Thrall of the Voice: Character Play Restrictions

Any rule erratum or clarification submission for the upcoming 2019 ARV should be posted here.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Theo, your dog and cat example is hard to follow. But my understanding from the linked post is that you believe that Thrall would allow you to play a character at any site (regardless of it being a Haven, or the characters home site). Is that right?

But even the "Golden child", A Chance Meeting, needs to specifically mention that it overrides play-site (eg at Haven or Homesite) rules to do so.

There is nothing in Thrall that mentions or refers to sites in general. Therefore, Thrall does not change the Homesite/Haven rules.

Thrall does mention "even minions agents". And agents have a Homesite playability restriction. There are other rules for agents, but I can't think of any otheragent rules regarding play of agent characters. So presumably Thrall is referring to that rule.

So Thrall suggests that it overrides agent homesite playability requirements but it does not suggest that it overrides other site playability requirements (eg, that a character must be played at a Haven or their Homesite).

Clearly cards cannot override the rules without specifically referring to them. For example, Thrall does not allow you to play a character beyond GI and keep them in the game because Thrall created its own means to play them regardless of other rules. But the reasoning presented in the linked thread would allow such antics.


I changed my mind. See below.
Last edited by CDavis7M on Wed Oct 09, 2019 10:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

CDavis7M wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 12:12 am Theo, your dog and cat example is hard to follow. But my understanding from the linked post is that you believe that Thrall would allow you to play a character at any site (regardless of it being a Haven, or the characters home site). Is that right?

But even the "Golden child", A Chance Meeting, needs to specifically mention that it overrides play-site (eg at Haven or Homesite) rules to do so.
I was trying to show with parentheses how two different meanings can be derived based on the order that one links word concepts, where both of the two link structures I gave are observed in English. With both being valid parsings, a singular interpretation must resort to their relative probabilities, as supported by surrounding context. I gave linguistic context for why I think the probability belongs to the second parsing. You give meta-game context. Both are valid. But to my values, the linguistic context is more respectful of the game creators. Does the meta-game need rebalancing through Thrall nerfing? I am not entrenched enough to evaluate.

I was and am against A Chance Meeting character play overriding the normal character play requirements that it doesn't specifically mention. However the Player's Handbook, historic rulings, and current community think otherwise. Thrall of the Voice historic rulings also suggest that it's play mechanic is a replacement of the normal play mechanic. Konrad's Short-Event Hypothesis for why A Chance Meeting is not beholden to normal character play requirements is nicely self-consistent, but to me it has dubious support from the original rules texts. My argument about the parsing is that Thrall of the Voice does explicitly replace the normal character play mechanism, more explicitly than A Chance Meeting.
CDavis7M wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 12:12 am Thrall does mention "even minions agents". And agents have a Homesite playability restriction. There are other rules for agents, but I can't think of any otheragent rules regarding play of agent characters. So presumably Thrall is referring to that rule.

So Thrall suggests that it overrides agent homesite playability requirements but it does not suggest that it overrides other site playability requirements (eg, that a character must be played at a Haven or their Homesite).
Character placement (ignoring Avatar restrictions) is all one rule, as quoted in my previous post.
CDavis7M wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 12:12 am Clearly cards cannot override the rules without specifically referring to them. For example, Thrall does not allow you to play a character beyond GI and keep them in the game because Thrall created its own means to play them regardless of other rules. But the reasoning presented in the linked thread would allow such antics.
Not a useful example; returning a character that you played to your hand at the end of the organization phase because of exceeded GI has nothing to do with the mechanics for playing the character.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Theo wrote: Not a useful example; returning a character that you played to your hand at the end of the organization phase because of exceeded GI has nothing to do with the mechanics for playing the character.


Except that this is a rule for bringing characters into play. Same as the Homesite restriction rule. Same as the rule for placing a site with a character. Same as the uniqueness rule.

Your interpretation of Thrall would override all of these rules.

The portion of the "standard" rules for "bringing characters into play" that you quoted are only a subset of the rules for playing characters and are divorced from the context of the more detailed "starter" rules for "bringing characters into play".

Thrall clearly requires the character to be played at a Haven or their Homesite when considering all of the rules.


I changed my mind. See below.
Last edited by CDavis7M on Wed Oct 09, 2019 10:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

CDavis7M wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:59 am
Theo wrote: Not a useful example; returning a character that you played to your hand at the end of the organization phase because of exceeded GI has nothing to do with the mechanics for playing the character.
Except that this is a rule for bringing characters into play. Same as the Homesite restriction rule. Same as the rule for placing a site with a character. Same as the uniqueness rule.

Your interpretation of Thrall would override all of these rules.

The portion of the "standard" rules for "bringing characters into play" that you quoted are only a subset of the rules for playing characters and are divorced from the context of the more detailed "starter" rules for "bringing characters into play".

Thrall clearly requires the character to be played at a Haven or their Homesite when considering all of the rules.
As I stated in the other thread, site placement and uniqueness are rules on ANY character played, not just the character played through the "one and only one of the following activities" allowance, so playing a character though other allowances does not allow you to circumvent those (without explicitly addressing them, i.e. Strider -> Aragorn).

Thrall explicitly replaces the "one and only one of the following activities". This means it is not beholden to the rules appearing only under those activities.

However, my previous quote (MELEp58) does not appear under those activities. Hoho! This is problematic not just for Thrall but also for bringing a character into play as a consequence of an influence attempt, as well as A Chance Meeting. None of these explicitly address played characters requiring their home site or a haven. From this we should perhaps conclude that all of these play mechanics are only useful if at the character's home site or a have. Alternatively, we interpret MELEp58 as still defined in the context of the normal "one and only one of the following activities", such that none of these alternative play mechanics are under it's influence. This is my interpretation. But then Thrall is free as well. It is illogical to treat them inconsistently.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

I understand your argument better now. But the rules don't suggest a framework to support your conclusion. There is nothing in the rules to suggest that every rule of multiple rules in the same clause can be overridden because a card enables a player to override 1 of those rules.

Are there any other examples of such a frame work (besides A Chance Meeting BS?)

Especially in the context of a fallen wizard being enabled to play 6 mind characters. This is clearly the allowance being created. There is nothing to suggest site playability allowances.

Influence attempts and A Chance Meeting don't have this issue:

Influence attempts don't have these issues as they are covered by a separate set of rules which seem clear enough to me.

A Chance Meeting specifically has little icons printed on it to cover site playability allowances. If anything, this is the only allowance that the card explicitly creates.


see below
Last edited by CDavis7M on Wed Oct 09, 2019 9:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Ichabod Digest 55" wrote:>Can Thrall of the Voice be played to play a Troll character when Bad Company is
>not in play?
No.
Thrall cannot be used to play a Troll.


See below.
Last edited by CDavis7M on Tue Sep 17, 2019 12:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

I've thought about this more and changed my mind of how the rules and card effects interact (mostly based on A Chance Meeting and other cards that let you play cards beyond of the rules). The rules cover playing cards in general. But once played, card effects just operate as they are written according to their own requirements unless the card effects themselves specifically reference some rule. This is the to reconcile the rules with the cards.

So, (despite the 1 ICE Digest ruling against) I've come to the conclusion that Thrall actually WILL let you play Orcs and Trolls (under DI or not, and at a haven/homesite or not, etc). Still, I think "instead of a normal character" in Thrall is being used like the phrase "in lieu." Meaning that you can't use Thrall after playing a character normally.

-----

Unfortunately, by this same reasoning, I've now come to the conclusion that a Fallen Wizard COULD play 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 mind characters (and 1-5 mind characters) using A Chance Meeting, We Have Come to Kill, or Open to the Summons. The MEWH rules do not restrict the mind of characters in the deck, only the mind of starting characters and characters played by the regular rules. Seems pretty sweet, but you'd need to leave enough DI/GI unused for several turns until you get the 2-card "combo." So maybe not all that great.

Has anyone seen this before?



Also despite this ruling:
ICE Digest 44 wrote:>I read in the last Inquest that you could start The Grimburgoth (minion agent
>with a mind of 8 ) in a WH deck if you played Open to the Summons, which is a
>minion permanent event that can be played in lieu of a minor item. It allows a
>minion agent to be played in the company with a -1 to his mind at any
>DarkHaven.


That is incorrect. The agent would have to have 6 mind in order for that
to work. Which issue was this in? I know the deck I wrote for InQuest
had two errors in it (Dasakun and Snaga-hai)
.
Too bad no one asked why Open to the Summons would have to follow the rules if A Chance Meeting does not.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Wed Oct 09, 2019 10:16 pm Unfortunately, by this same reasoning, I've now come to the conclusion that a Fallen Wizard COULD play 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 mind characters (and 1-5 mind characters) using A Chance Meeting, We Have Come to Kill, or Open to the Summons.
By this same reasoning player could play unique card that has copy/manifestation already in play, each time he can play additional character/resource or not additional character/resource but under modified conditions*.

I think that no Unique/Cannot be duplicated if its copy/manifestation is already in play, no Orc/Troll, no character with mind over 5
are global filters that may be overriden only explicitly.
Thrall of the Voice overrides explicitly some of them.

*)I think that A Chance Meeting, We Have Come to Kill are not in the same line as Open to the Summons and Thrall of the Voice.
Former allow to play character at their execution, latter do not create "play character" action but only modifies where (OttS) or which (Thrall) character may be played.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 6:50 am
CDavis7M wrote: Wed Oct 09, 2019 10:16 pm Unfortunately, by this same reasoning, I've now come to the conclusion that a Fallen Wizard COULD play 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 mind characters (and 1-5 mind characters) using A Chance Meeting, We Have Come to Kill, or Open to the Summons.
By this same reasoning player could play unique card that has copy/manifestation already in play, each time he can play additional character/resource or not additional character/resource but under modified conditions*.
This isn't exactly the same. Rules on uniqueness are not only in the rules. They are restrictions appearing in the card itself, with the term being defined by the rules. A Chance Meeting can only overcome homesite restrictions by specifically referencing the restriction. Thrall does not reference homesite restrictions and it cannot overcome them. And so A Chance Meeting cannot overcome the Uniqueness restriction unless it had specifically said "even a unique character in play".

-----
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 6:50 am I think that no Unique/Cannot be duplicated if its copy/manifestation is already in play, no Orc/Troll, no character with mind over 5
are global filters that may be overriden only explicitly.
Thrall of the Voice overrides explicitly some of them.
Uniqueness is different because it is a restriction printed on the character card. The others are rules for playing characters.

When playing as a Fallen Wizard: if an agent can be played by We Have Come to Kill, and an Orc/Troll can be played by Thrall of the Voice, then a 9 mind character can be played by A Chance Meeting.

If a global filter was intended, I would expect harsher language to differentiate between these play restrictions.

-----
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 6:50 am *)I think that A Chance Meeting, We Have Come to Kill are not in the same line as Open to the Summons and Thrall of the Voice.
Former allow to play character at their execution, latter do not create "play character" action but only modifies where (OttS) or which (Thrall) character may be played.
I guess we differ. I think Open to the Summons and Thrall do create a play character action. They are only permanent events to maintain the -1 mind effect.
  • A  character  (even  a  Hobbit) may  be  brought  into  play.
  • A  character  may  be  brought  into  play  
  • you  may  bring  into  play  one  character
  • One  agent  minion  may  be  played
I don't see enough of a difference.

If Thrall and Open to the Summons really did modify the playability rules, I would expect to see the term "is playable" which is used other MEWH card effects.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

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.
A Chance Meeting, We Have Come to Kill are short-events not restricted to be playable in particular phase.

Thrall of the Voice states which character can be played instead a normal character. Cards that do not state so do not allow to play a non-normal character.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 4:51 pm 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.
A Chance Meeting, We Have Come to Kill are short-events not restricted to be playable in particular phase.
I agree. And these are short events. But I do not think that card type (e.g., short event vs long event) makes any difference (if you still maintain this position on short-events discussed elsewhere).
MELE Events, p. 40 wrote:
  • Short-event -- A short-event's effects are implemented.
  • Permanent-event -- The effects of a resource permanent-event are immediately implemented.
The effects of both short events and permanent events are implemented in the same manner. They are just implemented as written when they resolve according to their own conditions.

------
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 4:51 pm Thrall of the Voice states which character can be played instead a normal character. Cards that do not state so do not allow to play a non-normal character.
I disagree that cards not stating "instead of" (as in Thrall) do not allow play a non-normal character. If card can be played by a Fallen Wizard, and that card has a character playing effect, then the character can be played according to the card's own conditions (regardless of the rules) when the effect resolved.

Thrall's "instead of a normal character" statement is a condition that must be satisfied to declare the character-playing effect. And this condition references the rules on playing characters. Meaning that you cannot play a normal character during the organization phase and then play a 2nd character using Thrall of the Voice, since Thrall's character-playing effect is used "instead of playing a normal character."

If Thrall's "instead of a normal character" statement were to modify the METW+MEWH rules for playing characters, I would expect to see the "is/are not playable" terminology used all across MEWH when the playability rules are altered (An Untimely Brood, Saruman's Machinery, War-forges, Fortress of Isen/the Towers, Guarded Haven, etc).

All of the character playing card effects operate according to their own conditions without needing to respect the normal rules for playing characters:
  • Agents are non-normal characters for Ringwraiths. We Have Come to Kill allows agents to be played without specifically referencing rules for playing agents.
  • While 9-mind characters are non-normal characters for Fallen Wizards, A Chance Meeting allows the 9-mind character to be played by a Fallen Wizard without specifically referencing the mind-restriction rules for playing characters.
  • Thrall allows for Orcs and Trolls to be played by a Fallen Wizard without specifically referencing the rules for playing Orcs and Trolls.
  • Open to the Summons allows an 9-mind Agent to be played by a Fallen Wizard without specifically referencing the mind-restriction rules for playing characters.
-----

MEWH includes several restrictions on playing cards and targeting cards beyond the normal METW rules. If there was to be a restriction on using card effects to play characters having greater than 5-mind, I would expect something like the MEWH restrictions on playing skill cards using Orcs or Troll characters:
  • A card effect that brings a character into play may not be used to play a character having a mind greater than 5.
But there is no such restriction.

-----

Don't get me wrong, I do think that this is unexpected, but I have never seen the issue raised before.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 4:51 pm 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 hand size before the site phase. Enabling a major or minor item to be played at a tapped site is not an action; it modifies the legality of a defined and otherwise restricted action.
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 4:51 pm A Chance Meeting, We Have Come to Kill are short-events not restricted to be playable in particular phase.
Who has ever argued this? This issue is whether their allowance as written opens the normal restrictions on character play to be in any phase or not. It does not. But this is water under the bridge after last year's vote, because the player base decided they wanted a different card.
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 4:51 pm Thrall of the Voice states which character can be played instead a normal character. Cards that do not state so do not allow to play a non-normal character.
Again, it is factually not true that Thrall has an effect using a passive voice. Thrall of the Voice states which character a player may bring into play; this is an active tense. Thrall allows the player to bring into play a character as it specifies; it does not modify the normal rules for the actions that bring a character into play, it gives an alternative bring into play action.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Theo wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2019 1:13 am
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 4:51 pm 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 hand size before the site phase. Enabling a major or minor item to be played at a tapped site is not an action; it modifies the legality of a defined and otherwise restricted action.
Bounty cannot be used this way. The item is played at resolution of Bounty or not at all.

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.

Which it does not.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2019 6:58 am 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 item may be played at such site". "Playable" could allow Lobelia at Framsburg to tap to search for major item.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Theo wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2019 1:13 am Konrad Klar wrote: ↑10 Oct 2019, 18:51
A Chance Meeting, We Have Come to Kill are short-events not restricted to be playable in particular phase.
Who has ever argued this? This issue is whether their allowance as written opens the normal restrictions on character play to be in any phase or not. It does not. But this is water under the bridge after last year's vote, because the player base decided they wanted a different card.
Any card (not only short-events, permanent-events) may create action to be executed when the card comes into play (once) and may allow for taking an action later.

Moot point may be a convention of writing the actions.

I believe that they must be reconstructed.

If playing a character according to Trall would be immediate action, then restrictions "during organization, phase", "may be also in your starting company" do not make a sense. Stage resource may be played only at these point of game.

If playing a character according to Open to the Summons would be immediate action, then "Cannot be duplicated on given character" does not make a sense too.

Master of Esgaroth allows for an action to be taken later.
Lack of text "when" in texts of other short-events leads me to conclusion that the action cannot be taken later. It may or must be taken at time of execution of given short-event.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Post Reply

Return to “2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions”