Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

The place to ask all rules questions related to MECCG.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2922
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by Konrad Klar » Thu Nov 28, 2019 9:12 am

Question is whether it is possible to declare an action while facing 1st attack in such way that the action will resolve while facing 2nd attack.

The Tormented Earth seems to have such potential.
The Tormented Earth wrote:Magic. Sorcery. Playable on a sorcery-using character facing a non-automatic-attack. Cancels the attack or gives the attack -3 prowess, your choice. Unless he is a Ringwraith, character makes a corruption check modified by -4. Cannot be duplicated against a given attack. "...as if...smitten with a shower of bolts and huge slingstones..."-LotRVI


The Tormented Earth does not target an attack. It is playable on character facing an attack.
" Cancels the attack" or "gives the attack -3 prowess" are not declared. Which one will happen is result of choice; the choice is part of main effect, it is not made at declaration of the card.

If The Tormented Earth will be responded by the Concealment, the Concealment will cancel an attack and then usually The Tormented Earth should fizzle (because the target character is no longer facing a non-automatic-attack; is no longer valid target).
But what if immediately after canceling 1st attack a sorcery-using character is considered facing 2nd attack?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 905
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by CDavis7M » Fri Nov 29, 2019 12:52 am

"Playable on a sorcery-using character facing a non-automatic-attack" is not an "active" condition. It is a condition for the action of playing Tormented Earth. The Annotations define which conditions are "active" conditions. Annotation 8 creates 2 active conditions: that the target (the character) be in play at both declaration AND resolution of Tormented Earth. The target is the character. That the character be facing an attack is not an active condition. There is no Annotation or rule stating that conditions for selecting a target are active conditions, especially not at resolution. The only active condition at resolution is that the target be in play.

Therefore, play of Tormented Earth will not fizzle in the example situation. The cancel and prowess modification effects will fizzle due to lack of a target. The corruption check will still resolve even if the attack has been canceled. If there are multiple attacks, Tormented Earth cannot re-target another attack as "the" attack was already established.


By the way, the cancel action and prowess modification actions of Tormented Earth are declared contingent upon the later-declared choice action by the player. The non-chosen effect still is declared and resolves but has no effect.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2922
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by Konrad Klar » Fri Nov 29, 2019 8:20 am

CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 12:52 am
"Playable on a sorcery-using character facing a non-automatic-attack" is not an "active" condition.
I agree.
Active conditions of The Tormented Earth are:
- the target of the card itself - "sorcery-using character facing a non-automatic-attack",
- the target of the action "makes a corruption check modified by -4".

Coincidentally the same entity in both cases.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 905
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by CDavis7M » Fri Nov 29, 2019 5:03 pm

Konrad Klar wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 8:20 am
Active conditions of The Tormented Earth are:
- the target of the card itself - "sorcery-using character facing a non-automatic-attack",
This is misleading. The only "target" of the action of playing Tormented Earth is the character card itself.
Targeting: Choosing a specific entity through which a card or effect will be played out. An entity chosen as such is the "target" of the action. Some possible targets are: characters, corruption checks, strike dice rolls, items, sites, and companies. A card that states it is playable on or with a certain entity targets that entity.
That the target character is a "sorcery-using character" and that they are "facing a non-automatic attack" are conditions for selecting the target. These conditions are not the "target" and so they are not active conditions that would be checked at resolution.

Your interpretation that "sorcery-using character facing a non-automatic-attack" is an active condition that would need to be checked at resolution causes all sorts of inconsistencies in the rules as discussed elsewhere.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2922
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by Konrad Klar » Fri Nov 29, 2019 6:25 pm

CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 5:03 pm
Your interpretation that "sorcery-using character facing a non-automatic-attack" is an active condition that would need to be checked at resolution causes all sorts of inconsistencies in the rules as discussed elsewhere.
Is it not checked both at declaration and at resolution of The Tormented Earth?

What if Bróin that bears Magic Ring of Weals at declaration of The Tormented Earth will not bear Magic Ring of Weals at resolution of The Tormented Earth?
Should The Tormented Earth resolve and be executed anyway? Is it the consistency you desire?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 767
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by Theo » Fri Nov 29, 2019 8:51 pm

Indeed.

The target is the character. Thee active condition includes that the character is sorcery-using.

This is where your logic breaks down:
CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 5:03 pm
These conditions are not the "target" and so they are not active conditions that would be checked at resolution.
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: 905
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by CDavis7M » Fri Nov 29, 2019 11:46 pm

Before going down this rabbit hole of active conditions (where is the rule making "sorcery-using" and "facing an attack" active conditions?) How would "the attack" (target and active condition) of Tormented Earth's already declared effects be changed from the 1st attack to the 2nd attack? It couldn't. And so these effects could not resolve regardless of the presence of a 2nd attack.

And what would be the purpose of this scenario?

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2922
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by Konrad Klar » Sat Nov 30, 2019 5:19 am

CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 11:46 pm
(where is the rule making "sorcery-using" and "facing an attack" active conditions?)
Nowhere. It is made by text of the card.
CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 11:46 pm
How would "the attack" (target and active condition) of Tormented Earth's already declared effects be changed from the 1st attack to the 2nd attack?
Only the person who think that "the attack" is target of The Tormented Earth can answer the question.
CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 11:46 pm
And what would be the purpose of this scenario?
Educational.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 905
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by CDavis7M » Sat Nov 30, 2019 11:39 pm

In the scenario, if concealment cancels the first attack of an assassin, the first attack is still established as the "an attack" in the "playable on" conditions of Tormented Earth. "An attack" cannot be changed to the 2nd attack after the 1st attack is established.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2922
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by Konrad Klar » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:14 am

No.
The Roving Eye wrote:Playable on a non-Wizard, non-Ringwraith, character bearing a Palantír, greater item, or ring that is not a gold ring. Target character is forced to make a corruption check modified by -2. If the character would normally be eliminated as a result of this check, he is instead discarded (along with all card splayed with him).
Target character that at declaration of The Roving Eye had Palantir of Osgiliath and Beautiful Gold Ring, but at resolution has Lesser Ring is stil valid target of The Roving Eye.

The character must be bearer of at least: Palantír OR greater item, OR ring that is not a gold ring.
No particular Palantír OR greater item, OR ring that is not a gold ring is specified at declaration of The Roving Eye.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 767
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by Theo » Mon Dec 02, 2019 2:25 am

I think the difference is that The Roving Eye does not reference the item being borne again. For The Tormented Earth, it is not the first reference to an attack that qualifies a character but the references to canceling the attack that cause the attack to be a target.
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: 2922
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by Konrad Klar » Mon Dec 02, 2019 8:47 am

Konrad Klar wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 9:12 am
" Cancels the attack" or "gives the attack -3 prowess" are not declared. Which one will happen is result of choice; the choice is part of main effect, it is not made at declaration of the card.
This is the whole point.
I agree that the comparison The Tormented Earth vs The Roving Eye is not 1:1.
The comparison The Tormented Earth vs Rats! also is not 1:1.
Rats! wrote:Playable on a company containing at least one minor item that is at or moving to a [-me_rl-] , [-me_sh-] , or [-me_dh-]. Company discards one minor item of its choice or chooses one of its characters to become wounded (no body check required).
We do not know which of: "Cancels the attack" or "gives the attack -3 prowess" will happen.
We know that one of them will happen.

"The attack" may be an attack that is currently faced.
If however "the attack" is the attack first mentioned as "a non-automatic-attack" (at declaration of The Tormented Earth), then the reference remains fixed.
Still it does not prevent the card from resolving if "a non-automatic-attack" faced at declaration is other than "a non-automatic-attack" faced at resolution. In such case neither "Cancels the attack" or "gives the attack -3 prowess" cannot be executed (there is no "the attack"), but "character makes a corruption check modified by -4" still is executed.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 905
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by CDavis7M » Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:27 am

Konrad Klar wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 8:47 am
"The attack" may be an attack that is currently faced.
If however "the attack" is the attack first mentioned as "a non-automatic-attack" (at declaration of The Tormented Earth), then the reference remains fixed.
Still it does not prevent the card from resolving if "a non-automatic-attack" faced at declaration is other than "a non-automatic-attack" faced at resolution. In such case neither "Cancels the attack" or "gives the attack -3 prowess" cannot be executed (there is no "the attack"), but "character makes a corruption check modified by -4" still is executed.
The existence of the particular attack that is "a non-automatic-attack" is established at declaration of The Tormented Earth either (A) because it is an active condition (your opinion, not mine) or (B) because it is a condition for selecting the target character that is "facing a non-automatic-attack." Either way, the particular attack has been established and cannot be changed (just as the attack has been established for the cancellation or prowess reduction actions). The use of "a" when introducing a subject vs the use of "the" when referring to said subject has no difference in meaning to the game. If the attack were an active condition to be verified at resolution per Annotation 7 (not my opinion), a different attack could not be used to satisfy this condition at resolution since it has already been established. This is the whole point of Annotation 7.

Also, I can find nothing in Annotation 5-8 or the rest of the rules to suggest that "facing a non-automatic-attack" is considered to be an active condition. Sure, it is a condition for selecting the character that The Tormented Earth is played on, but it is not an active condition that would be verified at resolution of The Tormented Earth per Annotation 7. The only active condition verified at resolution of The Tormented Earth is that the character card targeted at declaration still exists.

----------
Konrad Klar wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 8:47 am
Konrad Klar wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 9:12 am
" Cancels the attack" or "gives the attack -3 prowess" are not declared. Which one will happen is result of choice; the choice is part of main effect, it is not made at declaration of the card.
This is the whole point.
I agree that the comparison The Tormented Earth vs The Roving Eye is not 1:1.
The comparison The Tormented Earth vs Rats! also is not 1:1.
Rats! wrote:Playable on a company containing at least one minor item that is at or moving to a [-me_rl-] , [-me_sh-] , or [-me_dh-]. Company discards one minor item of its choice or chooses one of its characters to become wounded (no body check required).
We do not know which of: "Cancels the attack" or "gives the attack -3 prowess" will happen.
We know that one of them will happen.
There is no reason to believe that actions happen without declaration. All resolved actions are declared -- this is the nature of actions by definition of the game.

We DO know which of "Cancels the attack" or "gives the attack -3 prowess" will happen. At declaration we know that the chosen action is the one that will happen. We do not know which action will be chosen at declaration but we know that the chosen action will happen. It is simple enough to declare the chosen action or to declare both actions contingent on being chosen. Rats! involves a similar choice and its actions can be declared contingent on that choice. For what reason would the actions need to not be declared in order to provide consistency with the rules?

Also, I'm not sure why supposedly not-declared actions based on a choice are being discussed. The Roving Eye does not involve a choice made by a player beyond playing it on a particular character.

----------
Theo wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 2:25 am
I think the difference is that The Roving Eye does not reference the item being borne again. For The Tormented Earth, it is not the first reference to an attack that qualifies a character but the references to canceling the attack that cause the attack to be a target.
Established active conditions may be referenced by other actions, but each action has it's own active conditions. That later effects of The Roving Eye do not have the same active conditions as the action of playing The Roving Eye makes no difference itself.

Action // Active Condition for the action:
  • Play The Tormented Earth // target character (a sorcery-using character facing a non-automatic-attack)
  • Player's choice between cancelling or reducing prowess // no active conditions
  • Cancels the attack // the target attack
  • give the attack -3 prowess // the target attack.
  • character makes a corruption check modified by -4 // the target character
  • Play The Roving Eye // target character (non-Wizard, non-Ringwraith, character bearing a Palantír, greater item, or ring that is not a gold ring)
  • make a corruption check modified by -2 // target Character
  • Discard cahracter is they would normally be eliminated as a result of this check // target character

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2922
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by Konrad Klar » Wed Dec 04, 2019 11:10 am

CDavis7M wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:27 am
The existence of the particular attack that is "a non-automatic-attack" is established at declaration of The Tormented Earth either (A) because it is an active condition (your opinion, not mine) [...]
It is hard for me to treat with respect some statements if they are assigning me what I did not say.
Konrad Klar wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 8:20 am
Active conditions of The Tormented Earth are:
- the target of the card itself - "sorcery-using character facing a non-automatic-attack",
- the target of the action "makes a corruption check modified by -4".
CDavis7M wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:27 am
There is no reason to believe that actions happen without declaration. All resolved actions are declared -- this is the nature of actions by definition of the game.
Maybe you do not see a reason.
I do not care, bluntly speaking.
If you are just pissing on the existence of:
Annotation 9a: If a card is required to be discarded by some passive condition, the
card is discarded immediately when the condition resolves, not in the following chain
of effects.
then I just do not care.
Even if a corruption check is declared, its result is not declared.
If a choice is declared, a result of the choice is not declared.
CDavis7M wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:27 am
We DO know which of "Cancels the attack" or "gives the attack -3 prowess" will happen. At declaration we know that the chosen action is the one that will happen.
It is what differentiates multiple alternative effects of a card from a choice that is a main effect of a card.
You can deny an existence of the difference and you can interpret Drowning Seas and Waiting Shadows accordingly.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2922
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Timing: Multiple attacks and chain of effects crossing them

Post by Konrad Klar » Wed Dec 04, 2019 1:11 pm

CDavis7M wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:27 am
Also, I'm not sure why supposedly not-declared actions based on a choice are being discussed. The Roving Eye does not involve a choice made by a player beyond playing it on a particular character.
Two not necessarily related statements in one row.
"Also, I'm not sure why supposedly not-declared actions based on a choice are being discussed."
You are not sure about that and I believe you.
"The Roving Eye does not involve a choice made by a player beyond playing it on a particular character."
Yes.
It involves two different sets of factors (one present at declaration, other present at resolution) that makes a target valid.

Bearer of x type of item(s) is still bearer of x type of item(s) , even if the item(s) at declaration are different from item(s) at resolution.
The particular bearer (Frodo, Boromir etc.) must be still the same particular character, but what describes it as bearer of x type of item(s) does not must.

A sorcery-using character facing a non-automatic-attack must still be the same particular character (and must be sorcery-using), but a non-automatic-attack at declaration does not must be the same as a non-automatic-attack faced at resolution.

A situation is different if at least one happens:
- action is explicitly declared against (in case of card also - playable on) X,
- at least one declared action (along with declaration of a card that causes it) operates on specified at declaration X.

In these cases we have to do with a targeting. No more, no less, this means that a X specified at declaration may not be different that X at resolution.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”