Active conditions of effect of Black Arrow

[Konrad Klar]

The Wizards: Black Arrow
Rarity: Promo, Precise: P

Resource: Minor Item

Warrior only. Tap Black Arrow to give -1 to the prowess and body of any one attack against bearer's company. When Black Arrow is tapped, discard if its bearer is not a Man. "'Black arrow! I have saved you to the last. You have never failed me and always I have recovered you. If ever you came form the forges of the true king under the Mountain, go now and speed well!'"-Hob

Annotation 5: If an action requires an entity to tap as a condition for the action's main
effect, that entity must be untapped when the action is declared; else, the action may
not be declared. Tap the entity at this point; this is considered synonymous with the
action's declaration, i.e., it is not a separate action. When it comes time to resolve the
action in its chain of effects, that entity must still be in play and tapped or the action is
canceled.

So either: if bearer is not a Man the effect of Black Arrow is self-canceling, or the effect requires special treating.

P.S.
I would gladly replace
"that entity must be untapped when the action is declared; else, the action may not be declared."
with
"that entity must be untapped immediately before the action is declared; else, the action may not be declared."

EDIT: "Black Arrow to give" -> "Tap Black Arrow to give" in citation
(nobody noticed )

[Zakath]

Are you suggesting that because Black Arrow discards itself, it cancels the originally intended action of modifying an attack?

Isn't this handled by Annotations 9 and 9a?

Annotation 9: If a card specifies that an action is to occur as a result of some specific passive condition, this action becomes automatically the first action declared in the chain of effects to immediately follow the chain of effects producing the passive condition. The passive condition must exist when this resulting action is resolved in its own chain of effects, or the action is canceled. Note that actions in the strike sequence follow a different set of rules.

Annotation 9a: If a card is required to be discarded by some passive condition, the card is discarded immediately when the condition resolves, not in the following chain of effects.

The way I read it, the action initiated by tapping Black Arrow has to resolve fully, and then it is immediately discarded. But it does resolve, thus there is no self-canceling involved.

[Konrad Klar]

Isn't this handled by Annotations 9 and 9a?

When Black Arrow is tapped, discard if its bearer is not a Man.

Is an action caused by passive condition; passive condition - Black Arrow is tapped AND its bearer is not a Man, action - discard Black Arrow.
Please note the Black Arrow may also become tapped due to other reason e.g. in result of Slip Treacherously.

Any known to me rule regarding passive conditions does not help the Black Arrow's effect from being self-fizzled (if bearer is not a Man).
If someone will tap Jewel of Beleriand for effect and then the Jewel of Beleriand will be discarded in result of Rats! or Drowning Seas played in response then the effect of Jewel of Beleriand will fizzle.
Entity tapped at at declaration must be in play and in state "tapped" when it comes time to resolve the action.

Annotation 9a: If a card is required to be discarded by some passive condition, the card is discarded immediately when the condition resolves, not in the following chain of effects.

The way I read it, the action initiated by tapping Black Arrow has to resolve fully, and then it is immediately discarded. But it does resolve, thus there is no self-canceling involved.

The way I read Annotation 9a is that if a card is required to be discarded by some passive condition, the action "discard" does not wait for current chain of effect to finish to be declared. Whether the passive condition appears at the stage of declarations or when some action is resolved and executed, or even outside of chain of effects (company with 2 characters bears Palantír of Osgiliath and starts moving), the action is executed immediately.

If the action "discard" caused by passive condition would not be executed immediately, then the hazard long-events kept in play by The Will of Sauron will not be discarded when The Will of Sauron would leave play.
The Will of Sauron would be discarded by Marvels Told. Then in next of chain of effect "all hazard long-events are discarded" will be declared and when it will come to resolve the action it would appear (surprise?) that Will of Sauron is not in play.

A card causing an action as a result of a passive condition must be in play when the
action resolves, or else the action is canceled.

Discarding would not happen. By the same logic a returning to the site of origin caused by action from Snowstorm does not happen if Snowstorm is not in play when the action "return" tries to resolve (e.g. because Snowstorm has been discard by Twilight in response to "return" action).

[Bandobras Took]

Help me out, here: Annotation 9 talks about an action resolving when that action has been created by a passive condition.

9a talks about a *condition* resolving.

How on earth does a condition even resolve? Declared actions resolve, not conditions.

What is 9a *actually* talking about?

[Konrad Klar]

Very good point. "Like this post" would be too few.

[Zakath]

Now you've got me going back to the very beginning with these stupid passive condition rules. ICE's vague language strikes again!

And I believe the answer lies in the MELE glossary:

Condition, passive: An action that causes another action to take effect. The triggered action will be the first declared action in the chain of effects immediately following the chain of effects that contained the passive condition.

The term "passive condition" doesn't refer to the conditional statement printed on a card (i.e. the "Any company moving in..." text on a dragon ahunt). The term "passive condition" refers to the declared action that causes the requirements of such a statement to become satisfied and thus triggers the action associated with it. Within that usage, a condition can resolve because it is by definition an action itself.

This actually makes Annotation 9 read much cleaner to me and allows 9a to make perfect sense as well.

So the answer to the Black Arrow question is what I thought it was, if not for exactly the reason I thought at the time.

Black Arrow can be fizzled by Rats!, because Rats! can be played in response to the action that declares the invocation of Black Arrow to modify an attack. If it gets played in response, it resolves first.

But a passive condition cannot do this, not even if the effect is to discard the card.

You declare an action: you will be using Black Arrow to reduce the prowess and body of an attack its bearer is facing. Per Annotation 5, quoted in the initial post in this topic, the tapping of Black Arrow is synonymous with this action and is not separate. This action IS the passive condition referred to by the rules. And per 9a, while it does bypass the LIFO stack just as you said, Konrad, it does so after the passive condition (read: action that caused Black Arrow to tap) resolves first. Thus, when the actual action to use the Black Arrow resolves, it is still on the table and takes effect. As soon as that action has resolved and the prowess/body modifications have gone into effect, the other effect of the card triggers and causes it to discard itself.

[Konrad Klar]

1.
Someone made an error somewhere in engineering calculations and now he has feeling that he invented perpetuum mobile.

Annotation 9a: If a card is required to be discarded by some passive condition, the card is discarded immediately when the condition resolves, not in the following chain of effects.

is erroneous.
It should be:
"Annotation 9a: If a card is required to be discarded by some passive condition, the card is discarded immediately when the condition is produced, not in the following chain of effects."
Annotation 9 says: "the chain of effects producing the passive condition".

2.
If however things are working as you, Zakath, are explaining them, we have two set of rules, one named Active Conditions, other named Passive Conditions, concerning the same things - actions declared by player. Two overlapping sets of rules.
And then it still is not known when exactly a returning action from Snowstorm and an attack from Smaug Ahunt happens and in what order.
Because they are not the same as Snowstorm, Smaug Ahunt respectively. The cards may be played even in M/H phase of not moving company.

3.
Choose (1), or (2), or other possibility and see, what then actually some regulation regulates. What is cleaner. And thereafter work on this base.

4.
MELE glossary says: "An action that causes another action to take effect."
CRF says "A passive condition causes an action to happen as stated on a card already in play."
Indeed, one does not preclude other. But if passive condition actually needs to be an action, then there is no passive condition for discarding action from Reluctant Final Parting (or "if its current site is an Under-deeps site or if its current site's nearest Haven is not the same as the nearest Haven for the site at which the ally can be played" is an action, your choice).

5.

Per Annotation 5, quoted in the initial post in this topic, the tapping of Black Arrow is synonymous with this action and is not separate.

In case you care:
Annotation 5 says: "this is considered synonymous with the action's declaration".

EDIT: "then there is not passive condition" -> "then there is no passive condition"

[Bandobras Took]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: timing rules are a mess.

[sarma72]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: timing rules are a mess.

or simply use common sense. If this was meant to be self-cancelling, the card would simply start like "Warrior only. If bearer is a Man, tap to...", or even more simply "Man Warrior only. Tap to..."

[Konrad Klar]

or simply use common sense.

Whose common sense?
My sense says that mistakes usually are not made deliberately.
And that it does not prevent them from happening.
If authors mean that Black Arrow is tapped for effect if bearer is a Man, otherwise is discarded for effect, they fail to express such intentions.
If they mean that Black Arrow is discarded after use if bearer is not a Man, they also fail to express such intentions. It would be enough to write "Discard after use if bearer is not a Man".
Authors wrote what they wrote and if players want to use the card as though they was discarded after use if bearer is not Man they need proper errata or use "while-you-wait" errata.
Players have right to explore some possibilities given by cards. They may play Slip Treacherously, either in intention of preventing their opponents from tapping some items for effect, or in any other intentions. If text of some card says "discard this item if tapped (and other condition is met)" then they may expect that the item will be discarded, regardless of what/who tapped it.

The Wizards: Athelas
Rarity: Uncommon, Precise: U

Resource: Minor Item

A Dúnadan can tap and use this item to heal a character in his company (change from wounded to well, character remains tapped). Aragorn II can also tap and use this item to remove a corruption card from a character in his company. Discard after use.

[Bandobras Took]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: timing rules are a mess.

or simply use common sense. If this was meant to be self-cancelling, the card would simply start like "Warrior only. If bearer is a Man, tap to...", or even more simply "Man Warrior only. Tap to..."

If common sense were at all sufficient, ICE would never have had to make rulings and clarifications.

The specific question of Black Arrow has no bearing on how to understand 9a, which is what I was both discussing and responding to.

[Bandobras Took]

Now you've got me going back to the very beginning with these stupid passive condition rules. ICE's vague language strikes again!

And I believe the answer lies in the MELE glossary:

Condition, passive: An action that causes another action to take effect. The triggered action will be the first declared action in the chain of effects immediately following the chain of effects that contained the passive condition.

The term "passive condition" doesn't refer to the conditional statement printed on a card (i.e. the "Any company moving in..." text on a dragon ahunt). The term "passive condition" refers to the declared action that causes the requirements of such a statement to become satisfied and thus triggers the action associated with it. Within that usage, a condition can resolve because it is by definition an action itself.

This actually makes Annotation 9 read much cleaner to me and allows 9a to make perfect sense as well.

That is interesting.

Just to be sure I understand what you're saying, let's look at this from the Ready to His Will/Rank Upon Rank standpoint:

You would say that it's the *declaration* of playing a man creature card that triggers Rank's declaration (in the case where it is card play and not an automatic attack), not the resolution of playing the card and subsequent creation of the attack. Rank becomes the first declared action in the next chain of effects, wherein the affected attack actually exists.

Likewise, it's declaring that a company is entering the site that triggers Rank -- not the resolution of any potential chain of effects to do with entering the site.

Assuming I've understood you correctly, this may be consistent. It's something I'm going to have to think about for a while.

[Zakath]

I think your examples are consistent with how I understand it, yeah. I think Konrad has a good point though - what about things that aren't normally thought of as actions?

Is flipping over a company's new site card an action? Is transitioning to a new phase of the turn an action? I'm not sure!

If a passive condition must be an action, and there are mechanics within the game that are not played out as capital-A Actions, how do cards with conditions predicated on those mechanics work? We just had a rules digest about Siege. If transitioning between phases is NOT a declared action, then how does the attack from Siege work?

[Konrad Klar]

BTW. Some curiosity.

Against the Shadow: Ancient Black Axe
Rarity: Rare, Precise: R2

Resource: Special Item

Unique. Playable at any Under-deeps . Weapon. +2 . Warrior only: +3 prowess (to a maximum of 11); -1 to strike's body.; tap this item to make a character at the same site automatically pass a corruption check, When this item becomes tapped, bearer makes a corruption check.

Someone may play Slip Treacherously in order to trigger cc from Ancient Black Axe.

[DamienX207]

I appreciate how well this single thread highlights the nuances of English and how multiple people can read the same ICE rulings and not interpret them the same way.

My 2 cents: I don't believe the game rules generally make sense in the way that Zakath is describing. It's a lot to break down in terms of the full implications of that position, in the interest of time, but I believe that if one considers the full spectrum of rules (i.e. the word "immediately" designating an immediate action that must be performed at the next opportunity prior to any other actions being taken, which is probably the most obvious point of evidence; the context of how discarding is generally always immediate and 9a codifies that; the fact that 9a is a clarification of 9 and thus is clarifying that the discarding happens immediately *rather than* afterward; and so forth). I glanced through the digests and believe Van Norton spoke to this in ICE 556, and I'd presume there are references elsewhere. So while I respect the thought experiment and putting others' interpretations through their paces, I don't currently feel like that's supported by the rules in practice (to Konrad's point).

To break down Black Arrow for the sake of our readers, it has two distinct effects as currently written and ruled by ICE (e.g. ICE 44; just to clarify for anyone wondering, the second line isn't a continuation of the first, also to Konrad's point). Thus when Black Arrow's allowance of tapping to reduce prowess/body is declared, it must be tapped upon declaration, per Anno 5 like Konrad said. The passive condition of Black Arrow being tapped then comes into effect and Black Arrow must be immediately discarded at the next opportunity, prior to the opponent having a chance to take their own action in response.

So yeah, as written (and based on my understanding), I would agree that the Black Arrow is only useful when its bearer is a Man character; otherwise it is discarded immediately after its allowance is initiated (and at which point - when being discarded - its effect would thus also leave play regardless, i.e. even if it wasn't immediately discarded, it would still be useless because the effect leaves play along with the item, I believe).