Council of Elrond

Hi,

Can Gates of Morning/Night be used to cancel an enviroment hazard/resource declared earlier in the same chain of effects? Can it be played for that purpose if it's already in play?

Thanks

Environment. All environment hazard cards in play are immediately discarded, and all hazard environment effects are canceled. Cannot be duplicated.

Short answer: no.

Long answer: cards/effects declared earlier in the same chain of effects are not considered in play until the resolve. Since they will not have resolved when Gates of Morning resolves, they are not considered in play yet and Gates will not affect them.

Since Gates cannot be duplicated, if a copy is already in play, then another copy may only be declared if an effect has been declared which potentially removes the copy already in play.

Bandobras Took wrote:Since Gates cannot be duplicated, if a copy is already in play, then another copy may only be declared if an effect has been declared which potentially removes the copy already in play.

Thanks. I don't understand this statement completly. Supose there is a Gates of Morning in play, opponent plays Gates of Night, can I play Gates of Morning in response? How does it resolve?

MELE Rules wrote:In all cases, if a card "cannot be duplicated," a second copy of that card cannot be declared - unless the first copy of the card is targeted for removal earlier in the same chain of effects when the second copy is played.

The general interpretation of this is, yes, if a card is potentially going to be removed, you can declare a second copy. (Some might argue about the use of "targeted" here.)

So the chain would be:

1) Gates already in play.

2) Doors declared

3) New Gates declared in response.

3a) New Gates resolves and does nothing, since Doors is not in play yet.

2a) Doors resolves and discards both Gates, since both are in play.

1a) No more Gates.

So in the case of Doors vs. Gates, you're better off waiting for Doors to resolve completely and then start a new chain with Gates.

With Twilight, though, it's a different story:

1) Gates is in play.

2) Twilight is played targeting Gates.

3) New Gates is played in response.

3a) New Gates resolves.

2a) Twilight Resolves and removes the original Gates

1a) Original Gates was discarded, but new Gates is still around.

Ok, that makes sense to me. Thanks

The general interpretation of this is, yes, if a card is potentially going to be removed, you can declare a second copy. (Some might argue about the use of "targeted" here.)

So the chain would be:

1) Gates already in play.

2) Doors declared

3) New Gates declared in response.

3a) New Gates resolves and does nothing, since Doors is not in play yet.

2a) Doors resolves and discards both Gates, since both are in play.

1a) No more Gates.

Some might argue about the use of "targeted" here.

He, he. Indeed.
Doors of Night does not target anything (it discards all enviroment resources that are in play at its resolution). So first example is wrong.

I knew someone was going to say that.

Most games I've seen generally interpret the phrase as simply "designated for removal," but a literal reading of the rules is as you have said.

To summarize:

A strict interpretation of the rules states that if you hold a "Gates of Morning" in your hand and have "Echo of All Joy" with "Fog" in play, you cannot save it once your opponent has declared his "Doors of Night" without a "Twilight"?

Suckage for my deck.

Yes, Twilight is a necessity for any deck -- hazard or resource -- that relies on Environment effects.

Konrad Klar wrote: Doors of Night does not target anything (it discards all enviroment resources that are in play at its resolution). So first example is wrong.

This I don't understand. The effect of the doors of night doesn't target the gates of morning? I agree that the doors of night itself doesn't target anything, but surely its effects target all enviroment resources, doesn't it?

In order to target, and effect must specify by number and type. Effects which act through an entire class of things (generally long events) do not target.

Bandobras Took wrote:In order to target, and effect must specify by number and type. Effects which act through an entire class of things (generally long events) do not target.

Wow... I can't explain this to the guys I'm introducing the game (if I want they continue interested in it).

I don't mean being an ass, but...

Isn't it too literal? Isn't "all environment resources" qualify for "specify by number and type"? This is not a very intuitive ruling...

MELE Rules wrote:Targeting: Choosing a specific entity through which a card or effect will be played out. An entity chosen as such is the "target" of the action. Some possible targets are: characters, corruption checks, strike dice rolls, items, sites, and companies. A card that states it is playable on or with a certain entity targets an entity. Cards which affect an entire class of other cards do not target (e.g., Wake of War).

I agree that targeting rules are a headache, and you don't actually need to overwhelm them with every nitpicking detail if you're introducing people to the game; when I was first learning the game we pretty much ignored chains of effects and declaring things in response before anything resolved.

Nevertheless, this is the official rule. It is entirely literal and taken from the rulebook.

Bandobras Took wrote:

MELE Rules wrote:Targeting: Choosing a specific entity through which a card or effect will be played out. An entity chosen as such is the "target" of the action. Some possible targets are: characters, corruption checks, strike dice rolls, items, sites, and companies. A card that states it is playable on or with a certain entity targets an entity. Cards which affect an entire class of other cards do not target (e.g., Wake of War).

I agree that targeting rules are a headache, and you don't actually need to overwhelm them with every nitpicking detail if you're introducing people to the game; when I was first learning the game we pretty much ignored chains of effects and declaring things in response before anything resolved.

Nevertheless, this is the official rule. It is entirely literal and taken from the rulebook.

Ok, it doesn't make me happy but I understand it now. Thank you for your patience in explaining it