Council of Elrond

Hello:

Does the alternative hability of Goldberry

Alternatively, tap Goldberry to cancel one attack against her company keyed to Wilderness

work with a creature keyed to two or is that for only one?

Thank you.

As many Wildernesses as you want. Compare the CRF entry for Elven Cloak.

Or compare to Angmar Arises...
Both comparisons are not 1:1. Angmar Arises is about playing creatures normally keyed to , or to . CRF says that this does not work for creatures normally keyed to .
Elven Cloak allows for canceling a "strike keyed to Wilderness ". Which strike is keyed to , or to anything else, I do not know. I only know strikes from attacks keyed to region/region symbol, or to site. CRF says that Elven Cloack "Can cancel a strike keyed to two or more Wilderness."

mmmhh...

Yes. A comment: Goldberry and Elven Cloak say "keyed to ". Angmar Arises says "keyed to A " and "keyed to A ". Maybe is this A a difference ( though A doesn't necessarily mean one), but my interpretation would be that Goldberry and Elven Cloak work in as many as I want, like Bandobras says.

And you are right with that of "strike keyed to something". I didn't note it. That is in the card and in the CRF. Maybe should be that in the next update.

I think the real difference is rooted in the difference between hazards and resources. Deep wilderness creatures (or deep shadowland creatures) are so rare that they far into the wilderness (or shadowlands). That's why you need multiple regions of the appropriate type to encounter them. This is why cards such as Angmar Arises won't work. While on the resource side if you're carrying around an Elven Cloak in the wilderness you can use it to hide. It doesn't matter if you're on the edge of the wilderness or deep inside it. This is a theory sort of answer. If you want a more mechanistic answer then a creature with 2 or more symbols on it can only be played on a company moving through that number of the appropriate regions, however it is still keyed to a particular region type.

Wacho wrote:[...] This is a theory sort of answer. If you want a more mechanistic answer then a creature with 2 or more symbols on it can only be played on a company moving through that number of the appropriate regions, however it is still keyed to a particular region type.

According to mechanistic aspect of this theory: what stops a player using Angmar Arises from playing keyed to Angmar a creature that normally requires ?

You may be right, but please be more precise.

(Many things may result from some [precise, or not] definition, or rule, or ruling. For example "a resource is playable at some site" does not only says me where I can play the resource, but also whether I can retrieve the resource using Mistress Lobelia; "free" minor item, that can be played at Wellinghall after playing a faction is not necessarily playable at Wellinghall).

P.S.
Drughu is another card affected by this problem.

But what is your opinion about Goldberry or Drughu? could they be used with more than one ? After Bandobras answer I understand that at least Goldberry can.

Angmar Arises and Elven Cloak are at least errated.

Angmar Arises and Elven Cloak are explained in CRF, but not errated.

Both options (yes|no) are possible.
CRF's remarks for Elven Cloak may be directly applied to analogous Shadow-Cloak.
For Golberry and Drughu (and Ford, Phial of Galadriel, Stinker, Gollum, Wild Hounds*) there are no precedences.

A ruling that would support a common play style (and Wacho's theory [ask him for confirmation]) would sound:

If resource effect refer to attack, or creature keyed to a region symbol, the reference also applies to attack, or creature keyed to multiple region symbols of the same type.

*) Yes, yes... There is no "a" before region symbol in texts of any of these cards!

OK, thank you. It sounds good that "common play style" supporting rule, to consider it in the future.

Oh man, after years without playing, already restarted, remembering and tons of questions quickly after two rounds...

Konrad Klar wrote:

Wacho wrote:[...] This is a theory sort of answer. If you want a more mechanistic answer then a creature with 2 or more symbols on it can only be played on a company moving through that number of the appropriate regions, however it is still keyed to a particular region type.

According to mechanistic aspect of this theory: what stops a player using Angmar Arises from playing keyed to Angmar a creature that normally requires ?

The rules state that you can only play a "deep" creature when you are moving through the appropriate number of the particular region type. Angmar Arises doesn't meet the conditions to play such a creature. It says a creature keyable to a can be played. A creature is not keyable to a .

Is not Wild Fell Beast keyed to , or Cave-Drake keyed to regardless of what checks for it?

Im just trying to get your point.

Konrad: You may be looking at the wrong card, as mentioned previously.

Elven Cloak checks whether the attack is keyed to Wilderness.

Angmar Arises specifically states that it checks whether the creature can be keyed to a Shadow-Land.

The two cards are performing different kinds of checks; Angmar Arises has an indefinite article in the singular, indicating that it looks for the ability to be keyed to one instance of the region type. Goldberry, Drughu, and Elven Cloak lack the indefinite article, meaning that they check merely for region type, with no number specified.

Compare Shadow-Cloak, which has the same article as Angmar Arises: a Shadow-Land, etc. Note that there is no CRF entry clarifying (as opposed to Elven-Cloak) that Shadow-cloak may cancel attacks keyed to multiple Shadow-Lands.

Ok.
So "a" makes the difference.

Bonus question:
Hero Framasburg.

Framsburg wrote:Nearest Haven: Lórien Playable: Items (minor) Automatic-attacks: When a company enters this site, opponent may play one creature from his hand that is treated in all ways as the site's automatic-attack (if defeated, creature is discarded). It must normally be playable keyed to a Ruins & Lairs [R], Shadow-hold [S], single Wilderness [w], or Shadow-land [s]. Special: Contains a hoard.

Underilnes mine.
Unless "single" is purely redundant, it does not fit in any theory (neither theory of meaningful "a", neither theory that CRF entry for Angmar Arises is general for whole class of similar phrases).

(I think that I know answer: '"single" is redundant' ).

Actually, the problem is that English is an imprecise language at times, and ICE was even more imprecise. Since nothing on Framsburg actually contradicts the logic behind the other cards, it should stand.