The main concern here is the interpretation of Van's digest. In particular, Ben points out that Van said:Ben Sorenson wrote:I've seen a lot of things saying "Chance Meeting was ruled that way" to defend its current use.
Konrad Klar took the view that Chance Meeting enables character play because a short-event's effects are instantly implemented and Chance Meeting should be read as allowing a character to be played rather than modifying how a character may be played.
However, in a discussion on Eagle Mounts, I used this same argument to say that when Eagle Mounts resolves (it does not require a moving company), its effect enables a company to move outside of the m/h phase -- in much the same way that Chance Meeting currently allows a character to be played outside of the organization phase despite the rules on character play.
Miguel disagreed, citing Chance Meeting a special case (Strider along with it, apparently, but not the Witch-King or Black Horse), which led me to look for the original ICE ruling on Chance Meeting being playable at any time and in addition to the one character per turn limit.
I can't find it.
The closest thing is in Van Digest 585, wherein we have:
Quote:
2.) A Chance Meeting
Q: May I use this card to bring my wizard in play ? And what will be the amount of his mind ? May I use ACM at any time during my turn (during movement hazard phase to assign the new character a strike; will this increase the number of hazards) ? May I play a second character with ACM during organisation phase ?
A: No, you can't use A Chance Meeting to bring in Wizards. You can only play A Chance Meeting when you are at a site, normally, the Untap, Organization, Site and End of Turn phases.
The question asks four things:
1) Can I play a wizard and what will be his mind if so?
2) May I use ACM at any time during my turn?
3) Can I use it during the movement/hazard phase to assign a new character a strike?
4) May I play a second character during the Organization phase?
His response only answers two of them:
1) No.
3) You must be at a site to play Chance Meeting. Normally, a company is at site during phases other than the m/h phase.
4) Was never even touched.
And the heart of the problem is 2) which is not directly addressed and only inferentially ruled on. All this digest says is that Chance Meeting can't be played if you aren't at a site.
It doesn't say anything about Chance Meeting enabling character play or being playable at any time. No direct answer was given to this question.
There's ample room in his answer to say that the standard response for Chance Meeting questions -- ICE ruled it that way -- isn't quite good enough. ICE didn't rule that way unless there's some bit of documentation not available to the general public.
A strong indication is the Old Road ruling from the CoE in digest 74:
Quote:
About old road, since it's a short event, can it be played at any time during your turn if your are at a haven ?
*** No. It must be played during your site phase.
There is no direct ICE ruling saying that Chance Meeting is playable at any time. Even the inferential evidence is shaky. The CoE has with Old Road ruled that cards modifying how something may be played do not modify whether something must be played. Chance Meeting does not directly enable character play -- it modifies how the character may be played.
The current interpretation (in many people's opinion) has a disastrous effect on gameplay (the best method for dealing with automatic attacks is to bypass them entirely -- something the auto-attack annotation was designed to prevent -- not to mention that half of the Balrog mind reduction rule came around because of abuses with We Have Come to Kill -- and keeping in mind that the Strider ruling follows the Chance Meeting logic, which really doesn't seem to have been much logic at all) and the standard response has been "That's the way ICE ruled it." Except they really didn't.
That being the case, and keeping in mind Konrad's and my positions here, is the play of A Chance Meeting/We Have Come To Kill actually legal under circumstances other than when character play is allowable?
If it is legal, then:
1) Why was Old Road ruled to only be playable during the site phase? Should that ruling be updated?
2) Would Eagle Mounts work in a similar manner (upon resolution of the Short Event, the company moves outside of the m/h phase because the short event's effects are immediately implemented)?
If it isn't legal, let us know ASAP so that people actually have to work to get around auto-attacks. Smile
(A) You may play ACM on a company only if it is at a site.
but not:
(B) You may play ACM on a company if it is at a site (and certain other requirements are met).
Fair enough. However, I think it's also pretty clear that Van would not have said (A) if he did not also mean (B). Why? Well, he goes on to mention phases outside the org phase. If he didn't mean (B) as well as (A), this would be utterly senseless.
Hence, I'm inclined to see Van's digest as asserting both (A) and (B).
Now the question is how far we should generalize from this interpretation of ACM to other cards like Eagle Mounts. My suggestion: not far at all. David has said before that Van's ruling should be construed as a covert erratum. While I want to skip over any moral judgments on Van, I think this way of viewing the matter is essentially correct.
Thoughts?
