Hi,
After having a great discussion on this subject and finding a polish thread which I guess is related (impossible to understand even with the google translator) I’ll post the question here:
Can a Foolish Words on-guard be revealed and played on a character which has appeared in the site through A Chance Meeting? I’d say no, because of the rules erratum (not being able to reveal an on-guard card if it wasn’t playable during m/a phase), but some others would say that the text of the card overrides the rules (“It may be revealed if…”) or that there were the conditions of playability during m/a (on another character)…
On the same level, another related question:
We have a wizard traveling alone, he gets a Lure of Nature and another Lure of Nature is placed on-guard. Fram Framson appears through A Chance Meeting. Could the Lure be revealed and played on Fram? And if the Wizard was not traveling alone, could the Lure be revealed and played on Fram too? To my mind, both answers are No.
Thank you guys!
An On-guard cards related questions
-
Bandobras Took
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 3109
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm
The card specifically states under what circumstances it may be revealed and on whom it may be played, thus overriding the normal rules for revealing and playing on-guard cards.Any riddling roll, offering attempt, or influence attempt by the target character is modified by -4. If placed on-guard, it may be revealed and played when a character in the company declares a riddling, offering, or influence attempt.
During his organization phase, a character with this card may tap to attempt to remove it. Make a roll (or draw a #): if this result is greater than 7, discard this card.
Lure of Nature must follow the normal rules for on-guard cards, so the target must have existed during the movement/hazard phase. It cannot be put on a character brought into play during the same site phase.
The game is flawed, but this does not mean it cannot be loved.
-
Konrad Klar
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 4352
- Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
"it may be revealed and played" in Foolish Word's text alters both conditions (of revealing) and timing (declaring and resolving).
The card is declared in the same chain of effects in which it is revealed, so there is no chance to play Marvels Told in the same chain of effects (the same what happen if the card is played in M/H phase).
The card is declared in the same chain of effects in which it is revealed, so there is no chance to play Marvels Told in the same chain of effects (the same what happen if the card is played in M/H phase).
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Ok, but the point is if the target is valid. Its stated WHEN can it be played, but the foolish doesnt say anything about the target. Under these conditions "It may be revealed and played" on a valid target (like the other char under whom DI is the ACM char).
As I read foolish, I understand this, the other could be written as "if placed on-guard, it may be revealed and played on a character in the company declaring a riddling, offering, or influence attempt."
Of course, Im a noob in rules, its just my point of view. I dont know if this is an old-and-solved issue.
As I read foolish, I understand this, the other could be written as "if placed on-guard, it may be revealed and played on a character in the company declaring a riddling, offering, or influence attempt."
Of course, Im a noob in rules, its just my point of view. I dont know if this is an old-and-solved issue.
-
Konrad Klar
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 4352
- Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
My reasoning:
An on-guard card cannot be revealed if all conditions of revealing are not met. They include a conditions of playing it. They in turn include a presence of valid target (if the card has any). Therefore a text of card that provides alternate conditions of revealing is enough to replace all standard conditions of revealing as on-guard.
I think that I understand your objection, donepi. "when" is not "if". "When it may be revealed/played" is one thing and "whether it may be revealed/played" is other thing.
Standard conditions of revealing on-guard cards include among others:
That is more restrictive than Foolish Word's "when a character in the company declares a riddling, offering, or influence attempt."
So if WHEN (Foolish Words may be revealed and played) would not include WHETHER (Foolish Words may be revealed and played) then Foolish Words could not be revealed and played e.g. in response to influence attempt against opponent's character. Correct time (WHEN), but not correct conditions (WHETHER).
If Foolish Words on-guard may be able to be revealed in response to influence attempt against opponent's non-faction resource, or in response to influence attempt against opponent's character, then "when a character in the company declares a riddling, offering, or influence attempt." must be read as "if a character in the company declares a riddling, offering, or influence attempt."
WHEN and WHETHER cannot be decoupled in case of that card.
An on-guard card cannot be revealed if all conditions of revealing are not met. They include a conditions of playing it. They in turn include a presence of valid target (if the card has any). Therefore a text of card that provides alternate conditions of revealing is enough to replace all standard conditions of revealing as on-guard.
I think that I understand your objection, donepi. "when" is not "if". "When it may be revealed/played" is one thing and "whether it may be revealed/played" is other thing.
Standard conditions of revealing on-guard cards include among others:
Underline mine.CRF, Turn Sequence, Site Phase, On-Guard Cards wrote:You may reveal a card in response to an influence attempt against a faction even if the
on-guard card only has an effect if the attempt is successful. You may also reveal a
card in response to such an attempt that affects the actual influence attempt.
That is more restrictive than Foolish Word's "when a character in the company declares a riddling, offering, or influence attempt."
So if WHEN (Foolish Words may be revealed and played) would not include WHETHER (Foolish Words may be revealed and played) then Foolish Words could not be revealed and played e.g. in response to influence attempt against opponent's character. Correct time (WHEN), but not correct conditions (WHETHER).
If Foolish Words on-guard may be able to be revealed in response to influence attempt against opponent's non-faction resource, or in response to influence attempt against opponent's character, then "when a character in the company declares a riddling, offering, or influence attempt." must be read as "if a character in the company declares a riddling, offering, or influence attempt."
WHEN and WHETHER cannot be decoupled in case of that card.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
This paragraph you wrote clarifies everything:
"An on-guard card cannot be revealed if all conditions of revealing are not met. They include a conditions of playing it. They in turn include a presence of valid target (if the card has any). Therefore a text of card that provides alternate conditions of revealing is enough to replace all standard conditions of revealing as on-guard."
No more objections. Thanks.
"An on-guard card cannot be revealed if all conditions of revealing are not met. They include a conditions of playing it. They in turn include a presence of valid target (if the card has any). Therefore a text of card that provides alternate conditions of revealing is enough to replace all standard conditions of revealing as on-guard."
No more objections. Thanks.