack loses all skills while bearing this card.
If losing a skill is an action, then the effect of this card will always start any chain of effects, which would be silly.
I'm not really clear on your reasoning here Ben. Memories Stolen works in a similar way to corruption cards. Your character has the card played on him and you lose the skills. You are not continually losing your skills just as a character who has a corruption card played on him is not continually receiving corruption points.
That's my reasoning precisely. The loss of a sage skill is not something one can respond to just because a character happens to move through a dark domain. Passive conditions as defined in the rules cause an action to happen. Not just an effect. Not every effect is an action, just as not every card that affects another card targets that card.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Wacho wrote:@Jambo--Flotsam and Jetsam seems to me a clear example of a passive condition. There is an effect that allows you to search through your play deck for example (Smoke Rings or something) and this cards cancels it. You can still play your card, but it just won't do anything. Is there a problem with this interpretation?
I believe so. :)

If flotsam and jetsam worked by passive condition that triggered an action (like an Ahunt) then it might never work as intended. At the beginning of each m/h phase one would always be able to play a Smoke Rings or equivalent in response to the passive condition being triggered, much in the same way some are suggesting that supposed passive condition(s) of ItHoHR can always be responded to by a MT or VoM.

I now believe through Konrad's reasoning in earlier parts of this thread, that the effects of FaJ are in fact continuous once the card has resolved for the first time. If the effects are continuous, then there'd be no continual pack check passive condition which would render the card ineffectual.

I also believe that's how ItHoHR must work too.
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)”