Untapping of not tapped cards

[Konrad Klar]

If it is legal to declare Marvels Told using/tapping (and also "on") sage ally, then inability to perform an action required by main effect is not obstacle. Ally is unable to cc.
Minion The Worthy Hills never taps. Is it obstacle to play at minion The Worthy Hills the cards that according to their main effect tap a site (e.g. Secrets of Their Forging)?

Texts of some cards whose main effect untaps other card do not say that the other card needs to be tapped (And Forth He Hastened, Hundreds of Butterflies, Look More Closely Later).
May the card be played on not tapped card (wounded character, untapped site/character)? Note: something declared in response may tap/heal target.

[dirhaval]

About Marvels Told; Ringwraiths can use Voices of Malice and they do not make corruption checks.

I feel that The Worthy Hills had some more use in further official expansions.

[Annatar]

Minion The Worthy Hills never taps. Is it obstacle to play at minion The Worthy Hills the cards that according to their main effect tap a site (e.g. Secrets of Their Forging)?

The NetRep of ICE already dealt with this question:

ICE RULES DIGEST 35
27-01-1998
From: Tommi Juhani Ronkainen

2. A company is at The Worthy Hills (minion). It plays Double-dealing and When You Know More. Does it fail because The Worthy Hills cannot be tapped?
No.

And for the second question:

Texts of some cards whose main effect untaps other card do not say that the other card needs to be tapped (And Forth He Hastened, Hundreds of Butterflies, Look More Closely Later).
May the card be played on not tapped card (wounded character, untapped site/character)? Note: something declared in response may tap/heal target.

A card cannot be played for no effect.

You may not play a card which has no effect on the game. Causing a dice roll is considered to be having an effect on the game.

Legal Play of Cards: A player may not play a card just to discard it (i.e., just get it out of his or her hand). Specifically, a card may only be played if it meets at least one of the following criteria:

• The card must have an immediate effect on the game.

• The card is a long-event. Long-events can always be played, even if ultimately they will not affect play.

• The card has a potential effect on play that could be triggered later. Most permanent-events fall into this category. Only those that are playable on or with a certain entity are restrictive. E.g., you cannot play a corruption card if no character exits that would be affected by it.

IMHO, this means that you cannot play And Forth He Hastened to untap an untapped character (this has no effect on the game), but in the same situation you can play Hundreds of Butterflies in the M/H phase (the hazard limit increases by one) or Look More Closely Later (sage makes a corruption check).

[Konrad Klar]

If I would play Beorning Skin-changers as short-event against company with Beorn or an untapped warrior with prowess greater than 4 would be it for no effect? Is there a guarantee that Beorn or an untapped warrior with prowess greater than 4 will be in the company at resolution?

Is there a guarantee that a company moving from Isengard to Edoras will not have at resolution of some action or in its site path? Is a playing against the company Lost in Free-domains or Lost in the Wilderness the playing card for no effect?

[Annatar]

I think that the NetRep of ICE had it clear:

ICE RULES DIGEST 107
10-07-1998 Author: Craig Ichabod O'Brien Source
From: Martin Toggweiler <mtogg...@compuserve.com>

[Concerning the Free Council] I was surprised to read in Steven Brown’s report on Origins that Cram can be discarded to untap a character that is not tapped. Presumably the same holds for Cram’s minion equivalent Strange Rations?

Yes. It can be done because it changes corruption point totals.

You can discard Cram to "untap" an untapped character that must make a cc because that changes the amount corruption points of its bearer. You can't do it simply to discard the card.

If I would play Beorning Skin-changers as short-event against company with Beorn or an untapped warrior with prowess greater than 4 would be it for no effect? Is there a guarantee that Beorn or an untapped warrior with prowess greater than 4 will be in the company at resolution?

Maybe, this should not be in this way.

Is there a guarantee that a company moving from Isengard to Edoras will not have at resolution of some action or in its site path? Is a playing against the company Lost in Free-domains or Lost in the Wilderness the playing card for no effect?

Sorry, perhaps I am not understand you correctly. Lost in Free-domains and Lost in the Wilderness may only be played if the company's site path contains a or a , respectively. I think that you can't play these cards preventively if the conditions to be played are not met.

Maybe you can develop both examples better.

[Konrad Klar]

Playable on a moving company. The company must do nothing during its site phase if it has a in its site path "...and they were also no longer certain of the direction in which they were going."-LotRI

Playable on a moving company. Its hazard limit increases by one for every in its site path. "Not far ahead were dreary hills, rising higher and higher, dark with trees. On some of them were old castles with an evil look, as if they had been built by wicked people.."-Hob

Bold and cursive original.

Maybe you can develop both examples better.

They are as they were intended.
Some company moving from Isengard to Edoras does not have nor in its path and question is whether playing on it Lost in Free-domains/Lost in the Wilderness is a playing card for no effect (thus illegal).

EDIT:
"Bold in cursive original" -> "Bold and cursive original"

[Annatar]

Playable on a moving company. The company must do nothing during its site phase if it has a in its site path "...and they were also no longer certain of the direction in which they were going."-LotRI

Ok. But according to the reprinted version of Lost in Free-domains in the Challenge Decks, the most updated text for this card are:

Playable on a company moving with a Free-domain in its site path. The company may do nothing during its site phase.

And I am afraid that by approximation, this is the same for the rest of "Lost in [region]..." hazard cards.

Perhaps ICE wanted to do it in that way to avoid such problems.

[Konrad Klar]

OK. There are two variants of Lost in... cards. And which should be used is separate question.

Beorning Skin-changers as short-event and Slip Treacherously are under consideration at now.

Beorning Skin-changers as short-event may/may not be played on hero company with Beorn or an untapped warrior with prowess greater than 4.
If the company will have Beorn or an untapped warrior with prowess greater than 4 at resolution there will be no effect.

Slip Treacherously may/may not be played in situation when there are no untapped items in play. If there will not be untapped items in play at resolution there will be no effect.

Is there a guarantee that Beorn or an untapped warrior with prowess greater than 4 will still be at resolution of Beorning Skin-changers?
Is there a guarantee that still there will not be untapped items in play at resolution of Slip Treacherously?

[Konrad Klar]

ICE RULES DIGEST 107
10-07-1998 Author: Craig Ichabod O'Brien Source
From: Martin Toggweiler <mtogg...@compuserve.com>

[Concerning the Free Council] I was surprised to read in Steven Brown’s report on Origins that Cram can be discarded to untap a character that is not tapped. Presumably the same holds for Cram’s minion equivalent Strange Rations?

Yes. It can be done because it changes corruption point totals.

Discarding a ring from company or from hand (or revealing a hand if both former options are not possible) is main effect of Rolled down to the Sea. Discarding a ring from company will reduce character's CPs total. Does it mean that bearer of a ring may discard the ring at Council if nothing else but goal - reducing character's CPs total - justifies it?
For gold rings it opens a possibility of testing them at Council.

Main effect of Drowning Seas (primary use) is "Target company loses one item of its choice and its player must randomly discard two cards from his hand."

If player controlling a target company does not have any card in hand, then only result will be discarding of item.
If a target company does not have any item then only result will be randomly discarding of two cards from hand of player controlling the company.

But the results are at least the main effect of Drowning Seas.
A changing of corruption point totals done by discarding of Cram is done at declaration. Main effect is untapping of (former) bearer, if he was tapped.
Someone could say that by playing a card from hand he achieves part of effect of Drowning Seas. Yes, he achieves it at declaration.

[Konrad Klar]

I want to add: what is allowed at Council is subset of what is allowed in play at all.
If e.g. during playing Free to Choose may not be played on minion item then it is not allowed at Council too.

Both discarding of item in play for some effect and playing a short-event card has inevitably such result that the item is no longer is in play (along with CPs that it would give) and that a short-event card will be not in hand and soon will be in discard pile.
Both results are not main effects of the actions.
The same concerns as for Cram discarded to untap not tapped character is for Healing Herbs.
And if it would be allowed to discard Healing Herbs (and to tap bearer) to heal not wounded character with final result that the target character will be untapped, then for what alternative use of Healing Herbs - to untap not wounded character - with the same final result that the target character will be untapped?
Text of alternative use of a Healing Herbs contains stipulation "character that is not wounded". Text of primary use does not state that target character need be wounded.