This errata was voted on and was accepted.
But is it wrong and clearly contradicts the existing rules. The reason the vote was a failure is because no one bothered to read the rules. I can tell because no one in the linked discussions bothered to quote the rules, and the rules are actually very clear. The previous discussion misunderstands the rules on Uniqueness and the rules on the out-of-play pile. From this misunderstanding, the CoE's issued errata clearly contradict the rules. What a farce.
The questions being raised in the linked discussion are:
- What does "removed from play" mean and where do cards removed from play go? Do they count for Uniqueness?
- What does "removed from the game" mean and where do cards removed from the game go? Do they count for Uniqueness?
The answers from the actual rules are:
- Cards that are "removed from play" are placed in the discard pile. They do NOT count for Uniqueness. The rules on Unique say nothing about discarded cards.
- Cards that are "removed from the game" are placed in the out-of-play pile. Cards that are out-of-play cannot be brought back into the game, they have been removed from the game. The Unique restrictions have always specifically applied to unique characters or allies that are eliminated and to unique creatures that are defeated. However, rule changes in MELE state that cards (not limited to characters, allies, and creatures) in the out-of-play pile DO count as being "in play" for Uniqueness (even though they are not in play).
Yes, the rules changed in MELE: cards that are not in play may still count as being in play for purposes of Uniquess if those cards are in an out-of-play pile or marshalling point pile. This changes the rules because the METW rules on uniqueness are only generally concerned with cards that are in play, not cards that are out-of-play. Meaning that under the METW rules, both players could play Favor of the Valar while under the MELE rules, only the first player to play Favor of the Valar can play it. Still, METW had specific rules on not playing an eliminated character or ally, or a defeated unique creature. Therefore, the change in MELE is that "now" (back in 1997) non-character, non-ally, non-creature cards (ie, all cards) ALSO cannot be played when they are in the out-of-play pile (ie removed from the game).
Also note the clarification in the METW Unlimited rules that clarifies the Limited description of the out-of-play pile, which makes it seem more like a discard pile for "used" cards.
Actual Rules wrote:
2 · THE CARDS AND DECKS
UNIQUE & “MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED” CARDS
If a card states that it is “unique” or that it “may not be duplicated,” only one such card (or its effects) may be IN PLAY at a time. The first card played takes precedence (influence checks may change this). This restriction applies to all cards in play, i.e., both yours and your opponent’s.
(Comment: This main rule on Uniqueness ONLY apply to cards in play, not to cards that are out-of-play. But this rule was changed, see more below.)
METW Limited:
"Out-of-play Pile – Your cards that are removed from play after being used are placed in your out-of-play pile." (Comment: this description is confusing because it seems more like a discard pile. This was clarified in the Unlimited rules below)
METW Unlimited:
Clarification: If a character is eliminated due to combat or due to failing a corruption check by 2 or more, his card is placed in the out-of-play pile – that character may not be brought back into play by either player. If a creature is defeated, its card is placed in the defender’s marshalling point pile. If such a creature is unique, it may not be brought back into play by either player.
When a card is REMOVED FROM PLAY in all other cases, the card is DISCARDED unless the card specifically states otherwise.
(Comment: This rule specifically states that eliminated characters and defeated unique creatures cannot be replayed. This rule does not cover short-events.)
MELE:
Clarification: If a character is eliminated due to combat or due to failing a corruption check by 2 or more, his card is placed in the out-of-play pile – that character may not be brought back into play by either player.
When a card is removed from play in all other cases, the card is discarded unless the card specifically states otherwise.
Clarification: In general, cards in your out-of-play pile and your marshalling point pile are considered to be actively in play for the purposes of being unique (if the card states it is unique).
(Comment: MELE included a few changes: (A) cards in the out-of-play pile now are specifically considered to be in play for purposes of being unique. Also, the bit about creatures is removed since a creature may be defeated (e.g., by a RW, or someone doesn't want a trophy) and it will go to the player's out-of-play pile instead of the defender's marshalling point pile.
I don't know how much more clear the rules could be on "removed from play." When a card is "
removed from play" without being
eliminated or
defeated, the card is DISCARDED unless the card specifically states otherwise.
Furthermore, this interpretation is consistent with other rulings. This is why Knowledge of the Enemy received the CRF clarification that it "
Removes cards from the game, not just from play." This clarification is needed because KotE does not discard (remove from play) a card that is already being discarded, it moves that card to the out-of-play pile (remove from the game).
----------
the JabberwocK wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 5:13 am
Clarification:
Cards "removed from play" are placed in an out of play pile and are still considered for purposes of uniqueness. Cards "removed from the game" can be placed anywhere outside of the playing environment and no longer have any affect or interaction with the game.
This directly contradicts the rules and creates confusion in all the rules and cards listed.
Cards "removed from play" are placed in the discard pile unless otherwise indicated and they do not count for purposes of uniqueness.
Cards "removed from the game" are not " placed anywhere outside of the playing environment." Removing cards that were in play from the "playing environment" is not a concept of this game. Instead, such cards are placed in the out-of-play pile and they do count for purposes of uniqueness. Cards that are out-of-play cannot be put back into the game. Therefore, they have been "removed from the game."
----------
the JabberwocK wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 5:13 am
Clarification:
Cards in the discard pile are never considered for purposes of uniqueness.
This clarification clears up any possible confusion remaining from Van's ruling in ICE Digest 581 that because a card is unique, only one copy can be
played during a game (which we already know is not true in all cases).
Van's ruling in ICE 581 is correct. It's true that Van wasn't Ichabod, but this isn't some one off "mistake." This ruling is directly supported by the MELE rules above.
ICE wrote:From: "Van Norton" <vno...@mindspring.com>
Subject: [MECCG] Ruling Digest 571
Date: 1999/04/16
>Subject: News Of Doom and other questions (Van/Ick)
>Just a few of questions.
>When cards are "removed from the game" such as with News Of Doom and
>Dark Tryst, I assume they are placed in the out of play pile. Is
>that correct?
Yes.
ICE wrote:From: "Van Norton" <vno...@mindspring.com>
Subject: [MECCG] Ruling Digest 581
Date: 1999/06/14
> 2- If my opponent played News of Doom, can I play my copy of
>the card later in the same game?
No. News of Doom in unique. Only one copy can be played during a
game.
These rulings are correct because News of Doom states "
Remove News of Doom from the game" and that means that it goes to the out-of-play pile. Meaning that with the changes in MELE, it now counts as being in play for purposes of being Unique. Meaning that someone else cannot play News of Doom a second time because it is Unique and it is still considered "in play."
----------
the JabberwocK wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 5:13 am
Erratum:
Change:
CRF, Tournaments, The Character Draft wrote:Characters left over from the character pool may be placed either in the play deck, or out of play, but may not be placed in the sideboard.
To:
CRF, Tournaments, The Character Draft wrote:Characters left over from the character pool may be placed either in the play deck, or removed from the game, but may not be placed in the sideboard.
This CRF ruling is wrong but it is better to be removed completely rather than edited to be incorrect again as was done here. The Council of Lorien tournament policy already covers any question that could have been asked in order to need this answer.
CoL states: "
If a unique character is duplicated by opponent's selection, both characters are set aside (this character may not appear in either player's starting company)... In his or her play deck, each player may now assign up to 10 characters, and this may include any unrevealed or duplicated (set aside) characters from his or her pool of starting characters."
The question that prompted the CRF ruling above was probably asking whether left over characters could be included in the sideboard. But the CoL policy is clear that "left over" characters from the draft may be included in the play deck, or they may not be. There is nothing about putting them in the sideboard. There is also nothing about putting such characters "out of play" (ie into the discard pile) as in the CRF Ruling. Under the CoL, left over characters are just not placed into the play deck. It doesn't say where they go. Presumably they stay in the "pool of potential starting characters," which is not used after game setup. Simple enough.
---------
the JabberwocK wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 5:13 am
Erratum:
Change:
Balrog, Getting Ready to Play, Miscellaneous wrote:If you are a Balrog player, your opponent may not play any of the following cards: The Balrog (Ally), The Black Council, Durin’s Bane, Balrog of Moria, Reluctant Final Parting.
However, if at any time your opponent has one of these cards in his hand, he may remove it from play and bring one card from his sideboard into his play deck.
To:
Balrog, Getting Ready to Play, Miscellaneous wrote:If you are a Balrog player, your opponent may not play any of the following cards: The Balrog (Ally), The Black Council, Durin’s Bane, Balrog of Moria, Reluctant Final Parting.
However, if at any time your opponent has one of these cards in his hand, he may remove it from the game and bring one card from his sideboard into his play deck.
This errata goes against the rules: "
Clarification: If a character is eliminated due to combat or due to failing a corruption check by 2 or more, his card is placed in the out-of-play pile – that character may not be brought back into play by either player. When a card is removed from play in all other cases, the card is discarded unless the card specifically states otherwise.
Meaning that if you are playing against a Balrog player and you draw The Balrog ally, you can DISCARD it to sideboard another card. Removing a junk card to the out-of-play pile is an advantage in multi-deck games just as discarding a junk card from your hand is an advantage. I don't think the player should be rewarded because they included junk cards in their deck. You don't get rewarded for including Foul Fumes in your vs-minion deck, I don't see why you should be warded for included The Balrog in a vs-minion deck. The other possibility of removing The Balrog ally from the game is not unreasonable, but the rules are absolutely clear that The Balrog ally would be discarded.
----------
the JabberwocK wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 5:13 am
Erratum:
Change:
Dragons, Manifestations of Dragons wrote:If at any time an attack from a manifestation of a unique Dragon is defeated or if the manifestation is otherwise removed from the game:
• All existing manifestations in play of the same Dragon are removed from the game.
• No further manifestations of the same Dragon may be played.
• The Dragon’s lair no longer has an automatic-attack.
To:
Dragons, Manifestations of Dragons wrote:If at any time an attack from a manifestation of a unique Dragon is defeated or if the manifestation is otherwise removed from play:
• All existing manifestations in play of the same Dragon are removed from play.
• No further manifestations of the same Dragon may be played.
• The Dragon’s lair no longer has an automatic-attack.
This change is unnecessary. The other Dragon manifestations in play of a defeated dragon go to the out-of-play pile (removed from the game). This is fine since the dragon was defeated (they are all out-of-play now).
----------
the JabberwocK wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 5:13 am
If the above proposal is passed it means:
- No additional erratum on Strider is necessary.
Strider clearly overrides the rules on Manifestations just as The Mouth overrides the rules on Manifestations. There is no issue with Aragorn II being in play while a non-eliminated Strider is in the out-of-play pile.
----------
the JabberwocK wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 5:13 am
- News of Doom and Favor of the Valar are unique only for deck construction purposes and may be played by both players once during a game (effectively overturning Van's ruling in ICE Digest # 581). The alternative to this would be to issue an additional erratum on both News and Valar that they are "removed from play" instead of "removed from the game." This would stay true to Van's ruling but would add additional errata on 2 more cards, and it is unclear if this is better or worse for game play.
This goes against multiple ICE rulings and the rules of the game as changed in MELE. The rules are clear. Van was right.