Mistress Lobelia and Here, There, or Yonder

[Thorsten the Traveller]

@Wacho. Sure English is not my mother tongue, but I know this, when you get a court order restriction to move within 50 yards of your girlfriend's house because you're stalking her, it does not mean "your movement there is conditioned", you may move there but not freely, i.e. when accompanied by the police or when her house burns down you are allowed to enter and save her....it means: don't go there!

Imo, Lobelia is not restricted from moving in Cardolan, she's restricted from moving to other sites than Old Forest in Cardolan. That's what I think was ment, and the rest just logically follows from HToY. So to me, not being able to move to any site in a region means not being able to move through that region. You call it reading what's not there, I call it explaining an effect, that's what judges do. It makes way more sense than trying to work around some flawed combo of game texts at least.

[Bandobras Took]

You're speaking in terms of absolute restrictions rather than conditional restrictions.

[Konrad Klar]

@Zakath
It would be much easier if HToY would say:
"is not restricted form moving to this site's region"
Whole problem (as I see it) is that sometimes "moving in region(s)" means "moving to region", or "moving into region" (HToY), sometimes it means "moving through regions" (Ahunts, In The Heart of His Realm).
This is a question of careless wording, not question of logic. I don't have objections to your logic.

[collateral]

If the eagles drop you at Irerock, I would say you are also moving 'in' Withered Heath (Eagles are considered movement, right? Have dragons been ruled to only trigger on land-based movement?).

Not sure whether company using Eagle-Mounts moves through regions. It is not obvious. Fallen Radagast using Winged Change-Master ability does not move through regions.
[/collateral]

@Thorsten
Story about bad boy and his ex-girlfriend is rather comparable to the story about Ringwraith and Lorien.
Ringwraith (bad boy) cannot enter Lorien (ex-girlfrien's house and vicinity). He is not generally restricted from moving to any site in Wold&Foothils (to the any place in the city).

[Zakath]

@Zakath
It would be much easier if HToY would say:
"is not restricted form moving to this site's region"
Whole problem (as I see it) is that sometimes "moving in region(s)" means "moving to region", or "moving into region" (HToY), sometimes it means "moving through regions" (Ahunts, In The Heart of His Realm).
This is a question of careless wording, not question of logic. I don't have objections to your logic.

The interpretation of "moving in" that I came up with works perfectly well all three cards (for what it's worth, I am a native speaker of English and "moving through or to a site located in" is the simplest interpretation in my view). Note that if you follow the idea of 'moving through' literally, moving from Irerock to Gold Hill would not cause any dragons to attack you!

Further, using the definition I provided, a restriction on 'moving in' would be anything less than freely 'moving through or to a site in', and that causes HToY and Lobelia to resolve exactly as intuition would expect it to.

[collateral]

If the eagles drop you at Irerock, I would say you are also moving 'in' Withered Heath (Eagles are considered movement, right? Have dragons been ruled to only trigger on land-based movement?).

Not sure whether company using Eagle-Mounts moves through regions. It is not obvious. Fallen Radagast using Winged Change-Master ability does not move through regions.
[/collateral]

Winged Change-Master explicitly says that Rad is not considered to move through any regions, though. Eagle Mounts do not.

[Konrad Klar]

Note that if you follow the idea of 'moving through' literally, moving from Irerock to Gold Hill would not cause any dragons to attack you!

Not being native speaker of English I must believe*. I have only access to the dictionary and I'm trying to understand.
So, as I understand, company moving form Edoras to Dunharrow will not face the attack caused by Trouble on All Borders played on Riders of Rohan (according to the literal definition of "moving through")?

Playable on a unique faction in play. Any company moving through the region containing a site where the faction is playable, or through any region adjacent to this one, faces an attack. The attack is the same type as the faction and has 4 strikes with 8 prowess. The attack is detainment if the company and the faction are both minion or both hero. Cannot be duplicated on a given faction. Discard when any play deck is exhausted.

Further, using the definition I provided, a restriction on 'moving in' would be anything less than freely 'moving through or to a site in', and that causes HToY and Lobelia to resolve exactly as intuition would expect it to.

Sorry, I do not know, what your intuition is expecting.

Lobelia can move through Rhuadaur, but cannot move to the site in Rhudaur and she is considered restricted from moving in Rhudaur. Right?
Company moves from Ovir Hollow to Lorien and it is moving in Grey Mountain Narrows. Right?
Ringwraith cannot move to Grey Havens, or Lorien and is... what?... restricted or unrestricted from moving in Lindon, or Woold&Foothils?
Hypotetical ally that cannot move to Rivendell is restricted from moving in Rhudaur or not (could be played with help of HToY at Ettenmoors or not)?

*) Fairly speking: I have some doubts.

[Zangtumb]

It seems that only allies may have movement restriction (tzk, we all write about movement restriction as if it was a core mechanic, which is not; it is only a generalization out of the text of a quite limited number of allies.. ).
Thus, a Ringwraith is not restricted from moving in Lindon, even though no site will ever be available to do so (hardly surprising that the matter never arose...).
But I find the example of a "Nazgul-like ally" quite striking.
Only thing I could say, is that Lobelia may move just to ONE site, a Nazgul may move to any site BUT ONE. But I would nonetheless find quite odd an outcome that would make her restricted from moving in that region, and not him. (it would mean at least that in order to move in a region, it is not necessary to move in any site in it).
I would never have thought that movement restrictions (well, actually just *moving*) were so complex... (that's probably fallen Radagast's fault)

[Konrad Klar]

Ok, thanks. Now it is time for collateral part.
[collateral]
Ringwraith may have occasion to move through Lindon. With some help of Fallen Radagast. If Girdle of Radagast is played on Wizardhaven located in Elven Shores, Lindon, or Eriadoran Coast then Elven Shores is . Of course Ringwraith must be Dwar and must use Dwar Unleashed (other Ringwraiths could move to the sites in Eriadoran Coast at best).
[/collateral]
Things must be generalized. People may invent countless methods of playing cards that may involve cards which was designed without consideration of interactions between them.

[Zakath]

I was implying that my intuition is that Lobelia cannot suddenly pop up at a site she won't ever agree to move to!

So, as I understand, company moving form Edoras to Dunharrow will not face the attack caused by Trouble on All Borders played on Riders of Rohan (according to the literal definition of "moving through")?

If you were going to be excessively pedantic, then yes, you could argue that. Regarding the word 'through', the primary definition is:

in at one end, side, or surface and out at the other: to pass through a tunnel; We drove through Denver without stopping. Sun came through the window.

You would not be moving 'through' Rohan by this definition unless you enter it from somewhere else, then exit it to somewhere else.

However, a secondary definition is:

over the surface of, by way of, or within the limits or medium of: to travel through a country; to fly through the air.

Now I try not to be a lawyer-type, so I would probably say that yes, you would get attacked by the Riders in the example you gave. I would consider that second definition and feel like it applied to the situation, since you are traveling within the limits (borders) of Rohan.

Now on subject of Ringwraith movement - that is an interesting question. Is there any card that asks whether a character (or a company) is restricted from moving somewhere? We have concrete example of HToY for allies.

Because I would say that the Nazgul do have movement restrictions in the regions containing Hero . (On top of all the other movement restrictions they have! )

One difference is that Nazgul is absolutely forbidden from moving to the site, whereas ally does not stop the company from moving there, but then the ally is lost.

[Konrad Klar]

Further, using the definition I provided, a restriction on 'moving in' would be anything less than freely 'moving through or to a site in', and that causes HToY and Lobelia to resolve exactly as intuition would expect it to.

To make the things clear:
What is the definition of "moving in region X" you are providing? "Moving through region X or moving to the site in region X"?
Right?

[Zakath]

Both.

"Moving in" = "Starting from, passing through or to a destination within"

[Konrad Klar]

Thanks for quick response (and sorry for long time without my response*).
According to this definition a company moving from The Under-Vaults to Mount Gram, or in reverse direction, could activate action from Scorba Ahunt.
So either your definition requires additional polishing, or situation described above is OK.
...or something (Ahunts, HToY) is badly written, or I'm still missing something important.

*) It should be written in my previous post.

[Zangtumb]

I thought no region movement occurred with Under-deeps movement, so moving to Mount Gram as a surface site doesn't trigger Scorba Ahunt.
Btw: does Under-deeps count as a Region? Is an Ent ally discarded if someone moves to an Under-deep site in Rohan or Gap of Isen?
And what about HToY in an Under-deeps site?

[Bandobras Took]

The under-deeps is not a region. Under-deeps movement is not region movement. Ents are indeed discarded when moving to the Gem-Deeps, Pukel-Deeps, etc.

I think a better definition of the "moving through" as relating to certain hazard cards is "using region or starter movement that includes this region."

"Restricted from moving in" is something else entirely.

[Zangtumb]

Ok, Under-deeps is not a region.
May I play Here, There or Yonder at an Under-deeps Ruin and Lairs? (I'm starting to be annoying with this question.. )
The site has no region, and some ally is actually restricted from moving down to them...But what about allies with no restriction at all?
Does "being not restricted from moving into the site's region" exclude sites with no region at all? Or is it simply the poor wording of a pre-underdeep era?
(By the way: if Under-deeps is not a region - which is not - what is it exactly?)
Many allies are not restricted from moving to Under-deeps, even though HtoY horrible spelling (the lenght of this discussion somehow belies it ) requires them to be able to move into the site's region, and under-deeps is not one. HtoY's condition is however a negative one: It does not require them to move to a certain region, only not being restricted.

Mistress Lobelia at Barrow-downs was not a very strong combo; Roac the Raven playing Southrons from the Iron-deeps IS quite strong.

On one hand, I'll understand anydoby who swiftly answers no to this question.
On the other, I think it would have been much better if HtoY was simply about "site".
On a third hand, I think that an underdeep deck would be much more viable using that card; that's a pity to see them neglected.

[Konrad Klar]

No one may be restricted from moving through, or to the sites in region, that does not exist.