Konrad, this is covered by The Wizards Rulesbook: "A required or declared dice roll is an action and can be the target of another action or effect declared later in the same chain of effects." This is in harmony with annotation 1. You just declare New Friendships after you declare Marvels ...

And the problem is...?

I don't see the problem. You just declare New Friendships after you declare Marvels Told. Now your opponent has the chance to declare something in response to New Friendships.

You've emphasised the wrong bit (twice) and ignored the important part of this sentence here: "...are CONSIDERED to have been declared in the reverse order..." Why 'CONSIDERED' to have been? Because they actually weren't!, as per the rules . They're just 'CONSIDERED' to have been. Which m...

I went a read it again. It says "all of these actions are to be RESOLVED in the card’s chain of effects uninterrupted and in the order listed on the card." This statement doesn't say that actions are DECLARED in the order they are listed, it says the actions are RESOLVED in the order they...

Let me quote from the URD in reference to Annotations 5 and 6: Editor’s Note: Apparently, the NetRep team was going through a phase where they assumed that active conditions serve as the price of card play only. This is an official ruling, but is highly suspect, especially since if you discard the W...

...Bilbo is tapped when declaring MT in the chain of effects, before anything else is declared. No Bilbo does not tap until the card is resolved, and the card cannot be resolved until cards higher up the chain of events have been resolved. ...the Sage is not the target of the action of playing Marv...

This is incorrect. Please read again: "If a card specifies that more than one action occurs when the card is itself resolved in a chain of effects, all of these actions are to be resolved in the card’s chain of effects uninterrupted and in the order listed on the card . No actions may be declar...

I think you took out my colours :D Let me fix it. My comments are in green. The black text is an erroneous statement by CDavis7M: The corruption check of Marvels Told is declared, targeting Bilbo, a Sage. Wrong order. The Corruption check is the final action on the card and is declared last. The car...

I'm sorry, but you have misunderstood this rule: "If a card specifies that more than one action occurs when the card is itself resolved in a chain of effects, all of these actions are to be resolved in the card’s chain of effects uninterrupted and in the order listed on the card . No actions ma...

Konrad Klar wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:44 pm

CRF, Rulings by Term, Timing wrote:The actions listed on the card are considered to have been declared in the reverse
order as they are printed.

What is the context for this? This is not a clarification, this completely changes the RAW.

The corruption check of Marvels Told is declared, targeting Bilbo, a Sage. Wrong order. The Corruption check is the final action on the card and is declared last. The cards in a chain are resolved in reverse order, but the actions on each card are resolved in the order in which they appear (p.30 Th...

Well, see how it goes, I suppose. Organising deliberately by language makes no sense, as events on one side of the world would likely be of little interest to those on the other. Lack of activity makes more sense. I get that.

Not using the words you would prefer does not negate my argument, and besides, you understood my meaning, hence my phrasing is perfectly adequate. And nothing you have highlighted negates my argument. The cards trump the rules, and I have explained exactly how it might be argued, in this case, that ...

CDavis7M wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 3:41 pmAnd your statements on actions do not reflect the terminology and phrasing of the rules. This is described in ACTIONS AND CARD PLAY and TIMING and the glossary on chain of effects, declaring, resolving, and targeting, and Annotations 1-8.

Where do I fall foul of these rules? I can't see that I do.

On and with are not differentiated because they are clearly the same thing. Highly unlikely I think, otherwise they would not be separate words differentiated by an 'or'. ...it would require the player to pick up Crown of Flowers and move it to be with the Sage, which is an activity being performed...