Riddling Talk

The place to ask all rules questions related to MECCG.
TomG
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 12:19 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by TomG » Sat Aug 31, 2019 3:01 am

Although the reference from the player guide and CRF arguably provide support for Riddling Talk being able to cancel automatic attacks.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by CDavis7M » Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:07 pm

Konrad Klar wrote:
Wed Apr 04, 2018 2:28 pm
I can repeat my opinion expressed in other threads.
It is very visible at example of A Lie in Your Eyes.
A Lie in Your Eyes wrote:Playable on an untapped non-Ringwraith, non-Wizard character. Your opponent may either: tap the character, tap an ally the character controls, or choose for you to make a roll (draw a #). If the result is greater than the character's mind plus 6, the character is discarded (along with all cards he controls). 'That won't do... What did you see, and what did you say?'-LotRIII
At declaration it is not know what an opponent will choose: tapping target character, tapping an ally the character controls (if available), or making a dice roll. Result of the roll in not known too.
Therefore it cannot be said that tapping the character, tapping an ally, dice roll, or discarding the character are declared actions.
And because target of an action must be specified at declaration of the action, the character is not target of action "tap", nor action "discard", an ally is not target of action "tap". Character is still target of A Lie in Your Eyes, just because the card is played on it, but not because any action, potentially created by A Lie in Your Eyes may operate on it. Only declared action of A Lie in Your Eyes is choice.
When a card has options, the Player playing the card will choose which option to take when playing. And so declaration of targets can proceed. But with A Lie in Your Eyes, the opponent is the one choosing from among the options, not the Player that played A Lie in Your Eyes. Perhaps the opponent should have to choose which at declaration? But there is not rule requiring/allowing that that I have seen. Still, it is fine for the opponent to make the choice at resolution.

At declaration the target character is specified and the allies that the character controls are known. I don't see why the target ally cannot be specified at declaration before the option is chosen. It appears that the opponent would declare the target ally. I don't see why this is a problem at declaration since it is clear that the opponent would have made the choice at at resolution (if the opponent chose that option instead tapping the character or choosing for Player to make a roll).
Therefore it cannot be said that tapping the character, tapping an ally, dice roll, or discarding the character are declared actions.
I disagree. They must be declared to resolved. The actions can be declared subject to the opponent's choice.
the character is not target of action "tap", nor action "discard", an ally is not target of action "tap". Character is still target of A Lie in Your Eyes, just because the card is played on it, but not because any action, potentially created by A Lie in Your Eyes may operate on it. Only declared action of A Lie in Your Eyes is choice.
I disagree with all of this. These actions can be declared. How else would they resolve.
Last edited by CDavis7M on Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by CDavis7M » Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:08 pm

I remember opening several packs of The Dragons and pulling out this card, reading it line by line, getting to the end and then thinking "wait, what does this card actually do?" And then I read it again, and again.

This card has been in the back of my mind for a bit. I am trying to reconcile the card text and the Player's Guide. And then I thought to really break down the card based on the rules. And so I did and now I understand how this card may be used. Feel free to skip to the end.

I'll quote Riddling Talk and then the Player Guide. I'll explain what I think is confusing in both. Then I'll lay out the rules for playing cards and explain how they apply to Riddling Talk. And then I'll sum up how the Riddling Talk works. Underlining in the quotes is added for emphasis.

Text and Confusion of Riddling Talk and The Dragons Players Guide
Ridding Talk wrote:Riddling attempt. Playable on a character whose company is facing an attack of the type listed below. Character makes a roll (or draws a #) modified by: +2 for each sage and +1 for each Hobbit in his company. If the result is greater than: 8 against Dragons and Drakes, 10 against Men and Giants, 12 against Slayers, Awakened Plants, Orcs, Spiders, and Trolls; then name a card and opponent must reveal his hand. If the named card is in opponent's hand, the creature's card is discarded (all of its attacks are canceled) and the hazard limit against the character's company is decreased by three.
There is no antecedent for "the creature." Instead, we have "an attack" (of the types listed) and then the list of attack types themselves, but no creatures. Therefore, it is confusing whether (A) the attack is cancelled, like a normal attack-canceling card or (B) only creatures are canceled and only because they are discarded. At the very least, it is clear that a creature attack may be canceled. However, creature attacks are typically not canceled by discarding the creature's card. Maybe this is a result of Riddling Talk's power - it can cancel ALL attacks of Slayers and Assassins. I think it is unique in this respect.
The Dragons Players Guide wrote:Riddling Talk is a bit of a gamble as creature cancellers go, but the character does not tap and the hazard limit is reduced. Since there is no limit on the hazard limit reduction by Riddling Talk, you can easily stop your opponent from playing any more hazards on you this turn. Plus, Riddling Talk is useful against a wise variety of hazard creatures, giving it greater utility and frequency of play. Assuming the composition of your company is correct, you can use it on an automatic-attack at the least very least to look at your opponent's hard.
The Dragons Players Guide says that you can use Riddling Talk on an automatic-attack. And Riddling Talk is an attack-canceller so then it can cancel automatic attacks? But then we run into the issue of the "discard" language in Riddling Talk, which is confusing as mentioned above.

NOTE that you can NOT necessarily "stop your opponent from playing any more hazard on you this turn" as mentioned in the Guide, because hazard events may be declared in a chain of effects in response to Riddling Talk. But, when Riddling Talk actually resolves, and if it is successful, then you can stop your opponent depending on the hazard limit. However, at the very least you may be able to prevent your opponent from playing any further creatures or corruption cards this turn, if the hazard limit is reduced far enough, as those types of cards must start a chain of effects (See CRF Term-Corruption and CRF Turn-M/H Phase-Combat-Attack"). Meaning that creatures and corruption cards can't be declared in response to Riddling Talk.

What Riddling Talk Actually Does

The play of the Riddling Talk card has the active condition: "Playable on a character whose company is facing an attack of the type listed below." This condition is checked (declared and resolved) immediately (MELE p.87 and 88). If the conditions aren't met, the effects of the card are not declared or resolved and the card will be returned to your hand (it is not discarded).

Riddling Talk has the following actions written in its card text:
  1. Make a modified roll
  2. (if roll is greater than the number specified) Name a card
  3. (if roll is greater than the number specified)Opponent reveals his hand
  4. (if roll is greater than the number specified)&(If named card is in opponent's hand) Discard creature's card
  5. (if roll is greater than the number specified)&(If named card is in opponent's hand) All of its attacks are cancelled
  6. (if roll is greater than the number specified)&(If named card is in opponent's hand) Decrease the hazard limit by 3
If the active condition of Riddling Talk is met ("Playable on a character whose company is facing an attack of the type listed below). These actions are declared in reverse order (6,5,4,3,2,1) and then resolved in written order (1,2,3,4,5,6) (see MELE p. 50, and CRF-Term-Timing-Annotation 24). But first we must review the rules on declaring and resolving actions, Active Conditions of actions, and targets of actions.
CRF - Rulings by Term - Active Conditions wrote: Active Conditions
  • An active condition must be in play or established when the action requiring it is declared. Active conditions serve as the price of an action. They are restrictions on the player invoking the action.
  • Annotation 5: If an action requires an entity to tap as a condition for the action's main effect, that entity must be untapped when the action is declared; else, the action may not be declared. Tap the entity at this point; this is considered synonymous with the action's declaration; i.e., it is not a separate action. When it comes time to resolve the action in its chain of effects, that entity must still be in play and tapped or the action is canceled.
  • Annotation 6: If an action requires an entity to be discarded as a condition for the action's main effect, that entity must be discarded when the action is declared; this is considered synonymous with the action's declaration; i.e., it is not a separate action.
  • Annotation 7: If any other active condition for an action does not exist when the action is resolved, the action has no effect; if the action was playing a card from your hand, it is discarded.
  • Annotation 8: An action that requires a target is considered to have the active condition that the target be in play when the action is declared and when it is resolved. An action may not be declared if its target is not in play. However, dice-rolling actions may always be targeted by other actions declared later in the same chain of effects.
  • Your opponent's resources may be the active conditions for your resources, but may not be the targets for your resources.
  • If an "alternative" or "additional" effect does not have any "playable ..." conditions, then the "playable on ..." conditions from the primary effect of the card apply. The following cards are exceptions to this rule: Gloom, Good Sense Revolts, Half an Eye Open, Heedless Revelry, Here is a Snake, In the Name of Mordor, Inner Cunning, Nobody's Friend, Withdrawn to Mordor, and Wolf- riders.
  • See also Rulings by Term, Target.
CRF - Rulings by Term - Targets wrote:A target is an entity that an action is played out through. Enitities are only targets of an action if the action specifies those entities by number and type. Note that "the foo" counts as specifying one "foo."
Let's focus on the declaration of Action 4: (If named card is in opponent's hand) Discard creature.

Annotation 6 does not apply to declaration Action 4 ((If named card is in opponent's hand) Discard creature) because the creature (an entity) is not required to be discarded. The discarding only happens "If named card is in opponent's hand."

Annotation 7 may apply to Action 4 at resolution, but we are discussing declaration for right now.

Annotation 8 does apply to declaration of Action 4. While the action of discarding the creature is not "required" per Annotation 6, the discarding action does have a target, which is "the creature." We know "the creature" is the target of the discarding because "discard the creature's card" is an action that specifies a specific number of cards (e.g., 1 single target is specified here) and the action specifies the type (e.g., creature's card) according to the CRF Rulings by Term on Targets.

Given these rules, let's declare the actions of Riddling Talk WHEN PLAYING IT ON AN AUTOMATIC ATTACK.

Some may think that the only declared action caused by Riddling Talk is a dice roll. That is incorrect and does not follow from the rules. Let's walk through Riddling Talk actually follwing the rules laid out above.

Process of declaring actions when playing Riddling Talk on an automatic attack (reverse order from printed):
  • 6. (if roll is greater than the number specified)&(If named card is in opponent's hand) Decrease the hazard limit by 3. There is no hazard limit that can be targeted in the Site Phase, which is when you will be facing an automatic attack. The hazard limit is the target and it is an active condition of the action of decreasing it by 3. This action may not be declared according to Annotation 8 for reasons similar to those discussed above with respect to Action 4.
  • 5. (if roll is greater than the number specified)&(If named card is in opponent's hand) All of its attacks are cancelled This action may not be declared according to Annotation 8 for the reasons similar to those discussed above with respect to Action 4. This action is NOT declared when facing an automatic-attack as the active condition (a target creature card for the discarding action) must be met immediately. And there is no creature card with an automatic attack.
  • 4. (if roll is greater than the number specified)&(If named card is in opponent's hand) Discard creature's cardSame as Action 5, this action may not be declared as you know now if you didn't before.
  • 3. DECLARE Opponent reveals his hand
  • 2. DECLARE Name a card
  • 1. DECLARE Make a modified roll
Example Chain of Effects including declaration of the Riddling Talk card and the declared actions and resolved actions actually performed when playing Riddling Talk on an Automatic Attack.

First - Declare action of playing Riddling Talk and immediately DECLARE & RESOLVE the active condition: Playable on a character whose company is facing an attack of the type listed below.
  • The active condition is defined to not be an action and so it cannot be responded to directly. It is declared and resolved immediately with no time for response by you or your opponent. This actually occurs outside of the chain of effects. It is not in the chain of effects. I think this happens before the declaration of the card in the chain of effect as the card will just be returned to your hand without satisfying other active conditions. That is, if the card cannot be played at all, you do not need to discard and tap characters as active conditions of the effects within the card. The card just has no effect and is returned to hand.
Chain of Effects:
  • DECLARE play of Riddling Talk (as mentioned above, the active conditions are immediately declared and resolved upon this declaration)
  • 3. DECLARE Opponent reveals his hand
  • 2. DECLARE Name a card
  • 1. DECLARE Make a modified roll
  • other cards are declared in the chain of effects
  • other cards are resolved in the chain of effects...
  • 1. RESOLVE Make a modified roll
  • 2. RESOLVE Name a card
  • 3. RESOLVE Opponent reveals his hand
  • RESOLVE play of Riddling Talk
CONCLUSION
Therefore, as correctly stated in the Player Guide: "Assuming the composition of your company is correct, you can use it on an automatic-attack at the very least to look at your opponent's hard." Yes, since the Riddling Talk card itself (not its individual actions) only requires an attack as its active condition, then you may play it on an automatic-attack. And you may declare the actions listed above. So you name a card. And you get to see your opponent's hand, at the very least.

But "use" of Riddling Talk on an automatic attack does not allow you to cancel the automatic-attack as the "cancelling" actions may not even be declared (for the reasons given above) let alone resolve.
Last edited by CDavis7M on Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:20 am, edited 19 times in total.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by CDavis7M » Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:11 pm

As for Ahunt Dragons. I think they are not a valid target to be specified for "the creature's card" despite the fact that their attacks are hazard creature attacks. Just because a long-event card creates a hazard creature attack that is the active condition for Riddling Talk does not mean that the long-event is a valid target for the action of "(If named card is in opponent's hand) Discard creature's card."



The more I read the rules and the rulings and consider them all together, the more sense they make.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2878
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by Konrad Klar » Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:57 pm

CDavis7M wrote:
Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:07 pm
When a card has options, the Player playing the card will choose which option to take when playing. And so declaration of targets can proceed. But with A Lie in Your Eyes, the opponent is the one choosing from among the options, not the Player that played A Lie in Your Eyes. Perhaps the opponent should have to choose which at declaration? But there is not rule requiring/allowing that that I have seen. Still, it is fine for the opponent to make the choice at resolution
There are cards that have alternative effects and there are cards that have a choice as one of their actions.

If path of execution of a card has to be chosen at declaration then primary path is described in first paragraph, other paths in next paragraphs, each started with "Alternatively" word.

If choice has to be one of actions, there is no other method than mentioning the choice in text of the card.

If you disagree then you can play A Lie in Your Eyes as you described.
Good luck (also with Drowning Seas, Rats!).
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by CDavis7M » Tue Sep 10, 2019 8:42 pm

I see no issue with Rats. The options can be conditionally declared.

With Drowning Seas, perhaps the resource player would need to randomly select the 2 cards from their hand at declaration. I see no issue there.
CRF Rulings by Term - Timing wrote:Annotation 27 : If a card has optional effects, the player playing the card must choose which will take place. He must do this at the time the card is played, not when it is resolved in its chain of effects. When such a card is resolved, if any active conditions for the choice of effects do not exist, the card has no effect and is discarded. The player may not at this point choose to implement an alternative effect of the card.
When choices need to be made:
  • If the card presents optional effects or alternative effects to the playing player, then that player choose before declaration per Annotation 27.
  • If the card requires a target to the chosen or selected by either player (e.g., picking an item to be discarded), this will be done at declaration as the target would be an active condition per the Rulings by Term - Active Conditions rules noted above.
  • If the card requires something to be chosen or selected but there is no target (e.g., choosing between tapping a character or discarding an item. not the character and item will still need to be selected, but the choice between tapping or discarding need not be selected), this can be done at resolution, as normal since there is no active condition requiring the selection to be made immediately. This is just the normal way an action resolves when it doesn't have an active condition.
Surely this method is better and more inline with the rules than pretending that certain choice/options actions not declared but yet somehow resolve.

It is clear from the rules that the actions of a card are a chain of effects, and actions in a chain of effects are declared and resolved. There is nothing in the rules to describe resolution without declaration.
Last edited by CDavis7M on Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:53 pm, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by CDavis7M » Tue Sep 10, 2019 8:51 pm

Let's do Drowning Seas first as it is more fun.
Drowning Seas wrote: Environment. Playable on a company that moved this turn to a site with a Coastal Sea [ [-me_cs-] ] in its site path. Target company loses one item of its choice and its player must randomly discard two cards from his hand.
Alternatively, if Doors of Night is in play, target company must immediately return to its site of origin.
First - Active Conditions of Drowning Seas must be met - "Playable on a company that moved this turn to a site with a Coastal Sea [ [-me_cs-] ] in its site path." This is declared and resolved immediately.

Then, the hazard player notices there are two alternative options.
CRF Rulings by Term - Timing wrote:Annotation 27 : If a card has optional effects, the player playing the card must choose which will take place. He must do this at the time the card is played, not when it is resolved in its chain of effects. When such a card is resolved, if any active conditions for the choice of effects do not exist, the card has no effect and is discarded. The player may not at this point choose to implement an alternative effect of the card.
UPDATE - I changed my mind about the opponent selecting at declaration. The choice is declared, but only made at resolution. And the target is based on that choice, and so not an active condition.

Option 1 - hazard player chooses to have the resource player lose an item and discard cards
  • DECLARE resource player discards 2 random cards from their hand (resource player must randomly select 2 cards as they are targeted by the discard action. This occurs immediately and outside of the chain of effects)
  • DECLARE resource player loses one item of its choice (resource player must select the item to be lost. This occurs immediately and outside of the chain of effects.)
  • RESOLVE resource player loses the selected item of that it already selected.
  • RESOLVE resource player discards the 2 cards that were already randomly selected.
Option 2 - hazard player chooses the alternative effect of returning the company
  • DECLARE if Doors of Night is in play, target company must return to their site of origin
  • RESOLVE if Doors of Night is in play, target company must return to their site of origin
Just to be clear, I wouldn't bother asking my opponent to actually declare the targets at declaration. However, if the chain of effects actually got crazy and it mattered, I would at least bring the issue up to my opponent and see what they think.

Rats! is easy enough. But let's ignore the active condition and just focus on the declared actions.
Company discards one minor item of its choice or chooses one of its characters to become wounded (no body check required).
While not literally in the text, Rats! actually has the action of the company's player making a choice by virtue of using the word "or." This is inherent in the meaning of the text. In order for the company to do (A) OR (B), the player's company must choose (A) or choose (B).
  • DECLARE (if player chooses one of its characters to become wounded) one of its characters to become wounded (player selects the character at declaration. This active condition occurs immediately and outside of the chain of effects. The character to be wounded is selected before the player makes the choice of whether to wound a character or discard an item)
  • DECLARE (if player chooses to discard one minor item of its choice) discard one minor item of its choice (player selects the item at declaration. This active condition occurs immediately and outside of the chain of effects. The item to be discarded is selected before the player makes the choice of whether to wound a character or discard an item.)
  • DECLARE player makes a choice (the action - "player makes a choice" player's choice is inherent)
  • RESOLVE player makes a choice
  • RESOLVE (if chosen) discard selected minor item
  • RESOLVE (if chosen) wound selected character
Last edited by CDavis7M on Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2994
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by Bandobras Took » Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:18 am

I agree with CDavis7M. Annotation 27 describes how to handle a card that may generate one of many possible actions. A given card may, by its text, alter who gets to make the choice of which action is performed, but that choice is made at declaration.
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2878
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by Konrad Klar » Wed Sep 11, 2019 6:07 pm

Now only it leaves to figure out about which cards the Annotation 27 is talking.
Some suggestion:
CRF, Rulings by Term, Active Conditions wrote:If an "alternative" or "additional" effect does not have any "playable ..." conditions,
then the "playable on ..." conditions from the primary effect of the card apply. The
following cards are exceptions to this rule:
• Gloom
• Good Sense Revolts
• Half an Eye Open
• Heedless Revelry
• Here is a Snake
• In the Name of Mordor
• Inner Cunning
• Nobody's Friend
• Withdrawn to Mordor
• Wolf-riders
See also Rulings by Term, Targets.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2994
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by Bandobras Took » Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:47 pm

"Optional Effects" include any card where fewer actions may be taken than are listed on the card, or fewer effects implemented than are listed on the card, and the player has the option to decide which.

Seems fairly simple.
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2878
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by Konrad Klar » Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:58 pm

Something about things that seem fairly simple (for me).
Drowning Seas wrote:Environment. Playable on a company that moved this turn to a site with a Coastal Sea [c] in its site path. Target company loses one item of its choice and its player must randomly discard two cards from his hand. Alternatively, if Doors of Night is in play, target company must immediately return to its site of origin.
Imagine that "item of its choice" has to be specified at declaration of Drowning Seas.
OK. Resource player specifies Potion of Prowess. In response to Drowning Seas he uses Potion of Prowess (discarding it for effect).
When Drowning Seas has to resolve there is no target item, so Drowning Seas has no effect.

Of course Drowning Seas cannot be played at all for its primary use if a company has no item.

There are no method of choosing anything at execution of a card, just because any choice must be done at declaration.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by CDavis7M » Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:32 am

Great point Konrad. I have changed my initial thought. My mistake was overlooking the "chooses" action and the "random selection" action.

.... Oh, I already knew this for Rats! But didn't realize it when I was considering Drowning Seas.

Anyway, these actions are written right there in the card. They are performed by the player, and so are actions, and so they are declared and resolved in the chain of effects. If the hazard player takes the first option, then the resource players choice is not "optional", it is required. Yes, for Rats! the 2 actions are optional, but they depend on the choice, which is not optional, so I don't think annotation 27 applies.

The discarding actions are not directly declared, but only contingent on the choices. The declared action is discarding of the choosen item, and so the item is not a required target or an active condition.

Annotation 27 definitely applies to the choice between the "alternative" effects of Drowning seas. The hazard player playing the card must choose between the first or the alternative sets of effects. The hazard player cannot first choose the primary effect (or remain undecided) and wait to see if the resource player discards their cram, and then decide later to use the alternative effect. I think this situation is mostly what annotation 27 covers (the choice between sets of effects, or the choice between playing a card as a permanent event vs a short event, etc).

But annotation 27 doesn't describe choices by the opponent - the item discarded, or even the random card discarded from hand. My first thought was that the discarding action targeted the item as an active condition and so the item selection needs to be resolved immediately. But the rules don't give anything clear on when this is done.

In Riddling Talk, you clearly don't name the card up front at declaration. That would also be silly because then it could be played by your opponent in response, and then you'd fail as it's no longer in his hand.

So, yes. I changed my mind. Good point. The discarding action itself isn't declared directly.

With that, I think the action declared is the choosing-action by the resource player. There must also be a discarding action declared before the choosing, but the target would be conditioned on the choosing. And so it would not be a required target that would become an active condition.

And then similarly done for the random discard from hand.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by CDavis7M » Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:21 am

CRF #6 - 7/15/97 wrote:Riddling Talk

@ May be used on a non-hazard and/or non-creature attack.
Interesting. Riddling Talk received a CRF entry in #6 but then it was missing from CRF #7 without any mention in the changes or in the Digest.

TomG
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 12:19 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by TomG » Fri Sep 27, 2019 2:20 am

So where does that leave us with use of Riddling Talk on Dragon Ahunt cards? CDavis7M- Your analysis regarding Riddling Talk in the context of the rules involving declaration, etc. as it relates to automatic attacks is, unfortunately, quite convincing! I say unfortunately as I was hoping it could apply, and thematically it makes sense that riddling should render an automatic attack (e.g. a dragon) ineffective (ie cancelled). But your reasons make sense.
I still think there is an argument for its use against long events that have creature attacks, but it makes me think that the card itself would benefit from the annual rules vote.
For example, a vote to have the card amended with the boldface text as either one of the following:

Ridding Talk Riddling attempt. Playable on a character whose company is facing an attack of the type listed below. Character makes a roll (or draws a #) modified by: +2 for each sage and +1 for each Hobbit in his company. If the result is greater than: 8 against Dragons and Drakes, 10 against Men and Giants, 12 against Slayers, Awakened Plants, Orcs, Spiders, and Trolls; then name a card and opponent must reveal his hand. If the named card is in opponent's hand, THEN IF THE ATTACK IS AN AUTOMATIC ATTACK, THE ATTACK IS CANCELLED OR IF A LONG EVENT OR CREATURE CARD, THE LONG EVENT OR the creature's card is discarded (all of its attacks are canceled) and the hazard limit against the character's company is decreased by three.

Or

Ridding Talk :Riddling attempt. Playable on a character whose company is facing an attack of the type listed below. Character makes a roll (or draws a #) modified by: +2 for each sage and +1 for each Hobbit in his company. If the result is greater than: 8 against Dragons and Drakes, 10 against Men and Giants, 12 against Slayers, Awakened Plants, Orcs, Spiders, and Trolls; then name a card and opponent must reveal his hand. If the named card is in opponent's hand, the creature's card is discarded (all of its attacks are canceled) and the hazard limit against the character's company is decreased by three. DOES NOT CANCEL AUTOMATIC ATTACKS OR CREATURE ATTACKS THAT ARE LONG EVENTS.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 744
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Riddling Talk

Post by Theo » Sat Sep 28, 2019 4:58 am

A general clarification would help other cards as well... we'll see what (if anything) happens with https://councilofelrond.org/forum/viewt ... 145&t=3772

As expressed in that, I think it is reasonable to call the card creating a creature attack "the creature's card". Last I knew CDavis7M, at least, believes that creating a creature attack does not implicitly mean there is a any creature. The problem if this were the case is that I then know of no rules that would ever reward the Ahunt Marshalling Points, which are normally rewarded for defeating all strikes of a creature.
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.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”