RW movement rules & Balrog

The place to ask all rules questions related to MECCG.
Post Reply
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1718
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by Thorsten the Traveller »

This seems clear (implicitly) for most players, but I'd like to have it confirmed anyway (before creating a new Balrog avatar ;-) )
if it has been dealt with elsewhere, apologies for not digging deeper.

MEBA rules p.2:
A Balrog player acts as a Ringwraith player. Any card and rules text applying to a Ringwraith also applies to The Balrog (-). However, instead of using the special rules listed on page 59 of the MELE rules (or wherever else these rules may appear), a Balrog player uses the following special rules: (-)
nb. underlined section was added in the CRF. Not sure as result of which process/ruling.

MELE rules p.25:
in order to move from a Darkhaven to a non-Darkhaven site, a Ringwraith must have a special resource card:...
this is technically not in the Ringwraith Special Rules section (p.59).

However, on MELE rules p.22 it does state under "Ringwraith Effects":
the movement of Ringwraiths is restricted (see p.25).
This is in the Starter Rules. For some reason it is not repeated in the Standard Rules (p.59).

So, does this reference mean that p.25 also falls under "special rules" for a Ringwraith (as mentioned in MEBA CRF), and thus no movement restrictions as defined for Ringwraiths apply to The Balrog?
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2272
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by CDavis7M »

Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 9:31 pm MEBA rules p.2:
A Balrog player acts as a Ringwraith player. Any card and rules text applying to a Ringwraith also applies to The Balrog (-). However, instead of using the special rules listed on page 59 of the MELE rules (or wherever else these rules may appear), a Balrog player uses the following special rules: (-)
nb. underlined section was added in the CRF. Not sure as result of which process/ruling.
I have no idea where you found the statement "or whereever else these rules may appear" but this is not from the CRF nor is it from any ICE ruling.

Whatever you quoted is not what is actually written on page 2 of MEBA because MEBA mentions page 19 as well. I would check your sources.

Here is what page 2 of MEBA says:
MEBA p2.png
MEBA p2.png (336.04 KiB) Viewed 274 times
-----
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 9:31 pm MELE rules p.25:
in order to move from a Darkhaven to a non-Darkhaven site, a Ringwraith must have a special resource card:...
this is technically not in the Ringwraith Special Rules section (p.59).
I agree: page 25 of MELE is not page 59 of MELE. This rule applies to the Balrog. Remember the MEBA example: "e.g., if a card refers to a Ringwraith, it now applies to "a Ringwraith or The Balrog"

Therefore, the MELE rule on page 25 is: "in order to move from a Darkhaven to a non-Darkhaven site, a Ringwraith or The Balrog must have a special resource card: a Black Rider card, a Fell Rider card, or a Heralded Lord card." But recognize the meaning of the colon: this following statement explains the previous statement (is this inception?). The list of mode cards is not meant to be exhaustive, just explanative. Otherwise it would just say that the RW needs to be in a mode.
MELE p25.PNG
MELE p25.PNG (363.01 KiB) Viewed 274 times
-----
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 9:31 pm However, on MELE rules p.22 it does state under "Ringwraith Effects":
the movement of Ringwraiths is restricted (see p.25).
This is in the Starter Rules. For some reason it is not repeated in the Standard Rules (p.59).
The Starter rules are not repeated in the Standard rules because the Standard rules are merely "additions and extensions to the Starter Rules." (MELE p.4).

-----
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 9:31 pm So, does this reference mean that p.25 also falls under "special rules" for a Ringwraith (as mentioned in MEBA CRF), and thus no movement restrictions as defined for Ringwraiths apply to The Balrog?
There is no problem here. As stated on page 2, The Balrog needs to play a resource to move starter movement or region movement, which is more restrictive than movement "from a Darkhaven to a non-Darkhaven site" as in MELE.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1718
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by Thorsten the Traveller »

CDavis7M wrote:
There is no problem here. As stated on page 2, The Balrog needs to play a resource to move starter movement or region movement, which is more restrictive than movement "from a Darkhaven to a non-Darkhaven site" as in MELE.
The collection of movements to non-Darkhaven sites far exceeds the collection of movements done with just starter or region movement, so how can the requirement to be in a mode (or use some sort of resource to move with starter/region) be more restrictive?
The list of mode cards is not meant to be exhaustive, just explanative.
Sure, but none of the Balrog fána cards (nor any other resource) allow The Balrog to specifically move (from a Darkhaven) to a non-Darkhaven site, like the RW mode cards do. Without that first movement, he could not get anywhere.
The Starter rules are not repeated in the Standard rules because the Standard rules are merely "additions and extensions to the Starter Rules." (MELE p.4).
Of course. The main issue/question was if the restrictions on p.25 are considered Ringwraith "special rules" (as per MEBA p.2). If these "special rules" do not overlap with the "Ringwraith effects" (p.59, or 19 MEBA), then "any card and rules text applying to a Ringwraith also applies to The Balrog" seems misleading.

Also, strangely enough:
- other RW effects (testing a ring at -2, carry but not use items, etc.) are repeated in the standard rules, but they are not additions or extensions...
- p.59 states: This is a summary of the special effects of the Ringwraith character.
Now, summaries might not be exhaustive or conclusive, but the fact that "a RW may not move with region movement" is specifically mentioned, while other movement restrictions are not important enough to mention in the summary...let's put it down to oversight then.

nb. the underlined section "or wherever else these rules may appear" is from the MEBA rules at meccg.net. I was not aware they changed the actual rules or rephrased them without apparent reason, since the CRF is also on that website. As stated in the OP, I was aware of the change, but assumed there was a ruling to back that up.

nb. one does not always need FULL quotation Chris, it does not make the thread more readable if we all post full quotations or images. I do not believe I left out any relevant parts. The section on p.19 MEBA does not add anything to that on p.59 MELE.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2272
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by CDavis7M »

Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 7:43 am
CDavis7M wrote:
There is no problem here. As stated on page 2, The Balrog needs to play a resource to move starter movement or region movement, which is more restrictive than movement "from a Darkhaven to a non-Darkhaven site" as in MELE.
The collection of movements to non-Darkhaven sites far exceeds the collection of movements done with just starter or region movement, so how can the requirement to be in a mode (or use some sort of resource to move with starter/region) be more restrictive?
I said that the Balrog's movement restrictions are more restrictive than the Ringwraith's restrictions, not that the requirement to be in a mode is more restrictive.
The restriction on The Balrog not being able to use starter or region movement at all is more restrictive than the Ringwraith's restriction as Ringwraiths can still use starter movement from a non-haven back to a haven while the Balrog can not.

----------
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 7:43 am
The list of mode cards is not meant to be exhaustive, just explanative.
Sure, but none of the Balrog fána cards (nor any other resource) allow The Balrog to specifically move (from a Darkhaven) to a non-Darkhaven site, like the RW mode cards do. Without that first movement, he could not get anywhere.
Huh? The Balrog demon fana cards are not analogous to the Ringwraith mode cards.

It is Out He Sprang that is a "special resource card" allowing the Balrog to "move with region movement." This overrides his card, it does not override MELE page 25. The Balrog is still restricted from moving to a non-haven using starter movement as stated on MELE page 25.

The "first movement" must be region movement. Not starter movement...

Looking at this again, I think you may have missed the context -- the starter rules on page 25 are necessarily only covering starter movement. Region movement is a concept of the Standard rules. Page 25 does not apply to region movement. The phrase "region movement" has not even been explained as of page 25.

I find that many misunderstandings come from not reading the rulesbook in order and recognizing the context of the headings. The rules make sense if you read it from cover to cover. But picking statements out of context can lead to misunderstandings as shown in these forums.

----------
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 7:43 am The main issue/question was if the restrictions on p.25 are considered Ringwraith "special rules" (as per MEBA p.2). If these "special rules" do not overlap with the "Ringwraith effects" (p.59, or 19 MEBA), then "any card and rules text applying to a Ringwraith also applies to The Balrog" seems moot, or at least misleading.
The rules from p. 25 that that overlap with rules on page 59 are the same rule. If that rule on page 59 is overridden by MEBA then then the same rule on page 25 is overridden because it's the same rule. You'll notice that the rules on page 19 of MEBA are the same rules and those are the ones that are the focus of the statement.

----------
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 7:43 am Also, strangely enough:
- other RW effects (testing a ring at -2, carry but not use items, etc.) are repeated in the standard rules, but they are not additions or extensions...
- p.59 states: This is a summary of the special effects of the Ringwraith character.
Now, summaries might not be exhaustive or conclusive, but the fact that "a RW may not move with region movement" is specifically mentioned, while other movement restrictions are not important enough to mention in the summary...let's put it down to oversight then.
I don't there is any oversight in the rules. The section on page 59 states that it is a "summary of the special effects of the Ringwraith character." I agree, it is a summary of the special effects of a Ringwraith character. Page 59 does not say that all elements in the list summarize previously discussed rules, just that the list is a summary, and it is.

----------
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 7:43 am nb. the underlined section "or wherever else these rules may appear" is from the MEBA rules at meccg.net. I was not aware they changed the actual rules or rephrased them without apparent reason, since the CRF is also on that website. As stated in the OP, I was aware of the change, but assumed there was a ruling to back that up.
meccg.net has made many changes to the rules that were not actually from ICE. The CRF on meccg.net is also fraught with unofficial changes. It has come up here before. Some of the meccg.net changes are attributable to Van Norton and others to (old) CoE, and some are right but some are wrong. Note that Van was not authorized to make changes, and was sometimes wrong. But there are a few times were Van made official changes along with Ichabod (like the change to hazards and CVCC). And many of the CoE rulings are just wrong. So you can't just read meccg.net and assume it's from ICE.

----------
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 7:43 am nb. one does not always need FULL quotation Chris, it does not make the thread more readable if we all post full quotations or images. I do not believe I left out any relevant parts. The section on p.19 MEBA does not add anything to that on p.59 MELE.
Well, I just recognize that most of the misunderstandings come from not actually reading the rules, or from only summarizing the rules. The fact that you were quoting something as being from MEBA when it was NOT from MEBA is a red flag.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1718
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by Thorsten the Traveller »

ok so your argument is, since p.25 is in the starter rules section, it only applies to starter movement by default, even if "in order to move from a Darkhaven to a non-Darkhaven site, a Ringwraith must have a special resource card," does not mention starter movement at all. It makes some sense, even if it is sloppy in my opinion to leave it out. Some people take things at face value.
I find that many misunderstandings come from not reading the rulesbook in order and recognizing the context of the headings. The rules make sense if you read it from cover to cover.
That is true, context always matters. Of course, one does not re-read the full rules every year, certainly not every time one looks up something. And MELE states explicitly that to those experienced with METW only the dotted sections should suffice (such as p.25). Furthermore, other types of movement (in casu region movement) also require a resource, though not to overturn p.25 but the rule that RW cannot use region movement. The association to need a resource for any movement to a non-DH site is quickly made then. The mode cards state you may move with starter movement to a non-DH site, but if region movement is forbidden and those card don't change that, then why mention starter movement at all? For clarity, probably, but it creates the association that moving to a non-DH site was forbidden also for region movement by rule.

Either way, Balrog is bound by p.25, but it does not matter since he cannot use starter in any case and it does not apply to other types of movement. Good to clear that up.


another issue then:
CRF writes: Ringwraiths may not move from a non-Darkhaven site to another non- Darkhaven site unless they are using Dwar Unleashed. This means a Ringwraith may not move to Under-deeps sites that do not have a Darkhaven for a surface site.
I take it this also does not apply to a Balrog, even though he is considered a RW that cannot use region movement? :-)
Extending "not using region movement" to "not move from a non-Darkhaven to another non-Darkhaven" is somewhat of a leap, as it then affects UD movement, a ruling for which I'm sure there is an explanation, but I have not delved into it yet.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2272
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by CDavis7M »

A starter rule clearly cannot apply to a concept that has not been introduced. And yes, some people take things out of context. The player doesn't need to read the entire rules. Just check whether it's a starter rule or a standard rule, look at the other corresponding section in the other of the standard/starter rules, and check the CRF.
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:57 pm The mode cards state you may move with starter movement to a non-DH site, but if region movement is forbidden and those card don't change that, then why mention starter movement at all?
But do they state that? My copy doesn't mention mention "starter movement."
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:57 pm Either way, Balrog is bound by p.25, but it does not matter since he cannot use starter in any case and it does not apply to other types of movement. Good to clear that up.
I guess that's where you come in. Should there be a DC resource allowing The Balrog to use starter movement and it is desired that The Balrog be able to move from a darkhaven to a non-haven using starter movement, such movement would need to be specifically mentioned so as to override the MELE restriction.

----------
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:57 pm
CRF writes: Ringwraiths may not move from a non-Darkhaven site to another non- Darkhaven site unless they are using Dwar Unleashed. This means a Ringwraith may not move to Under-deeps sites that do not have a Darkhaven for a surface site.
I take it this also does not apply to a Balrog, even though he is considered a RW that cannot use region movement? :-)
Going back to MEBA p. 2: "Any card and rules text applying to a Ringwraith also applies to The Balrog." The clarification/ruling in the CRF is not text on a card nor is it text in the rules. This clarification does not apply to The Balrog.
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:57 pm Extending "not using region movement" to "not move from a non-Darkhaven to another non-Darkhaven" is somewhat of a leap, as it then affects UD movement, a ruling for which I'm sure there is an explanation, but I have not delved into it yet.
The MELE rules did not mention Underdeeps movement and the AtS rules did not mention Ringwraiths. So then the Ringwraiths could use underdeeps movement to move through the underdeeps without losing their mode. At least from September 1997 until December 1st 1997.

From: ich...@spamblock.net (Ichabod)
Subject: [MECCG] Ringwraiths and Under-deeps
Date: 1997/11/05

Hey y'all

We realized that Ringwraith movement needs some clarification. Namely
a Ringwraith may not move from a non-Darkhaven to a non-Darkhaven
unless he is using Dwar Unleashed. This means that a Ringwraith may
not move to any Under-deeps sites except the ones that are adjacent
to Darkhavens.

Since this ruling contradicts previous rulings made, it will not
take effect in tournament play until 12/1/97.


This ruling from Ichabod is also illustrative of why there are misconceptions. Some rulings in the CRF changed how the game works while some are merely explanations of how the rules work. But the CRF does not differentiate between which are which. People mistakenly think that only errata can change how the game is played.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1718
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by Thorsten the Traveller »

The clarification/ruling in the CRF is not text on a card nor is it text in the rules. This clarification does not apply to The Balrog.
Of course, hence the wink/smiley. And yes rulings can affect the game as much as errata. But essential is the explanation as to why the ruling was made, regardless of whether it is a clarification/interpretation or some new argument (balance, theme, meta-game, etc). What Ichabod calls a clarification I'd say is a new stipulation, or perhaps the extrapolation "not using region movement" = "no movement from non-DH to non-DH" was explained somewhere else, otherwise this ruling lacks explanation.

The balance issue is different with respect to UD movement for RW (and I do not see thematic objections). Even if in MELE there were no Under-deeps sites, UD movement did exist, and it was not banned for RW in standard rules. Thus, we do consider allowing RW generic UD movement (see The Dark Roads), and knowing that p.25 only applies to starter movement makes it easier in a way, we'd be overturning the CRF ruling not the official rules (we'll adjust the card).

btw. we do not plan to allow a Balrog starter movement, how would that work, if none of the site cards list a nearest Darkhaven for him (cq. them)? That would just complicate matters that can be solved otherwise. The region movement for Balrog is quite restrictive, with thematic and balance justification, but we can consider some more leeway there, e.g. grabbing cards faster, or creating fictitious MP's for Out He Sprang. I don't recall seeing The Balrog use Forced March in a game, it is not forbidden to him, perhaps that is a way to increase his movement, anyway it's another discussion.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2272
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by CDavis7M »

Ringwraiths can already use underdeeps movement to go to and from adjacent sites of a darkhaven. So The Dark Roads could specify that "Any Ringwraith's company in Heralded Lord or Black Ride mode may from a non-darkhaven to a non-darkhaven under-deeps site," directly overriding the restriction.
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:56 am What Ichabod calls a clarification I'd say is a new stipulation, or perhaps the extrapolation "not using region movement" = "no movement from non-DH to non-DH" was explained somewhere else, otherwise this ruling lacks explanation...
...we'd be overturning the CRF ruling not the official rules (we'll adjust the card).
By the way, Ichabod only made the announcement. This change and other changes always came from Coleman or Reynolds. Ichabod said as much in many of the posts where these changes were announced. And you can see that he had been (correctly) ruling that Ringwraiths could use underdeeps movement before. So this restriction on Ringwraith movement is as official as the Rulesbook. But again, the CRF doesn't indicate which clarifications came from the Designers and which are merely Ichabod explaining how the game works.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3660
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by Konrad Klar »

CRF wrote:Ringwraiths may not move from a non-Darkhaven site to another non- Darkhaven site
unless they are using Dwar Unleashed. This means a Ringwraith may not move to
Under-deeps sites that do not have a Darkhaven for a surface site.
Actually Ringwraiths were never prevented from moving between non-Darkhavens.
The restriction is spurious. For surface non-Darkhaven sites it is the result of Ringwraiths inability of using region movement.

So the logic behind:
This means a Ringwraith may not move to
Under-deeps sites that do not have a Darkhaven for a surface site.
is invalid.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1159
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by Theo »

Except that the CRF wording stands as written and makes the following logic valid; it is not spurious wording. That particular entry came from a Rulings Monday, which were explicitly to "reverse previous rulings, introduce new rulings on non-ambiguous situations, and errata".

-----
CDavis7M wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 6:58 pm
Thorsten the Traveller wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 7:43 am nb. the underlined section "or wherever else these rules may appear" is from the MEBA rules at meccg.net. I was not aware they changed the actual rules or rephrased them without apparent reason, since the CRF is also on that website. As stated in the OP, I was aware of the change, but assumed there was a ruling to back that up.
meccg.net has made many changes to the rules that were not actually from ICE. The CRF on meccg.net is also fraught with unofficial changes. It has come up here before. Some of the meccg.net changes are attributable to Van Norton and others to (old) CoE, and some are right but some are wrong. Note that Van was not authorized to make changes, and was sometimes wrong. But there are a few times were Van made official changes along with Ichabod (like the change to hazards and CVCC). And many of the CoE rulings are just wrong. So you can't just read meccg.net and assume it's from ICE.
As I suspect CDavis7M knows, the same edited pdf appears in the standard rule resources of the current CoE. So if CoE doesn't intend this pdf to be one of their endorsed rules document, they should clarify.
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!
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3660
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by Konrad Klar »

Theo wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 2:53 am Except that the CRF wording stands as written and makes the following logic valid; it is not spurious wording. That particular entry came from a Rulings Monday, which were explicitly to "reverse previous rulings, introduce new rulings on non-ambiguous situations, and errata".
I am not so lenient.

If it would be just stated:
"A Ringwraith may not move to Under-deeps sites that do not have a Darkhaven for a surface site."
then OK. That would be a new restriction that does not require any justification.

But if someone tries to present the statement as conclusion from other rule then this is an offence of logic.

Similarly someone could state that because in region movement a company is restricted to 6 regions at max (to 4 normally) direct movement from Rivendell to Pelargir is forbidden.

That would not be a true. It is possible even if region movement is being used (with "help" of Chance of Being Lost). It is also possible if a company uses special movement like Gwaihir.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2272
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by CDavis7M »

Konrad Klar wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 4:46 pm
Theo wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 2:53 am Except that the CRF wording stands as written and makes the following logic valid; it is not spurious wording. That particular entry came from a Rulings Monday, which were explicitly to "reverse previous rulings, introduce new rulings on non-ambiguous situations, and errata".
I am not so lenient.

If it would be just stated:
"A Ringwraith may not move to Under-deeps sites that do not have a Darkhaven for a surface site."
then OK. That would be a new restriction that does not require any justification.

But if someone tries to present the statement as conclusion from other rule then this is an offence of logic.
Again, you misunderstand what the CRF is and how it works. The statement is not merely a ruling, it's an explanation. You might not recognize this if you haven't bothered to read ICE's rulings. It was often the case that the Designers would explain their original intent when changing how a mechanic worked. The Designers did not intend for Ringwraiths to move from non-haven to non-haven at all, not merely to prevent region movement. Presumably region movement back to a haven is fine and would might have been permitted in an MELE rewrite.

So the ruling would not state "A Ringwraith may not move to Under-deeps sites that do not have a Darkhaven for a surface site" because that would merely be a new rule and would not explain the Designer's original intent.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2272
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by CDavis7M »

Theo wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 2:53 am As I suspect CDavis7M knows, the same edited pdf appears in the standard rule resources of the current CoE. So if CoE doesn't intend this pdf to be one of their endorsed rules document, they should clarify.
Thanks for pointing it out. I could not find where that came from.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3660
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: RW movement rules & Balrog

Post by Konrad Klar »

What I understand:
The Designers were often sick to say: We made a correction, We made an errata, We have changed our minds.
Instead they were preferring to make cumbersome constructs to pretend that their design was perfect from beginning.
See CRF entry for Deeper Shadow (This works even though the site is not technically part of the site path.).
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”