Playstyle Rules (stuck in 1995)

[rezwits]

Greeting fellow travelers!

I wanted to start a (possible deep conversation about when to tap).

I wanted to preface that this overall play style issue in question is a paradox, so there could be arguments.
So, try to not get too flustered in the conversation.

In general the answer and overall ruling is, in most CCG/TCG/LCG card games:
You can tap a card before or after for single a card play, either way is fine as long as you wrap up your single action in the correct game state.

I will harken back to the old days and give a Magic the Gathering example:

Let's say you have two Mountains 4 colorless visible on the board, with a Shivan Dragon in hand.

There were two ways this could be played:

A. The Player would drop the Shivan Dragon on the table and tap his lands.
B. The Player would tap his lands and drop the Shivan Dragon on the table.

In the end we all understood this was acceptable either way, and one point tho: Wizard's of the Coast made a ruling which they eventually revoked.

The ruling was that let's say you have RR3 but not RR4, and you tap FIRST, R , R, and then 2 color less and go, oh wait I don't have the 4th colorless, then in tournaments you would suffer mana burn, they also ruled later over this that if you dropped the Shivan Dragon on the table and went to tap, but said "oh I don't have enough mana" you could put the card back in your hand (and at one point I believe they said you could untap your land!).

Now that is all "remembrance" and almost the way things went. But at a certain point I think in the end they ruled, you can tap before or after and there isn't even mana burn anymore it just empties from your pool when you try to move on to the the next phase.

My statement is:

If you have a card in your hand that says you have to tap a guy or item, I am perfectly happy with you either:

Tapping the guy/item and then taking the card from your hand and putting it on the table.
--OR--
Taking the card from your hand and putting it on the table and tapping the guy/item after.

Because obviously it doesn't matter in which order this happens, to me it's all good.
I just can't stand rules lawyers (who are doing a bad job) saying you have to do it THEIR WAY, which they could argue EITHER way, which is the point I ma trying to make, being argumentative.

ONE way or the OTHER, and obviously if your not doing it the "Style" they like you're wrong, and they are going to start an argument etc.

It gets more complicated down the road with multiple tapping, effect(s), or permanent, discards, etc, but in general, I feel in trying to speed up the game, depending on where the cards are on the board your deck, discard, companies, parties, items, card under cards etc. It all depend on how convenient and when you can tap, sometimes you might do it before or after (discarding etc), just depends on where all the cards are.

Now I am not saying play a card and NOT tap, and go three step past that point and just forget to tap, people make mistakes, I know I do.

I am just saying playing the game sucks when you have "one of those guys" who every time you do one card action they INTERRUPT CONSTANTLY, and are checking the game state verbally instead of in silence waiting for an obvious error, that's all good, checking game state and saying one or two steps later "Hey that guy needs to be tapped", is just correct.

But my rule of thumb is while it's the players turn and he is thinking going over his cards, unless he asks me "any hazards" or similar I am QUIET, letting him take his turn in peace. Then when it's my turn I would only ask for the same. It's been over 20 years now and I think most of us experienced gamers of CCGs/TCGs/LCGs understand, be polite and pleasant and let's not go over the idiosyncrasies of our individual play styles that DON'T affect the game only affecting YOUR idiosyncrasies.

It's a hard thing to do, but in general there is no answer to tapping before or after on MOST situations it's a paradox, and if you don't understand why, I will explain later in discussion. But remember there are exceptions, because there are exception to everything, even exceptions to this last sentence.

I think playing like a jerk trying to put someone on TILT in a noncompetitive setting is just being douchebag outright. But in a tournament you just have to laugh back at your opponent, and understand there might be guys who do that, which in all honesty is acceptable, lame but that's Truly Competitive Play...

Let me know your thoughts if you get a chance...thanks!

Here is an example for discussion with our game:

You enter a site
face the AA
then drop an item, tucking it under the character, tap the character
but INTERRUPTING the RUDE player says you have to tap the site, or even says you have to tap the site FIRST!
then you tap the site, but have a 5 minute conversation about whether I had to tap this or that?
(not to mention you end up forgetting to play your minor item, example, didn't happen just saying...)

That's BS right (not the minor item, just the tap b4 or after discussion)? I mean come on Muhaha

It's been 20+ years guys!

[Bandobras Took]

It isn't as BS as you might think. Because of METW timing rules, *when* something is tapped can be vital in understanding how some effects work as well as whether it is valid, let alone effective, to declare an action in response.

The most obvious example of such is that it's impossible to tap characters to support the CC caused by Narya.

As for the "play an item at the site" question, the correct order (per the MELE rules) is:

1) Tap a character to bring an item into play;
2) Play the item;
3) Tap the site after an item is played at the site.

This would be important in the case of The Ithil-Stone -- to successfully play that item, a roll must be made. The item is only played if the roll succeeds. The site does not tap if the roll fails.

[rezwits]

It isn't as BS as you might think. Because of METW timing rules, *when* something is tapped can be vital in understanding how some effects work as well as whether it is valid, let alone effective, to declare an action in response.

The most obvious example of such is that it's impossible to tap characters to support the CC caused by Narya.

As for the "play an item at the site" question, the correct order (per the MELE rules) is:

1) Tap a character to bring an item into play;
2) Play the item;
3) Tap the site after an item is played at the site.

This would be important in the case of The Ithil-Stone -- to successfully play that item, a roll must be made. The item is only played if the roll succeeds. The site does not tap if the roll fails.

Absolutely, I actually became fully aware of the Narya ruling Saturday.

And I understand that "down the road" meaning when there is more than one card played, things can conflict.

The BS I am talking about is:

You look at your Sideboard, and the guy says what are you doing? And you say I am looking at my sideboard because I am going to tap my Nazgûl/Wizard and put a card in. And he says you have to tap your Avatar first before putting a card in. But you are just looking at your sideboard.
i.e. Basically being annoying and talking while you are looking thru your side board during Organization phase.

As for The Ithil-stone (spelled with a lower case S HAHA JK, but that's the KINDA CRAP I am taking about) The timing and order of when you tap is crucial, but not to mention this is a more advance card and takes considerable reading, extra cards, and even more reading, to "peer thru" the looking stone...

But even still.

Is there anything wrong with with announcing:

We enter the site, for simplicity, the attacks are Automatic, [THIS IS CRUCIAL RIGHT HERE=] you take the item from your hand tuck it underneath the character as you tap him?

I mean I got people that are like you have to TAP the character 1st and then take it out of your hand? I mean you can't play just Glamdring and tuck and tap while tucking? I am a minimalist and I try to save every OUNCE of TIME, not to mention every second...

Is there any card where if you take the card from your hand and put it on the table they could "in response" do something that would affect the game state, where Glamdring would get discarded like untapping your character?? Like Narya and nullifying the "Play an item ability"

That's the BS I am talking about...

Just a "simple one card play"...
(not really intricate items/perms that say "playable at a tapped etc...").
I am mainly talking about common courtesy...
And the same could be said for Factions like we talked about before

[rezwits]

The only other thing I would just like to say is sometimes, you can get like 20 cards on the table, and you are in hour two. And you tap your character to swing with him, and you tap the Glamdring he is holding, only cause the table is just a mess.

But once again he points out, you don't tap Glamdring. Is there a card where if you tap your guy for his strike and his weapon, that he could play a card that discards a tapped item or affect it? I am NOT talking about items where tapping matters such as Palantír of Amon Sûl. I am just saying like a Sting on a Hobbit, and you pick up both and tap them both.

This is just a fun question here. Because I would think in a basic setting that opponent is a total douche. Why? Because it would be easy to go back and ask, hey why is Sting tapped? And then you could just say "Oh well I just tapped them together!"

Thanks!

oh and btw the 4.2 URD ROCKS still reading it, read it on the plane ride back home too...

[rezwits]

Oh you know what?

In all aspects this is where this comes up HELZA.

Check this, my opponent has 4 guys untapped on the table.

He pulls out his Arkenstone, and places it on the table, he DOESN'T TAP ANYONE

He sits there and has a discussion with himself looking at his characters and the items they have, adding corruption up, going over it and over it, and then eventually says OK, TAPS the character and says I am giving it to Thráin II.

TO ME I AM 100% OK with this, I couldn't care less. I am there to have fun, and I want the game to grow not shrink.

Some people, (and you know who you are), require before taking it out of your hand you have to tap the character.

That is unacceptable behavior in a FUN setting...

[rezwits]

Lately, as I have been wanting to get even more active in the game:

I have been wondering what the time settings are for a tournament.

Like 1 hour 30 minute rounds or something?

If this is the case how do people have fun and play in like a 3 round tournament with 8 people or more, if they are interrupting people playing stuff fast, whilst just dropping cards, moving along, and going full bore?!

I mean my gosh me and a friend played two 80 minute games with a chess clock, and we made like 3-4 HUGE mistakes or at least I know I made two, but when they were caught, it was too bad and the game was lost, but I was ok with that because we got to FINISH in under 80 minutes, and my game is getting quicker and I am memorizing things more.

We were doing time trials seeing if we could speed up our game play. I mean honestly, you can play a 180 minute game bickering and dickering or a 90 minute game, it's up to the players really, their skill level, and mechanics annoyance.

I mean my gosh you could have 3 guys untapped at a Dragon's Lair, and drop Two Greater Items and Thror's Map on the table ALL at once if you're playing me. Tuck all three items where you want and then tap all 3 characters one after the other, FOR SPEED!

This is kinda what I mean by PLAY-STYLE... (I mean sometimes things just have to be understood) to speed things up!

Cause I just don't understand how you guys play and finish games under 60 minutes being METHODIC and RETENTIVE...

I can only do a full game in under 90 minutes... with only 2-3 mistakes, 60 is a DREAM!

[Konrad Klar]

The most obvious example of such is that it's impossible to tap characters to support the CC caused by Narya.

Unless Endless Whispers is played on character that taps in support the CC (the character need to be wounded by an Undead this turn, later be healed and utapped and later Endless Whispers need to be successfully played on him; then even Narya is unable to untap him).

[rezwits]

My only thing with Narya is:

The card gets resolved, all the way. Then the last sentence says, Gandalf makes a corruption check modified by -5.

At that point the card is over, especially because Narya says specifically untap character immediately, meaning that has already happened.

I mean there is a HUGE difference between:

Gandalf only. +4 prowess, +1 body, +2 direct influence for the rest of the turn. Immediately untap all unwounded characters in Gandalf's company. Gandalf makes a corruption check modified by -5. "'For this is the Ring of Fire and with it you may rekindle hearts in a world the grows chill.'"-LotRVI

{and}

Gandalf only. +4 prowess, +1 body, +2 direct influence for the rest of the turn. Untap all unwounded characters in Gandalf's company. Gandalf makes a corruption check modified by -5. "'For this is the Ring of Fire and with it you may rekindle hearts in a world the grows chill.'"-LotRVI

Huge, in my mind, but the way the ruling is the Immediacy of uncapping is just disregarded, in my eyes.

Because I always thought once you resolves a card and then the line "Character makes a corruption check by -X" the card is FINISHED.

So in Narya's case, it was like DO NARYA, ALL THE WAY, then time for Corruption Check.

I mean it was so clear. So now I guess the ruling for ALL cards that have the ending Sentence: "Character makes a corruption check by -X"
You have to make the Corruption Check First? Before the Effects of the card? And just don't even look at the Effect Text yet?

Just goto the end and do the CP check and then go back and do the effect? Which one is it? Cause I need to know for all the cards that have that similar last sentence.

[rezwits]

So, if someone could provide some clarity with a simple sentence or so that would be great.

When playing a card, that states or has a similar line such as:

...makes a corruption check modified by -X.

Do you skip all the text and go directly to the:

...makes a corruption check modified by -X. Line?

And then go back and resolve the card's text?
{or}
Resolve the card in order? Performing the last line with the CP CK last?

I think with most cards that end with the "similar cp text" it's Black and White, right?

CPK first then go back and resolve {or} Resolve then CPK after or last even?

Thanks!

[Bandobras Took]

Blame ICE.

An action declares. There is time to declare other actions in response. Only when all actions have been declared do they begin resolving.

In the case of a card with multiple actions, they are declared in reverse order from that printed on the card, so that they resolve in the order printed on the card.

In the case of Narya, then, the set of declarations goes:

- Corruption Check
- Untap Characters
- Bonuses (depending on whether you think that's an action or not . . .)

Now, either player can respond. It is here that you are allowed to declare actions that target a dice-rolling action earlier in the same chain (in this case, the CC). So you tap characters to support.

Here's where ICE decided to make things ugly:

The resolution of a character tapping to give +1 to a corruption check happens when the corruption check itself resolves.

Normally, the last declared action resolves first.

ICE decided to say "screw that" with regards to tapping to support corruption checks.

So the actions resolve as:

- Bonuses
- Untap Characters
- Corruption Check

Tapping to support the corruption check tries to resolve at the corruption check, but unfortunately, nobody who tapped to declare the action has remained tapped for its resolution, so the action fizzles.

The funny part is that playing any number of resources to support a corruption check declare and resolve as normal. It's only characters tapping to support a corruption check that casually violate all sense of timing rules.

As to why, your guess is as good as mine.

[rezwits]

Ok well what happens in the case of a Malady?

- Corruption Check
- Body Check?
- Corruption Check for Attacking?

What if the Shadow-magic using character fails his corruption?

{or}
Kindling of the Spirit
and the Wizard FAILS his Corruption does the card still resolve?
Do you still resolve the +2 Prowess?

(I am sensing cry babies in all of this)
and if you don't know what cry babies are
it's guys who cry to NetReps because cards are too powerful)

Another example?

Eyes of Mandos

- Choose one to put in your Hand?
- Reveal the top 8 cards?
- Tap Palando?

In that order? Yeah somethings a foul here,
I could probably go on all day about this one...

I am sensing cry babies...

[Konrad Klar]

In any chain of effects an order of declarations of an actions is reverse to an order of resolution of the actions.

So for Malady the order of declaration of the actions is:
CC of Shadow-Magic using character*
BC of target
CC of target
Malady (whole card)

When Malady resolves above actions resolve as follow:
CC of target
BC of target
CC of Shadow-Magic using character

Someone may ask for reason of:

The actions listed on the card are considered to have been declared in the reverse order as they are printed.

The part "are considered to have been declared" is most important.
Without it someone could say that the Malady is declared, but no ccs, and no bc are declared so there is no chance to affect cc (by tapping, or by playing a resource).
Of course to be resolved in as printed order, the actions printed on card must be considered declared in reverse order.




*) strictly speaking Shadow-Magic using character is also target of one of actions of Malady, likewise a sage is also target of one of action of Marvels Told (other target is event to be discarded)

[Bandobras Took]

(I am sensing cry babies in all of this)

I'm sensing a basic lack of understanding of the timing rules for this game.

Kindling of the Spirit
and the Wizard FAILS his Corruption does the card still resolve?
Do you still resolve the +2 Prowess?

The Wizard can't even do the corruption check unless the card resolves (in the sense of the card play action). Cards like Blind To The West or Many Sorrows Befall could prevent Kindling of the Spirit from resolving, in which case none of the card's actions will resolve.

(I am sensing cry babies in all of this) and if you don't know what cry babies are it's guys who cry to NetReps because cards are too powerful)

1) The NetRep does not alter the function of cards. That is the province of the CoE;
2) The only erratum the CoE has issued, to my knowledge, is the one which buffed a whole set of cards by making them actually usable on auto-attacks;
3) This has nothing to do with either organization; timing rules were to be found in the very first METW rules booklet I ever opened, which happened to be on the day the cards first arrived at my local hobby store.

Confusion over the rules is natural. They're complex. In a few spots, they're contradictory.

But not bothering to learn or understand them means that you're probably right when you say:

Yeah somethings a foul here,
I could probably go on all day about this one...

I am sensing cry babies...

Kindling Of The Spirit:

Declaration:

Corruption Check
+2 Prowess (if you believe that's an action)
Card Play

Resolution:

Card Play
+2 Prowess
Corruption Check

Eyes of Mandos:

Declaration:

Bring Card To Hand
Reveal Cards
Card Play

Resolution:

Card Play
Reveal Cards
Bring Card To Hand

ICE's wording is very poor in regards to active conditions, but tapping Pallando is the condition of revealing the cards, and done when the action requiring it is declared.

[rezwits]

Kindling Of The Spirit:

Declaration:

Corruption Check
+2 Prowess (if you believe that's an action)
Card Play

Resolution:

Card Play
+2 Prowess
Corruption Check

This is exactly where I get LOST.

Basically, if you want to use the term "stack". I am with the in and out, but my understanding WAS:

One the RESOLUTION of the "Corruption Check" hits and say steps up to the plate waiting to resolve, at this point the card is basically gone. Meaning on the "stack" per se, the only thing left to resolve is the Corruption Check? Meaning the CARD is GONE, no more actions or otherwise just the corruption check.

So then you sit, and say, time for corruption, and then people tap to support?

But are telling me, that DURING DECLARATION, you have to go thru and do all the assignments of support and etc? And then they resolve?

Cause I was under the impression, that until it's actually time to DO (i.e. Resolve/Resolution) Corruption Checks, then you decide wether to support by tapping or not.

But, you are saying you declare support during DECLARATION?

If so, I should be good from here...

[Bandobras Took]

Yes. You can't declare new actions once a chain of effects begins resolving. All actions have to be declared before any actions can resolve.

The action of tapping to support a corruption check is declared at some point after the corruption check is declared. You can't declare it before the corruption check is declared (obviously), and you can't declare it when the corruption check is actually made because the corruption check is made when actions are resolving.