Council of Elrond

That when it is played on a diplomat that the required scout in the company also is affected.

By your post I imagine you see something additional?

An alteration of the properties/rules governing a character's company is necessarily an alteration of the properties/rules that member characters are beholden to from being part of that company. Similarly some effects are explicitly inherited the other way. I would think the intent with Hide in Dark...

I would say that, for example, playing an effect on an entity implies that there is some... effect on (alteration of) the properties of or rules governing that entity. Playing a card by an entity does not (by itself) alter anything about the playing entity.

there is no mechanical difference between played "by" or played "on" for short-events. You have presented no basis for this other than your own opinion and cyclic logic. When the logic introduces a new concept (that of general rules only sometimes applying to cards) with no textual basis, I am skep...

I have explained that I don't think it is errata, but a clarification of the intended rules; I have presented several examples in the original rulebooks that evidence that skill cards are played by a character (not just on a character), just as the CRF confirms that they need to be. Your repeated pr...

I agree. But only for those early METW cards (and METD Many Turns) that say " <Skill> Only " but dont have any actions in the card text referencing the skill. I disagree for later cards that use " <Skill> Only " as a keyword. You can tell the difference by the way that they are. Wrong. I cannot tel...

You again seem to be falling back on cyclic logic.

Indeed, I think at this point overruling the CRF and allowing multiple to end on different characters should probably make it an errata, not a clarification.

(high five?)

I cannot speak to the confusion of others.

I like this version almost as much as mine.

There is a mild issue of the Deep Mine leaving play; I don't think the Wizardhaven should still be considered to be adjacent to an Under-deeps site.

I agree. But only for those early METW cards (and METD Many Turns) that say " <Skill> Only " but dont have any actions in the card text referencing the skill. I disagree for later cards that use " <Skill> Only " as a keyword. You can tell the difference by the way that they are. Wrong. I cannot tel...

As near as I can tell, your posts are contributing nothing new. If your premise is to ignore the CRF wording which unambiguously establishes that the play of a "skill only" card is an action that is carried out through a character of a particular skill (the criteria for a target) then your conclusio...

From what I can see, there are no cards in the game having "playable on/by/at" conditions that are "playable" on two different entities. Cards are only ever playable on/by/at one entity. Or the evidence for a card being played by more than one character is right in front of you, but you cyclic-logi...

Resource: Short-event Playable on an untapped Orc or Troll character bearing a Whip. Each tapped character in the bearer's company with a mind and prowess less than the bearer's makes a body check modified by -2. Failing the body check wounds, but does not eliminate the character. Each unwounded ch...

There is no community benefit to scouring the rules for seemingly inconsistent out of context statements as an attempt to conceive new hidden rules. There is no need to pretend to know the rules better than the community and show how they are playing the game wrong. If anything, this undermines the...