Incorrect and non-ratified CoE rulings that contradict the existing ICE rulings and the Rules

[Theo]

Otherwise, explain the purpose of "Once the effects of an environment card have been applied to a target during a given movement/hazard phase, that effect is not applied again to that target during the current turn."

I'd say it is a clarification. Just because it was written to clarify environments does not mean that the underlying motivation does not apply to non-environments (or during other phases). I don't know of any rule about environments to cause them to be treated differently.

If this limitation did not apply, then play could not proceed. There would be an infinite number of declarations of canceling, which the players would individually need to possibly respond to and resolve.

[CDavis7M]

The cancellation effect of Scorba Roused is not an environment, so that effect can be applied again to that same target again during the current turn.

I am suspecting that the same applies to the attacking effect of Scorba Roused.
Or there is some consistent theory, that explains that it is not a case.

I've only explained why numerous times in the past few post.

Hint: it's because Ahunts and Roused Dragons state "face one attack." They only need to face one attack for the effect to be applied.

[CDavis7M]

If this limitation did not apply, then play could not proceed. There would be an infinite number of declarations of canceling, which the players would individually need to possibly respond to and resolve.

Environment effects could have an infinite numbers of declarations. Wilderness to Shadow-land to Wilderness, and so on. This is why environments are specifically addressed.

But there would NEVER be "an infinite number of declarations of canceling" because non-targeted (non-attack cancellation) cancellation effects are not triggered, they are on-going effect that comes into play once, immediately at resolution. Attack cancellation works differently because it doesn't negate declaration/resolution of an effect.

If there were some effect effect to make Scorba's attack "uncancellable." It would be an ongoing effect to prevent declaration of of Scorba Roused's triggered cancellation effect.

Promptings of Wisdom states "cancel all hazard effects for the rest of the turn that: tap this company's current or new site." This is an on-going effect that prevents declaration or resolution of site-tapping effects like Long Winter. Even if the passive condition exists, Long Winter's triggered effect is never declared.

[Konrad Klar]

Hint: it's because Ahunts and Roused Dragons state "face one attack." They only need to face one attack for the effect to be applied.

I thought naively that "face one attack." means that a company faces just that number of attacks, not e.g. three attacks like in case of Mordor in Arms.
I never thought that "face one attack." may mean that attack is faced once.
How many times action from Mordor in Arms is then applied, when a company moves through Mordor regions? Three times?

[Theo]

But there would NEVER be "an infinite number of declarations of canceling" because non-targeted (non-attack cancellation) cancellation effects are not triggered, they are on-going effect that comes into play once, immediately at resolution. Attack cancellation works differently because it doesn't negate declaration/resolution of an effect.

Can you unpack this/clarify your language more? We have numerous examples of non-targeting effects still triggering on specific targets according to passive condition rules. "Note that cards like Rank Upon Rank are applied as a passive condition, once an attack of the right type is in play."-CRF

If the effects of an ongoing effect are only applied once, then one canceling of the cancel is sufficient to avoid the original cancel effect. If they may be applied more than once, nothing stops them from being applied infinitely many times (other than, in some but not all cases, their own wording).

[CDavis7M]

Hint: it's because Ahunts and Roused Dragons state "face one attack." They only need to face one attack for the effect to be applied.

I thought naively that "face one attack." means that a company faces just that number of attacks, not e.g. three attacks like in case of Mordor in Arms.
I never thought that "face one attack." may mean that attack is faced once.
How many times action from Mordor in Arms is then applied, when a company moves through Mordor regions? Three times?

...Mordor in Arms doesn't apply 3 attacks 3 times... It's just applied and then after it's applied, it's not applied again,

Back to Ahunts/Roused: Has the company moving to Withered Heath "faced one Dragon attack" from this Ahunt/Roused card? If so, then the effect has already been applied and it does not get reapplied.

Mordor in Arms states: "Any company moving in Nurn faces three attacks: Orcs-5 strikes with 8 prowess, Orcs-4 strikes with 10 prowess, Trolls-3 strikes with 12 prowess." If a company moves in Nurn, and they have not faced the 3 attacks from this card, they will face the 2 Orc attacks and the 1 Troll attack. After they have faced them, the company has "faced three attacks" from Mordor in Arms. The effect is just applied, it isn't re-applied.

[CDavis7M]

But there would NEVER be "an infinite number of declarations of canceling" because non-targeted (non-attack cancellation) cancellation effects are not triggered, they are on-going effect that comes into play once, immediately at resolution. Attack cancellation works differently because it doesn't negate declaration/resolution of an effect.

Can you unpack this/clarify your language more? We have numerous examples of non-targeting effects still triggering on specific targets according to passive condition rules. "Note that cards like Rank Upon Rank are applied as a passive condition, once an attack of the right type is in play."-CRF

Forewarned is Forearmed ("this attack cannot be cancelled") is NOT a "card like Rank Upon Rank." The difference is that Rank Upon Rank triggers an action to modify attributes of an attack while Forewarned is Forearmed has no "action" (nothing happens in the game) to be triggered. Instead of causing activity in the game (ie an action), "this attack cannot be cancelled" prevents activity in the game. It is a negation effect (eg cancellation/prevention) and doesn't have any action to be triggered by passive conditions. This an on-going effect that is already in play. Negation effects simply "negate an action in a chain of effects," thereby preventing that action from being declared or resolved. This has been the case since the original METW rules were published, long before the rules on passive conditions and even before the Unlimited updates. Negation effects include: "This attack cannot be canceled," "no creature hazards may be played," "automatically cancels any effect___" , "cancels all hazard effects___", etc..

This obviously must be the case otherwise:
(A) the cancelled/prevented actions could still be declared, and potentially other actions could be declared based on that in the same chain of effects, which makes no sense and would let players cycle cards, and
(B) the card doing the cancellation/prevent would not work if played in response due to the delay in triggering from passive conditions.

If the effects of an ongoing effect are only applied once, then one canceling of the cancel is sufficient to avoid the original cancel effect. If they may be applied more than once, nothing stops them from being applied infinitely many times (other than, in some but not all cases, their own wording).

You are misunderstanding the difference between "applied" (ie resolved) and declared. And you are also misunderstanding the difference between an "ongoing effect" and a "effect triggered by a passive condition."

Ongoing effects: "this attack cannot be cancelled", "company may not attack another company at this site," etc. There is no activity in the game to be triggered.
Effects triggered by a passive condition: "attacks against your companies are canceled." There is an action. An attack cancellation action. Attacks are different from declared effects. Attacks are created by resolution of a Creature Card/other card. An attack is essentially an ongoing effect where multiple chains of effects can take place before playing a "cancel an attack" effect. Cancelling an attack is an action (just like the cancellation actions of Concealment, etc.).

The "attacks against your companies are canceled" effect of a Roused Dragon is a triggered action (not an ongoing effect) that gets applied once. It must actually be applied, thereby canceling the attack. Otherwise the passive condition would triggered the Roused Dragon's cancellation action again. If it is triggered, Prowess of Age can cancel 1 singular triggered cancellation action. But Prowess of Age is not an on-going effect, it does not say "this attack cannot be cancelled." Therefore, the Roused Dragon's cancellation effect will be triggered a second time, and continue to be triggered by the passive condition until it is applied. Once it is applied, the attack is cancelled and the effect is not triggered or applied again (the attack is gone). If Prowess of Age said "this attack cannot be cancelled" then it could be used to make the Roused Dragon attack its own player's company, since this would negate the Roused Dragon's triggered cancellation effect.

The effect triggered by a passive condition MUST be applied, but it is not re-applied multiple times. There is a difference between:
"All non-agent Man attacks receive +1 prowess and +1 strikes" (applied) and
"All non-agent Man attacks receive + ∞ prowess and + ∞ strikes" = "All non-agent Man attacks receive +1 prowess and +1 strikes" + "All non-agent Man attacks receive +1 prowess and +1 strikes" + "All non-agent Man attacks receive +1 prowess and +1 strikes" . . . "All non-agent Man attacks receive +1 prowess and +1 strikes." (applied an infinite number of times).

The thing is, even though the passive condition still exists, the effect has already been applied. Rank Upon Rank says the attack gets +1 prowess and +1 strikes. That is all the attack gets, it doesn't get more than that. Similarly, an Ahunt/Roused says that the company faces 1 attack, that is all they face, they don't face more than 1 attack.

The effect might be triggered by the passive condition more than once, but it is only applied once.

[Konrad Klar]

Triggered once does not mean that is successfully applied.
Triggered until success means triggered as many times as it is needed. Is re-triggered even if there is no new occurrence of passive condition.

[CDavis7M]

Triggered once does not mean that is successfully applied.
Triggered until success means triggered as many times as it is needed. Is re-triggered even if there is no new occurrence of passive condition.

I have no idea what you're responding to or how this fits with your previous statements.

[Konrad Klar]

Triggered once does not mean that is successfully applied.
Triggered until success means triggered as many times as it is needed. Is re-triggered even if there is no new occurrence of passive condition.

I have no idea what you're responding to or how this fits with your previous statements.

OK.
To not to involve environments.
The Way is Shut is in play. Company is moving to under-deep site. 1st effect of Promptings of Wisdom is in use.

Return to a site of origin is declared.
Return to a site of origin is canceled.

Is the action considered applied?
If not, should be it declared again and again until The Way is Shut will be luckily/mercilessly discarded by Marvels Told?

[CDavis7M]

To not to involve environments.
The Way is Shut is in play. Company is moving to under-deep site. 1st effect of Promptings of Wisdom is in use.

Return to a site of origin is declared.
Return to a site of origin is canceled.

Is the action considered applied?
If not, should be it declared again and again until The Way is Shut will be luckily/mercilessly discarded by Marvels Told?

The return-to-origin effect of The Way is Shut is not "declared again and again." It is never even declared at all (let alone applied) because the conditions required to perform it are negated by the ongoing effect of Promptings of Wisdom. The players recognize this and move on with the game.

It's clear that the cancellation effect of Promptings cannot use passive conditions because it does not cause any activity in the game, it only negates other activities (there is nothing to be triggered by Promptings). The cancellation effect of Promptings of Wisdom does NOT get triggered/declared using the rules on passive conditions, it is an ongoing effect. Therefore, "Return to a site of origin is canceled" is not correct. Instead:
"Return to a site of origin would be declared but cannot be declared because the conditions required to perform it are negated." Nothing actually happens within the mechanics of the game.

Promptings of Wisdom beats The Way is Shut because Promptings negates the conditions for declaring the effect of The Way is Shut.

Prowess of Age does not beat the Dragon Roused attack cancellation because Prowess of Age specifically cancels 1 declared action, it does not negate all such actions (it does not make the attack uncancellable).

[Konrad Klar]

The return-to-origin effect of The Way is Shut is not "declared again and again." It is never even declared at all (let alone applied) because the conditions required to perform it are negated by the ongoing effect of Promptings of Wisdom. The players recognize this and move on with the game.

From where the players may know that something declared in response will not remove Promptings of Wisdom from company?

[CDavis7M]

The return-to-origin effect of The Way is Shut is not "declared again and again." It is never even declared at all (let alone applied) because the conditions required to perform it are negated by the ongoing effect of Promptings of Wisdom. The players recognize this and move on with the game.

From where the players may know that something declared in response will not remove Promptings of Wisdom from company?

The players will assess the board state as it changes. This is a basic gaming practice.

[Konrad Klar]

The players will assess the board state as it changes. This is a basic gaming practice.

As though it would explain something.

Hazard player may play Call of Home on ranger with Promptings of Wisdom. He may do it in response. Why not in response to returning action from The Way is Shut.

[CDavis7M]

The players will assess the board state as it changes. This is a basic gaming practice.

As though it would explain something.

Hazard player may play Call of Home on ranger with Promptings of Wisdom. He may do it in response. Why not in response to returning action from The Way is Shut.

Because the effect of The Way Is Shut cannot be declared and so Call of Home cannot cannot be declared "in response" to it. There is no reason why it "needs" to be declared.

But still, Call of Home can be played, maybe discarding Promptings of Wisdom, which would no longer prevent The Way is Shut from having its effect declared.