Old to the game and have some questions

The place to ask all rules questions related to MECCG.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2393
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Old to the game and have some questions

Post by CDavis7M »

Theo wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:51 am
CDavis7M wrote: Thu Oct 03, 2019 5:23 pm Using this framework it's clear that:
  • (A) RESOLUTION of the card being moved from your hand to the play area is synonymous with (B) DECLARATION of "playing the card" followed by (C) the DECLARATION of all of the effects of the card in reverse order. (Yes, resolution of one action is considered the same as declaration of many other actions. See Annotation 5, etc)
  • When you declare that a card is being played, the card is immediately moved (resolved) and the card's effects are declared in reverse order. These are "synonymous" -- they all happen at the exact same time according to the game mechanics. Meaning, the movement of the card is resolved without respect to timing and any chain of effects, similar to resolution of an active condition.
It is irrelevant to me where the card is moved. CRF Annotation 1 is unambiguous that a card is not considered to be in play prior to being resolved in its chain of effects.
CDavis7M wrote: Thu Oct 03, 2019 5:23 pm Why would an action require an "actor" (beyond the player)? Is the target of the action the "actor"? Or, what would the actor be?
In English, every verb requires a subject. Active verbs explain an action taken by the subject. For imperative tense we often have an implicit subject (in our case the player). Passive verbs do not need to have any actor, not even an implicit one (or some would say Existence is the implicit actor).

One of my proposals for this year's ARV discusses at length my beliefs that a "number and type"-specified actor of an action should qualify as an additional target for that action, in addition to any object entities that seem to be readily recognized as targets. (Actors, in the case of Ruse.)
CDavis7M wrote: Thu Oct 03, 2019 5:23 pm Also, I don't see anything in the game's framework for "passive effects" that "modify the rules governing entities they effect directly and immediately."
Indeed. I've been having a heck of a time tracking down where our notion that card texts supercede the rulesbooks originates. At the very least, we have the CRF:
CRF wrote:The Turn Sequence and Rulings by Term sections are specifically considered clarifications to the rules, and are therefore overridden by card text that specifically does so.
[edit: it was hiding in CoL Tournament Policy!]
CoL Tournament Policy wrote:Card Text vs. Rules-A card's text takes precedence if it contradicts a rule of the game (or these rules).
My working theory is that the passive effects are meant to alter how we understand the underlying rules. Implementing the effect would necessitate "direct and immediate" adoption; we can't choose to postpone following new rules. So "any resulting body check is modified by +1" means something like the dice roll is interpreted as being 1 higher. To contrast, your "action" framework might be conceptualized as the dice roll being interpreted at face value before some undefined actor must come along and actively declare and then resolve that the roll increases by one.
I got a notification but not sure what happened so...
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3748
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Old to the game and have some questions

Post by Konrad Klar »

CDavis7M wrote: Thu Oct 03, 2019 5:23 pm Using this framework it's clear that:
(A) RESOLUTION of the card being moved from your hand to the play area is synonymous with (B) DECLARATION of "playing the card" followed by (C) the DECLARATION of all of the effects of the card in reverse order. (Yes, resolution of one action is considered the same as declaration of many other actions. See Annotation 5, etc)
When you declare that a card is being played, the card is immediately moved (resolved) and the card's effects are declared in reverse order. These are "synonymous" -- they all happen at the exact same time according to the game mechanics. Meaning, the movement of the card is resolved without respect to timing and any chain of effects, similar to resolution of an active condition.
Underline mine.

I would say that declarations of all effects of the card precede declaration of the card (itself).
And this seems natural, if everything is declared in reverse order.
Otherwise even if the card itself would be canceled (by Twilight, Many Sorrows Befall etc.) its effects still would resolve.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2393
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Old to the game and have some questions

Post by CDavis7M »

Konrad Klar wrote: Wed Jun 15, 2022 6:48 am
CDavis7M wrote: Thu Oct 03, 2019 5:23 pm Using this framework it's clear that:
(A) RESOLUTION of the card being moved from your hand to the play area is synonymous with (B) DECLARATION of "playing the card" followed by (C) the DECLARATION of all of the effects of the card in reverse order. (Yes, resolution of one action is considered the same as declaration of many other actions. See Annotation 5, etc)
When you declare that a card is being played, the card is immediately moved (resolved) and the card's effects are declared in reverse order. These are "synonymous" -- they all happen at the exact same time according to the game mechanics. Meaning, the movement of the card is resolved without respect to timing and any chain of effects, similar to resolution of an active condition.
Underline mine.

I would say that declarations of all effects of the card precede declaration of the card (itself).
And this seems natural, if everything is declared in reverse order.
Otherwise even if the card itself would be canceled (by Twilight, Many Sorrows Befall etc.) its effects still would resolve.
If a card is canceled then it's effects absolutely do not still resolve because a card that is not in play does not have any effect on the game unless the card effect resolved and it specifically stated that the effect works later in the game.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3748
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Old to the game and have some questions

Post by Konrad Klar »

CDavis7M wrote: Wed Jun 15, 2022 2:59 pm If a card is canceled then it's effects absolutely do not still resolve because a card that is not in play does not have any effect on the game unless the card effect resolved and it specifically stated that the effect works later in the game.
Yes. Right.
But a card is not canceled until cancel action will resolve.
Cancel action from Twilight, Many Sorrows Befall etc. may be canceled too (by other Twilight) of may not resolve (due to lack of HL).


EDIT: Was irrelevant
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3748
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Old to the game and have some questions

Post by Konrad Klar »

It not only looks weird that a card itself resolves after its effects but also it causes additional problems (if declarations of the effects of the cards follow the declaration of the card itself).
If effects of Balance Between Powers would resolve before Balance Between Powers itself, then Balance Between Powers itself could not resolve.
Rebuild the Town would fizzle itself because at its resolution a target site is not [-me_rl-].

Artificial solutions lead to real problems (if the solutions are treated seriously and applied consistently).
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2393
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Old to the game and have some questions

Post by CDavis7M »

When the card resolves is a non-issue. It's not like Balance could prevent itself from resolving.

I think it makes more sense that a card is said to have resolved when all of its effects have resolved.

Some people have different sense.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3748
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Old to the game and have some questions

Post by Konrad Klar »

CDavis7M wrote: Thu Jun 16, 2022 5:03 pm I think it makes more sense that a card is said to have resolved when all of its effects have resolved.
I think it makes more sense that a card is said finished (in chain of effects) when all of its effects are finished (in chain of effects).
And that its effects do not resolve until the card will resolve.

Whit all respect to the senses of other people.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”