Clear skies / Hero events affecting minions

The place to ask and debate all rules issues related to MECCG.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Konrad Klar wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 5:30 pm 1) Conceptual AA, or AA understood as an attribute of a site is unable to be removed. So my inference is that CRF says not about conceptual AA, but about concrete AA.
What is your premise for this? I would think that ONLY the conceptual AA can be removed OR reduced. Did you have any particular card effect in mind?
Konrad Klar wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 5:30 pm 2). Quiet Lands could affect AA at [-me_rl-]. But if Balance Between Powers is in play, Quiet Lands cannot be played.
Forewarned is Forewarned does not affect minion sites. If it would affect a minion site it would also affect concrete AA at such site (the AA will become "cannot be canceled"). So it does not work here.
??? it is allowed to affect automatic-attacks at minion sites based on the CRF. Why are you saying it does not work?
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

1.
Conceptual AA, or AA understood as an attribute of a site is affected when concrete AA is added or removed.
Site without concrete AA still has conceptual AA. Its value is "None" and may be affected, e.g. conceptual AA of such [-me_bh-] may be affected by Fell Winter, or by Whole Villages Roused.

CRF Entry I have quoted says about concrete AA, not about conceptual AA. Conceptual AA can never be removed and adding new concrete AA, or removing existing concrete AA only affects a conceptual AA.

2.
Playing of Forewarned is Forewarned is not a company's activity. Even if a company cannot take any activity before entering a site, player is not so restricted.
Forewarned is Forewarned affects conceptual AA of site with multiple AAs by reducing a numer of concrete AAs that such site has (be removing all but one of them).
The effect of the card does not address any concrete AA to be removed. It address a site. As such it does not affect the minion sites, because Forewarned is Forewarned is a hero resource event.
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

CDavis7M wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 9:58 pm
Konrad Klar wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 5:30 pm 1) Conceptual AA, or AA understood as an attribute of a site is unable to be removed. So my inference is that CRF says not about conceptual AA, but about concrete AA.
In MECCG the term "automatic-attack" is used to describe both (i) the "automatic-attack" attribute listed on a site card and (ii) and combat-attack that is resolved when a company enters a site that has an automatic-attack attribute.
But it is still about concrete AA. The AA exists even if not faced.
Conceptual AA, or understood as an attribute of a site may have values like "None", "Three [...]" etc. .

.
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 May 06, 2021 8:51 am 1.
Conceptual AA, or AA understood as an attribute of a site is affected when concrete AA is added or removed.
Site without concrete AA still has conceptual AA. Its value is "None" and may be affected, e.g. conceptual AA of such [-me_bh-] may be affected by Fell Winter, or by Whole Villages Roused.

CRF Entry I have quoted says about concrete AA, not about conceptual AA. Conceptual AA can never be removed and adding new concrete AA, or removing existing concrete AA only affects a conceptual AA.
There's no reason to make up confusing terms. The rules never use the term "conceptual automatic attack" or "concrete automatic attack." The rules state that an "automatic-attack" is an attack that must be faced to enter and explore a site. The turn summary states "If the site has an automatic-attack, it attacks the company." So the term "automatic-attack" refers either to the automatic-attack of site card or that automatic-attack as faced by the company when entering the site.

In MECCG, the term "automatic-attack" relates to the automatic-attack listed on the site card unless the text specifically refers to an attack that is being faced.
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 8:51 am Playing of Forewarned is Forewarned is not a company's activity. Even if a company cannot take any activity before entering a site, player is not so restricted.
The player certainly IS restricted.
You are still confused about this CRF ruling despite discussing it numerous times. Not only are you confused about the ruling but the ruling has been superseded and there is no cause for confusion in the updated wording.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

I see a reason to create new terms. New term is a handle to speaking about a new notion.
I have a feeling that Theo speaks about AA understood as an attribute of a site. Not about concrete, individual AA.
Adding/removing concrete, individual AA affects AA understood as an attribute of a site.
But it does not add/remove the AA understood as an attribute of a site.
Conceptual AA exists anyway.

Some term is not confusing by itself. It may confuse you, me, someone.
It is not necessary to use the term "car". Someone may instead describe a machine with wheels, engine an so on, each time when he wants to speak something about such machine.
But using the term "car" is handy. Once when both sides of conversation imagine approximately the same behind the term "car", it is possible.
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

Whatever you are talking about, it isn't MECCG.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Konrad Klar wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 8:51 am 1.
Conceptual AA, or AA understood as an attribute of a site is affected when concrete AA is added or removed.
Site without concrete AA still has conceptual AA. Its value is "None" and may be affected, e.g. conceptual AA of such [-me_bh-] may be affected by Fell Winter, or by Whole Villages Roused.

CRF Entry I have quoted says about concrete AA, not about conceptual AA. Conceptual AA can never be removed and adding new concrete AA, or removing existing concrete AA only affects a conceptual AA.
Ok, I think I see the difference now. In my mind the concept of conceptual AA of a site refers to the list of concrete AA at a site. Your description is more like a reference to the list. The main difference is would be that I was expecting nothing listed to be able to correspond to language of the conceptual automatic attack being removed.

But your point seems to be (right?) that the "automatic-attack" of both "unless that resource directly affects an automatic-attack" and "Removing an automatic-attack" in that CRF rule mean a concrete one. And so you also think "reduced" differs from "remove" in that it is only the concrete AAs that are removed while only the conceptual AAs are reduced (as attacks; concrete could still have strikes/prowess reduced).
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 8:51 am Forewarned is Forewarned affects conceptual AA of site with multiple AAs by reducing a numer of concrete AAs that such site has (be removing all but one of them).
The effect of the card does not address any concrete AA to be removed. It address a site. As such it does not affect the minion sites, because Forewarned is Forewarned is a hero resource event.
Was underlined portion intended to mean: it does not affect any concrete AA by it's removal of concrete AAs from conceptual AAs?

Your final quoted sentence suggests that you also think the FW CRF entry is only about concrete automatic-attacks? Any reasons for this beyond the historical suppositions from CDavis7M? The word "the" in "the automatic-attack at a site" would fit better with conceptual than concrete AA (had it been phrases as "an" or "any" instead, concrete would have been a better fit).
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
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

CDavis7M wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 4:51 pm There's no reason to make up confusing terms.
You repeatedly indicate that you value assuming your interpretations are correct, ICE (if not nearly everyone) must have thought just like you, and under those assumptions it is reasonable to not care to understand anyone else's thought process.

I would like to say: some community members might actually enjoy thinking through possible rules interpretations and understanding one another. But this statement is likely wasted on you, since you under the framing of you I gave above this suggestion would be incomprehensible. But feel free to prove me wrong by having the decency to let those of us trying to communicate WITH one another to do so without your insults and interruptions.

You have made it clear what your position is on this thread. To the extent that you are set in those positions, I don't see any possibility of progressive further contributions from you.
Last edited by Theo on Thu May 06, 2021 11:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Theo wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 10:59 pm Was underlined portion intended to mean: it does not affect any concrete AA by it's removal of concrete AAs from conceptual AAs?
Yes.

I can now only repeat. Conceptual AA, i.e. status of AA(s) of given site is not something that can be removed.
If some rule says about removing of AA, the rule says about removing of concrete, particular AA.
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

Theo wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 11:07 pm I would like to say: some community members might actually enjoy thinking through possible rules interpretations and understanding one another.
This is a game with a set of rules defined by terms. Making up terms that have no basis in the game is confusing to the community, regardless of how much someone enjoys trolling. The confusion and deception to the community caused by fake terms and trolls is evident in the originally correct CoE rulings that were later changed to become incorrect because of trolls, ignorance, and forgetfulness. Not to mention all the wasted time.
Vastor Peredhil
Council Member
Posts: 1321
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:46 am
Location: Kempen (Niederrhein) Germany

well said Chris ;)
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

CDavis7M wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 4:51 pm There's no reason to make up confusing terms. The rules never use the term "conceptual automatic attack" or "concrete automatic attack." The rules state that an "automatic-attack" is an attack that must be faced to enter and explore a site. The turn summary states "If the site has an automatic-attack, it attacks the company." So the term "automatic-attack" refers either to the automatic-attack of site card or that automatic-attack as faced by the company when entering the site.
1) This already acknowledges that there are multiple uses of automatic-attack.
2) This list was even an oversimplification, not comprehensive.

I can understand why further rule discussion might seem like "wasted time" to you if your stance is "my interpretation is always the one and only correct interpretation." If the discussion confuses you but you don't actually want to understand, the most efficient option would likely be to stop participating in the discussion.
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

@ CDavis7M
I do not want to introduce the term "conceptual AA" into MECCG. It is only for purposes of discussion about rules.
Maybe it will be somewhat usable only in this thread, but who knows.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Khamul the Easterling
Ex Council Member
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 9:16 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

CDavis7M wrote: Mon May 03, 2021 6:46 pm
Khamul the Easterling wrote: Mon May 03, 2021 5:15 pm Thank you!

Only I don't really see the difference to, for instance, Forewarned is Forearmed (modifying auto-attacks) that was discussed here [Rules questions: Forewarned means Forearmed

I daresay that also FiF does not target cross-aligned specific sites, but why?
There is a difference between "target" and "affect." There is no possibility in the rules to "target" an opponent's site with your resource. The reason that the ruling "Hero events cannot target or affect minion sites, and vice versa. News of the Shire is an exception" says "target" is because it is specifically an expansion of the corresponding MEWH rule to hero and minion players. The MEWH rules were drafted to cover ALL situations by using the word "affect" in addition to the word "target." For example, Forewarned is Forearmed does not target the site (it is a non-targeting effect), but it does affect the site (i.e., the reduction of the site's automatic attacks to one attack).

Note that News of the Shire is not the only exception as several resources specifically state that they apply to "all versions." The example ruling is that playing Tower Raided and Rebuild the Town on hero Moria causes minion Moria to be a Ruins & Lairs for the minion opponent, but not a border-hold.
Picking up again on this... My question refers to the marked sentences which to me seem contradictory:
CRF says Hero events cannot [...]affect minion sites <-> FiF does affect such a site
Who can help?
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Khamul the Easterling wrote: Mon Aug 02, 2021 5:27 pm
CDavis7M wrote: Mon May 03, 2021 6:46 pm
Khamul the Easterling wrote: Mon May 03, 2021 5:15 pm Thank you!

Only I don't really see the difference to, for instance, Forewarned is Forearmed (modifying auto-attacks) that was discussed here [Rules questions: Forewarned means Forearmed

I daresay that also FiF does not target cross-aligned specific sites, but why?
There is a difference between "target" and "affect." There is no possibility in the rules to "target" an opponent's site with your resource. The reason that the ruling "Hero events cannot target or affect minion sites, and vice versa. News of the Shire is an exception" says "target" is because it is specifically an expansion of the corresponding MEWH rule to hero and minion players. The MEWH rules were drafted to cover ALL situations by using the word "affect" in addition to the word "target." For example, Forewarned is Forearmed does not target the site (it is a non-targeting effect), but it does affect the site (i.e., the reduction of the site's automatic attacks to one attack).

Note that News of the Shire is not the only exception as several resources specifically state that they apply to "all versions." The example ruling is that playing Tower Raided and Rebuild the Town on hero Moria causes minion Moria to be a Ruins & Lairs for the minion opponent, but not a border-hold.
Picking up again on this... My question refers to the marked sentences which to me seem contradictory:
CRF says Hero events cannot [...]affect minion sites <-> FiF does affect such a site
Who can help?
What is the contradiction you're seeing?

I don't see it. Forewarned is Forearmed is a hero event that affects sites (the effect "any non-dragons lair site...") and so for Fallen-wizards it does not affect minion sites. Later on the MEWH rule was expanded to apply generally, beyond FWs (see CRF).
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)”