Actions created by playing an item

Any rule erratum or clarification submission for the upcoming 2019 ARV should be posted here.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2875
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Actions created by playing an item

Post by Konrad Klar » Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:37 pm

Texts of some item cards state that some action happens after playing the item.
Timing of the actions is uncertain, especially if playing of such item is one of actions of chain of effects that contains other actions, or if such item is played in result of other action (e.g. in result of Bounty of the Hoard, or Thing Stolen).

Proposed regulation:

"If text of an item card states that an action happens after playing of the item, the action bacomes first action of a nested chain of effects. This means that a flow of execution of current chain of effects is halted until nested chain of effects will finish. No action may be declared in response to the action, unless it is a dice-rolling action; an action that targets the dice-rolling action may be declared in response.
If the action is a strike, an actions that may be otherwise declared in strike sequence may be declared.
If the action is an attack, an actions that directly affect an attack may be declared; an actions that may be otherwise declared in strike sequence may be declared."
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
the Jabberwock
Council Chairman
Posts: 1138
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by the Jabberwock » Tue Jul 09, 2019 12:06 am

Will you please provide an example or two which illustrate the problem and what is being fixed with the regulation proposed? Thank you.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2875
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by Konrad Klar » Tue Jul 09, 2019 6:14 am

When Bounty of the Hoard resolves, chain of effects in which it was declared is not finished yet (even if there are no other actions in the chain waiting for its resolution).

In result of Bounty of the Hoard the Forgotten Scrolls is played that causes Trap attack.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
the Jabberwock
Council Chairman
Posts: 1138
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by the Jabberwock » Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:39 am

So can you provide an example that would illustrate the importance of whether the Trap Attack (with Forgotten Scrolls) takes place immediately before the Bounty of the Hoard chain resolves vs it taking place after the Bounty of the Hoard chain resolves?

Also, since Attacks must begin their own chain of effects by rule, isn't it clear that the Trap Attack would take place as the first declared action immediately following the resolution of the Bounty of the Hoard chain of effects?

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2875
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by Konrad Klar » Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:39 am

Forgotten Scrolls wrote:Lost Knowledge. Can also be played at Minas Tirith (if the site is tapped). Cannot be included with a starting company. After this item is played, the bearer faces an attack (cannot be canceled): Trap-1 strike with 8 prowess (weapons do not modify prowess against this strike). If its bearer is at a Ruins & Lairs [R], discard Forgotten Scrolls to make information playable at the site until the end of turn.
Attack is created not "if this item is played" but "After this item is played".
So I think that in this case there is not action caused by passive condition that potentially could be produced later. So rules that govern actions caused by passive conditions are not applicable.

In typical situation Forgotten Scrolls is played as one card chain of effects. So Trap attack may be declared as first action of next chain.
However sometimes Forgotten Scrolls may be played in middle (as result) of other chain of effects.
Compare this situation with resolution of Tower Raided.
Tower Raided wrote:Playable during the site phase on an untapped Shadow-hold [-me_sh-] if your company there: bears an item worth at least 2 marshalling points, contains an untapped scout, and discard for no effect a Stolen Knowledge card it controls. Tap the site and discard the item. Company faces an attack: Orcs-4 strikes with 8 prowess. By the end of the site phase, tap a scout in the company or discard this card. If this card is not discarded, all versions of this site are now Ruins & Lairs [-me_rl-] , and no factions are playable there. Discard this card when the site is discarded or returned to your location deck.
To declare anything that would directly affect Orcs attack (and to declare anything in strike sequences) we need space for other chains of effects. This is no more, no less but nested chains of effects. After completion of the nested chains of effects, a flow of execution returns to main chain of effects.
the Jabberwock wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:39 am
Also, since Attacks must begin their own chain of effects by rule, isn't it clear that the Trap Attack would take place as the first declared action immediately following the resolution of the Bounty of the Hoard chain of effects?
No. This is case for actions caused by passive conditions, not necessary attacks, and if the passive condition has been produced in chain of effects.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by Theo » Sat Jul 13, 2019 6:49 pm

CoE #22 wrote:Any card that has the potential to immediately create an attack is considered an attack for purposes of interpreting CRF Annotation 15.
This would prevent any item that creates a trap attack from being played during an existing chain of effects.

I assume "after" means "immediately after"... otherwise there is no limit on the delay before facing the attack, and I could choose it to be after the game ends.
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.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2875
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by Konrad Klar » Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:33 am

The "after playing X actions" never happen in chain of effects in which X has been played.
So they are never first declared actions of chain of effects containing X.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by CDavis7M » Sat Sep 14, 2019 10:31 pm

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. Like Rescue Prisoners, Smoke in the Wind, etc.

-----

I don't see any issues with the trap attack.
After this item is played, the bearer faces an attack (cannot be canceled)
The attack itself is not an action declared by the item. As far as I can see, no items declare actions. Sure the effect is declared -- which will trigger the attack after the the item is played.

It's a little weird to see timing issues arise in the site phase. I guess they also arise with events that create attacks.

But here, the attack is not inline (rescue prisoners, etc) it is an effect that comes into play and waits for after the item is played to be triggered. This IS a passive condition.

This attack will be in the following chain of effects. And, so then you can declare actions (compared to inline).

----

So, I don't see a need for the proposal. There are various rules that already apply. Maybe we could just point to which apply for certain situations. And then maybe a problem will be discovered if any problem exists.

But also, I think the proposal is an incorrect statement is the existing rules. There are changes, and no need for such changes. And unforseen consequences of such changes.

So I am against the proposal

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by Theo » Thu Oct 10, 2019 6:16 am

CDavis7M wrote:
Sat Sep 14, 2019 10:31 pm
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. Like Rescue Prisoners, Smoke in the Wind, etc.
I interpret CoE #22 as clarifying that Annotation 15 applies to actively declared attacks or actively declared actions that could immediately cause attacks. I'm not sure why you think that Annotation 15 should not be generalized beyond creature attacks; would you say the same of Annotations 12-14?? But perhaps we should take this discussion elsewhere, as it seems tangential to the proposal.
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.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by CDavis7M » Fri Oct 11, 2019 1:42 am

Theo wrote:
Thu Oct 10, 2019 6:16 am
CDavis7M wrote:
Sat Sep 14, 2019 10:31 pm
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. Like Rescue Prisoners, Smoke in the Wind, etc.
I interpret CoE #22 as clarifying that Annotation 15 applies to actively declared attacks or actively declared actions that could immediately cause attacks. I'm not sure why you think that Annotation 15 should not be generalized beyond creature attacks; would you say the same of Annotations 12-14?? But perhaps we should take this discussion elsewhere, as it seems tangential to the proposal.
Oh, right. It's not just CoE 22 that I was looking at. If you look at the later CoE rulings, the CoE Netrep was also asserting that attacks Ahunts (and all sorts of other things, like the Trap attack) are also considered to be covered by Annotation 15, not just Tidings.
Coe 72 wrote:*** CRF, Turn Sequence Rulings, Movement/Hazard Phase, Combat, Attack:
# Annotation 15: An attack must be the first declared action in a chain
of effects; i.e., a creature card may not be played in response to
another card in the same chain of effects. Revealing an on-guard
creature is an exception.
# @ Any card that has the potential to immediately create an attack is
considered an attack for purposes of interpreting Annotation 15.
Therefore, you cannot respond to a card with a dragon Ahunt, it must
start a chain of effects.
I take issue with including all sorts of things under Annotation 15. Sure on-guard is the only given exception. But clearly there are many exceptions given passive conditions and attacks created within cards. I would agree that Tidings is similar to a creature card in that an attack is created at resolution (whereas Ahunts would create attacks in the following chain per the annotations 9 and 10).

Going back to Bounty of the Hoard and Forgotten Scrolls, I think playing scrolls is a passive condition and the attack is declared in the chain of effects after the one with Bounty. "After this item is played, the bearer faces an attack" means that resolution of playing this item is a passive condition that will trigger the attack in the following chain of effects coming after the chain in which the item is played.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2875
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by Konrad Klar » Fri Oct 11, 2019 7:58 am

CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Oct 11, 2019 1:42 am
Going back to Bounty of the Hoard and Forgotten Scrolls, I think playing scrolls is a passive condition and the attack is declared in the chain of effects after the one with Bounty. "After this item is played, the bearer faces an attack" means that resolution of playing this item is a passive condition that will trigger the attack in the following chain of effects coming after the chain in which the item is played.
Compare it to Troll-Purse or to Greed. They do not say that something happens after item is played.
After x does not happen in chain of effect in which x happens.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by CDavis7M » Fri Oct 11, 2019 9:59 pm

Konrad Klar wrote:
Fri Oct 11, 2019 7:58 am
CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Oct 11, 2019 1:42 am
Going back to Bounty of the Hoard and Forgotten Scrolls, I think playing scrolls is a passive condition and the attack is declared in the chain of effects after the one with Bounty. "After this item is played, the bearer faces an attack" means that resolution of playing this item is a passive condition that will trigger the attack in the following chain of effects coming after the chain in which the item is played.
Compare it to Troll-Purse or to Greed. They do not say that something happens after item is played.
After x does not happen in chain of effect in which x happens.
The 3 cards mentioned state:
  • After this item is played
  • each time an item is played
  • When any item is played
The difference in wording is meaningless to the mechanics of the game. Each of these cards establishes a passive condition that is satisfied by resolution of an item being played. In all 3 cases, the action is triggered by the item played in the 1st chain and the triggered action is declared in the 2nd/following chain of effects.

-----

"After this item is played" mean that the attack is not an immediate action. There is no active condition to trigger the attack. The only other possibility is triggering the action by a passive condition.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2875
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by Konrad Klar » Sat Oct 12, 2019 7:23 am

"each time an item is played"
"When any item is played"
imply simultaneity.

"After this item is played"
implies order.

Not impossible, but why a card would set an action triggered by successful playing the card?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by Theo » Sun Oct 13, 2019 3:40 am

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.
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.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Actions created by playing an item

Post by CDavis7M » Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:06 am

Konrad Klar wrote:
Sat Oct 12, 2019 7:23 am
"After this item is played"
implies order.
I disagree. There are many words in cards that have no meaning given the underlying actions.

"Immediately untap all unwounded characters in Gandalf's company." The word "immediately" implies that it happens immediately upon playing the card. This is not the case. The characters do not untap until resolution of the card. "Immediately" is used in many cards and has no meaning.

Konrad Klar wrote:
Sat Oct 12, 2019 7:23 am
Not impossible, but why a card would set an action triggered by successful playing the card?
So that original Annotation 24 does not apply, allowing bearer to avoid the strike if they can. This is just an item. It's not a hazard event.
Last edited by CDavis7M on Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:19 am, edited 2 times in total.

Post Reply

Return to “2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions”