Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

Any rule erratum or clarification submission for the upcoming 2019 ARV should be posted here.
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2776
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

Post by Bandobras Took » Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:17 am

Correct.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly. This prompted the backlash erratum that I will link to as soon as I notice it is officially posted. :)

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

Post by Theo » Sat Jan 12, 2019 1:25 am

Konrad Klar wrote:
Thu Jan 10, 2019 10:23 pm
So (in your opinion) it is impossible to reveal the Fool of Froth and Rage placed as on-guard when a company enters The Under-grottos, because at the point no AA at this site is Spider or Animal attack?
Full of Froth and Rage does not have any targets, so it can be revealed (when affecting an automatic-attack), "before the automatic-attack is resolved." Playing a creature as the second automatic-attack must also be done before the automatic-attack is resolved. So one could play a Spider or Animal creature, instantiating the type of the attack, and then reveal Full of Froth and Rage which would modify it.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
Have I not earnestly studied this matter?

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2470
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

Post by Konrad Klar » Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:01 am

Do you say that before facing each individual AA on-guard card may be revealed?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

Post by Theo » Sat Jan 12, 2019 4:33 pm

I realized I was conflating multiple definitions of "resolve", as well as "before". To your point, I wasn't remembering that here "before an" actually implies "before any", and furthermore "before any begin to resolve" (last chance is resource player declaring their intent to begin resolving).

I''m in agreement regarding impossibility of revealing on-guard Full of Froth and Rage at The Under-grottos.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
Have I not earnestly studied this matter?

User avatar
rezwits
Posts: 384
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

Post by rezwits » Mon Mar 11, 2019 11:58 pm

I agree with Konrad's 1st and initial clarification, but if need be, I can go with the 2nd one, for such things as in the case of Morgul Rats...

i.e. IF what makes them playable, such as Doors or some other "scenario", then they ARE normally playable, but without said scenario, they aren't playable... so therefore they AREN'T playable... this seems clear already, but go for MORE clarity...

Laters...
You probably aren't playing Agents correctly 8) <- need a rule thread for this tho...

User avatar
rezwits
Posts: 384
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

Post by rezwits » Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:26 pm

ABSOLUTE FOOD FOR THOUGHT in the meanhwile:

Corsairs of Umbar
Men. Five strikes. May also be played keyed to Andrast, Anfalas, Belfalas, Cardolan, Enedhwaith, Harondor, Lindon, Lebennin, and Old Pukel-land; and may also be played at Ruins & Lairs {R} and Shadow-holds {S} in these regions. May also be played at any site in Elven Shores, Eriadoran Coast, Andrast Coast, Bay of Belfalas, or mouths of the Anduin. "...with black sails bellying in the wind."-LotRV
EXTRACTION #1:
... May also be played keyed to (REGION LIST); and may also be played at Ruins & Lairs {R} and Shadow-holds {S} in these regions. ...
Adûnaphel
Unique. Nazgûl (7th). May be played as a hazard creature (with one strike) or as a permanent event. As a creature, may also be played keyed to Brown Lands, Dagorlad, Gorgoroth, and Western Mirkwood; and may also be played at sites in these regions. If played as a permanent-event, it will remain in play until tapped during the opponent's movement/hazard phase (tapping counts against the hazard limit). When tapped, Adûnaphel becomes a short-event and causes any one character to tap.
EXTRACTION #2:
... may also be played keyed to (REGION LIST); and may also be played at sites in these regions. ...
These two cards (among some others) have almost verbatim, the same TEXT FRAMEWORK.

In my eyes when ICE used the the term sites, they did this instead of putting Haven {H}, Free-hold {F}, Border-hold {B}, Ruins & Lairs {R}, Shadow-hold {S}, and Dark-hold {D}. They just simply put "sites" to save space, on card obviously.

To me, when ICE put Ruins & Lairs {R} and Shadow-holds {S} this is just a constrained subset of the main set sites

Like I said "FOOD FOR THOUGHT", for a later date...
You probably aren't playing Agents correctly 8) <- need a rule thread for this tho...

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

Post by Theo » Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:51 am

Of additional importance:
CRF wrote:A creature "played at a site in" a region is the same as being "keyed to" the site by name.
The site keyability of cards like Adunaphel is thus based on name, whereas for cards like Corsairs of Umbar it is based on symbol. The automatic-attacks are never based on name, so Adunaphel should be clearly out.

However, I only just now realized that there are distinct automatic-attack phrases:
  1. "... normally keyed to Xs."
  2. "... normally keyed to a X."
  3. "... normally be playable keyed to a X."
For category (a):
(hero) The Under-courts, The Under-galleries, The Under-gates, The Under-leas, The Under-vaults

For category (b):
(hero) The Under-grottos
(minion) The Under-gates, The Under-grottos,The Under-leas, The Under-vaults
(balrog) The Under-courts, The Under-galleries, The Under-grottos, The Under-leas, The Under-vaults

For category (c):
(hero) Framsburg

This makes me believe there was an implication that category (a) would require generic keyability, "keyed to (all) Xs." Meanwhile, categories (b) and (c) only require limited keyability, as per Corsairs of Umbar, etc.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
Have I not earnestly studied this matter?

User avatar
rezwits
Posts: 384
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

Post by rezwits » Mon Mar 18, 2019 5:16 am

Theo wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:51 am
Of additional importance:
CRF wrote:A creature "played at a site in" a region is the same as being "keyed to" the site by name.
These two CRFs have purpose:
CRF wrote:A creature “played at” a site is the same as being “keyed to” the site.
CRF wrote:A creature “played at a site in” a region is the same as being “keyed to” the site by name.
But the one you are quoting, doesn't say:

UNDERLINE "What you are WISHING it said"
A creature "played at a site in" a region is the same as being "keyed to" the site by name, and the site doesn't have a site type anymore?!?.

Meaning:
When you play Adûnaphel at Bandit Lair, you are playing Adûnaphel keyed to Bandit Lair that IS normally a Ruins & Lairs {or} you can play Adûnaphel keyed to the region named Brown Lands.

This is because Keying to Brown Lands is NOT the same as Keying to a Shadow-land.
Region are NOT the same
MELE Rulebook wrote:Clarification: The player playing a hazard creature must specifically state the type of region or site that a creature is keyed to - it can affect the use of other cards.
For example, if a character with a Shadow-cloak faces a strike from a creature that has been played keyed to Shadow-land, he can tap the Shadow-cloak to cancel the strike. However, if such a strike is keyed to Border-land, he cannot use his cloak against it.
Note: A creature played keyed to a specific region by name is not keyed to the specific region's type. For example, if Thranduil's Folk is played keyed to the Grey Mountain Narrows (a Shadow-land region), a target character with a Shadow-cloak can not use it to cancel a strike - the attack is keyed to the region by name, not by type.
no where is this opposed for sites...
CRF wrote:A creature “played at a site in” a region is the same as being “keyed to” the site by name.
i.e. Keyed to by Name, guess what? the site is STILL a R&L or SH or whatever, it doesn't LOOSE what type it normally is...

I looked over the rule books and misc docs, and I did not find one instance, that says:

If you play something Keyed to Moria (Durin's Bane, Bûthrakaur the Green, Umagaur the Pale, etc, of which there are FEW), Moria is no longer a Shadow-hold. Moria is STILL a Shadow-hold!

MIND YOU, I am not saying if you play Bûthrakaur keyed to Moria, that a Shadow-cloak can cancel the Strike.

I only find rulings for Keying to REGION Symbol (Type) as NOT being the same as Keying to REGION Name.

Oh and BTW, I couldn't find, OTHER than the a... URD, that CRF, not in any of these documents:

1_Book_METW.pdf
2_Insert_METD.pdf
3_Insert_MEDM.pdf
4_Book_MELE.pdf
5_Insert_MEAS.pdf
6_Insert_MEWH.pdf
7_Insert_MEBA.pdf
8_Terms.pdf
9_Errata.pdf
A_1_Digests_(Ichabod).pdf
A_2_Digests_(Gnome).pdf
A_3_Digests_(Van).pdf
B_CoE.pdf
C_Tournament.pdf
D_URD_4_2.pdf (this was the ONLY source) 🤔
E_DC_General_Rules_1_0.pdf
F_DC_Lord-player_Rules_1_0.pdf

Meaning if YOU are LUCKY to Key to say Moria, no matter what type it gets changed to it CAN'T FIZZLE because it STAYS Moria.
So say you Key to Moria, and then bump it up with The Witch-king, it's now Keyed to Moria a Dark-hold, but this is not NORMALLY a Dark-hold.
n.b. I understand that Site Types can change.

There are two more things you need to wrap your head around:

A. Normally playable, or Normally be playable
B. And Long Dark Reach Rulings for Dragons

Have fun...
You probably aren't playing Agents correctly 8) <- need a rule thread for this tho...

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 116
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

Post by CDavis7M » Mon Mar 18, 2019 5:26 am

Maybe overly simply. but I think if an AA allows for creatures "normally keyable to a [-me_rl-]" that this would require the creature played as an AA to have a little ruined tower [-me_rl-] on the left hand side of the card. This would exclude cards that are keyable to ruins and layers in certain regions.

User avatar
rezwits
Posts: 384
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

Post by rezwits » Mon Mar 18, 2019 5:43 am

Yeah, but that's too simple, I AGREE 99%, tho btw... but for completeness there are times due to Long Dark Reach (Normally) Rulings where they actually COULD be Normally Playable.

Like for instance, if in the cards text the card said:

If Doors of Night is in play, may be played at Ruins & Lairs.
(not IF the player travels there or whatever, oh no)

Just a BLANKET, IF DoN, then R&L is turned ON.

But here is the FURTHER reasoning.

All of the cards on his Wishlist, are NOT NORMALLY playable at R&L (unless).

They are only NORMALLY playable if SOME conditions are MET.
That's the whole lecture on Long Dark Reach & Normally playable. :P :P

Like for instance, IF I had a company the was moving from:

Rivendell to Ettenmoors, then Dunlending Raiders is NOW Normally Playable at R&L EVEN THO THERE IS NO REGION SYMBOL on the Upper Left Side.
A company has to make that condition active.

So, moving from Rivendell to Ettenmoors = Dunlending Raiders ARE Normally Playable at a R&L

If I am moving from Carn Dûm to Lossadan Cairn, are the Dunlending Rainders STILL Normally Playable at a R&L? no...

So, moving from Carn Dûm to Lossadan Cairn = Dunlending Raiders NOT Normally Playable at a R&L.

UGH
You probably aren't playing Agents correctly 8) <- need a rule thread for this tho...

Post Reply

Return to “2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions”