Council of Elrond

Neither allow an active action (e.g. "character may play"), so I'd say that both allowances are effects ("item may be played"). One is an effect on a company, the other is an effect on a (target) tapped site.

Túrin Turambar wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 11, 2019 6:40 am

exhaustive

If it was easy there might be more than two active members with Rules Wizard titles as of this post.

If Bounty enabled an item to be played later, it would use the "playable" terminology used in many MEWH cards. And it would need to be a permanent event played on the site or say "until the end of the turn" in order for the effect to last beyond resolution of Bounty. Or it would say: "this turn xyz...

I think it still needs more generalization. "Is successful" and "Is defeated" are concepts that carry with them other effects, but I do not think of them as changes of state; there is no "not yet successful or defeated or ineffectual" prior state (although perhaps a "being resolved" state would suff...

Just want to tie this back to extra agent actions, which occur "each time" an agent takes a normal action. Not that there was much original guiding text there either.

The URD will eventually be the go-to place. Right now it is unofficial, but a handy compilation. Current "CoE Official", in order of precedence: CoE Issued Erratas CoE ruling digests (last to first) Council of Lorien Tournament Rules ICE digests 579-588 (did not have a chance to be incorporated into...

But when a rule taken out of context then I can see how confusion could happen. This is the context: Movement/Hazard Phase General --- Here are the rules that this Annotation is annotating: At the beginning of its movement/hazard phase, a moving company's current site card becomes its site of origi...

If Bounty of the Hoard would not be restricted by its text to be playable only in site phase, it would allow to play an item in any phase. I don't share this interpretation. If it wasn't restricted it would be possible to get it out of hand during another phase to be able to draw back up to full ha...

The statement in CoE 22 on Annotation 15 is incorrect because it confuses creature attacks (annotation 15), attacks triggered by a passive condition (annotation 9 and 10), and attacks DIRECTLY declared within a card (annotation 24). The CoE ruling would break cards that rely on other timing rules. ...

I think it is improved from the original proposal. I suggest revising the wording at the end. Something like: until the site phase or until proceeding past when cards would be drawn if a company is moving in a movement/hazard phase, whichever occurs first. That is, actively declaring actions during ...

Not to derail further but: Tap the sage and the site to search through your play deck and choose an item that you must reveal to your opponent. Tapping the sage/site are clearly active conditions of declaring the search the deck action. That means they have to tap before resolution, but Far-sight n...

I can only speculate. I do think there are numerous examples of the terms being sloppily used in the intervening years. Things like players asking about whether they can perform some action at the end of the turn when they really meant to ask whether they could perform it after reconciling their han...

As for errata vs. clarification, I think the culprit (based on several of the ballots) is that the vast majority of players don't care about the difference. And in many particular cases the difference is contentious, often having to battle against the bias of decades of assumptions, and the ROC memb...

In cardnum, we must bring the site card to our hand first anyway.

Fell Winter and Morgul Night affect all of a type of region; establishing the order of their effects does not need to wait for the reveal of any regions. And sure, Snowstorm card establishing it's effect is in the same set. But the return action actually being declared is based on revealed regions, ...