Timing & Resolution of Resource Permanent Events using Untapping Effects

The place to ask and debate all rules issues related to MECCG.
Post Reply
User avatar
the JabberwocK
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1156
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

There are many different resource permanent events which state a company must face an attack (or multiple attacks), followed by the statement that a character must tap after the attack(s) or the permanent event is discarded.

I believe that there is time after finishing the attack/strike sequence to declare other actions PRIOR to having to meet the tapping requirement on the card. Is this correct?

ie. I may face attacks, then declare use of a Cram OR play And Forth He Hastened, etc. in order to untap a character to meet the above requirement?

Thanks
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CRF, Rulings by Term, Timing wrote:Annotation 24: If a card specifies that more than one action occurs when the card
itself is resolved in a chain of effects, all of these actions are to be resolved in the
card's chain of effects uninterrupted and in the order listed on the card. No actions
may be declared to occur between these multiple actions.

The actions listed on the card are considered to have been declared in the reverse
order as they are printed.
(amendment to original version of Annotation 24): As an exception, if one of the
effects of a card is an attack, cards may be played that cancel the attack, cancel one of
its strikes, or that otherwise are playable during the strike sequence--see Annotation
18 (Turn Sequence, Movement/ Hazard Phase, Combat, Strike Sequence).
Underline mine.

There is an errata for the rule (in force since 2012), but it is unrelated to the question.
So e.g. there is no time after facing the attack from Rescue Prisoners to us Cram or play And Forth He Hastened, etc.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
DamienX207
Council Member
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:53 pm

To clarify though, could an effect be used prior to the final strike’s resolution, such as Cramming a different character in between strikes/prior to the last? This would seem to be valid as the untapped character could in theory then tap in support for that final strike (but could then just remain untapped for the final resolution of eg Smoke on the Wind), no?
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Don't think so.
CRF wrote:Annotation 18: When a defending player chooses to resolve a strike against a particular character, the only actions that may be taken by either player until the strike dice-roll is made are the following: playing hazard cards that affect the strike, the attacker may decide to use any or all of his remaining -1 modifications due to strikes in excess of the company's size, a target untapped character may take a -3 modification so that he will not automatically tap, and the defending character may play resource cards that affect the strike. An action that has the condition that a target character tap, but which otherwise has an effect not outlined here, may not be declared at this point. This is true even if the recipient of the strike would be the target character tapping and thus receive -1 to his prowess.
Historically cramming the character facing the strike was contentious, but I believe things last settled on it being allowed. Cramming a different character is not allowed.

I should say, normally a player is also allowed to make chains in between strike sequences of an isolated attack (e.g. hazard creature), and those chains aren't restricted by Annotation 18. So you can then, for instance, cram anyone in the party. But Annotation 24 removes that ability for attacks that occur within a card sequence of effects. (Oh, and similarly the defender in CvCC can also not make those chains in between because it isn't their turn.)
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
DamienX207
Council Member
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:53 pm

(Obv when I say "cramming", I really mean Foul-Smelling Paste) :twisted:

To clarify because I'm confused; URD says "There is time between strike sequences to take actions that are otherwise legal." Annotation 18 and 24 both seem to be talking about during an actual strike sequence; I'm talking about between strike(s)/sequences. Again .. no?

Edit to add: "Annotation 16: When a wounded character becomes unwounded, he is considered in his history to have been wounded and must face any special actions the wounding strike presented him" which would seem to imply that becoming unwounded in the midst of resolving stuff is a possibility.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

I can only imagine hypothetical application of Annotation 16.

If special action resulting from wounding strike is dice-rolling action, it may be responded by action that targets the dice-rolling action.
Side effect of the action may be healing of the character.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

A point of annotation 16 is for hazards that effect characters wounded by an attack after the attack has resolved. E.g. Pale Sword can still be placed on a character wounded by an attack even if the character becomes unwounded later within that same attack resolution.
DamienX207 wrote: Sun Jul 28, 2019 11:59 pm To clarify because I'm confused; URD says "There is time between strike sequences to take actions that are otherwise legal."
The key is "otherwise legal". Annotation 24 disallows general actions between the effects of a card with multiple effects. For CvCC the defender is not allowed to declare general resource actions because it isn't their resource turn. (Each of these specify exceptions that DO allow (and so only allow) effects that cancel the attack or its strikes, and those that can be declared during a strike sequence.)
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
DamienX207
Council Member
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:53 pm

Right, so Annotation 24 means you can't use actions between effects like between the end of a Smoke On The Wind attack and the "tap a character to...", but wouldn't seem to prohibit actions within an effect; you could surely use other normal combat effects within a SOTW attack. As it says in the ammendment, actions (I love how "effects" and "actions" are apparently interchangeable, but presumably you get my drift) that are "otherwise playable" are OK -- so seemingly everywhere says that other actions are OK in some sort of endless loop of nebulous legality. Definitely not saying you're wrong Mr. Theo but wow do I not see how this is adding up to "you can't declare actions between strikes" since nowhere I've seen is actually saying that outright and URD + 24 ammendment both seem to imply actions between strikes are OK. Are there any other rulings on this issue, or are we scraping the bottom of the barrel on this one?

(& ahhhhh, MECCG Rules questions -- serves me right for replying to a year-and-a-half old thread). :P

Edit to add -- See this thread also: https://councilofelrond.org/forum/viewt ... =16&t=3466
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

DamienX207 wrote: Tue Jul 30, 2019 2:23 am URD + 24 ammendment both seem to imply actions between strikes are OK.
Perfectly OK for an isolated attack. Not OK for e.g. Smoke on the Wind attack. In that case when you reach the same point of being in between strikes, note that you are also still in between effects of Smoke on the Wind, so Annotation 24 kicks in preventing action declaration (other than the exceptions it lists).

Regarding other link, actions that modify the strikes are always allowed during strike sequences and so are allowed by Annotation 24 under it's third exception clause, even between strikes. Don't ask me why one would need to declare them in between strikes when one could just declare them during the next strike...
Last edited by Theo on Tue Jul 30, 2019 5:39 am, 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
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

For a normal attack that is resolved, it is possible to have a first character with cram/foul paste face and resolve a strike, then discard cram to untap the first character, and then resolve a second strike.

But when a chain of effects is being resolved within a card and that chain includes an attack (e.g., smoke on the wind), per annotation 24 and the rest of the rules in the Timing CRF section, it is not possible to take actions between strikes as you might otherwise be able to do. This is because cramming a different character is not an effect to "cancel the attack, cancel one of its strikes, or that otherwise are playable during the strike sequence" (see bold).
Timing
The validity of an effect, including the hazard limit, is checked upon declaration and upon resolution.
Annotation 24: If a card specifies that more than one action occurs when the card itself is resolved in a chain of effects, all of these actions are to be resolved in the card's chain of effects uninterrupted and in the order listed on the card. No actions may be declared to occur between these multiple actions. The actions listed on the card are considered to have been declared in the reverse order as they are printed.
(amendment to original version of Annotation 24): As an exception, if one of the effects of a card is an attack, cards may be played that cancel the attack, cancel one of its strikes, or that otherwise are playable during the strike sequence--see Annotation 18 (Turn Sequence, Movement/ Hazard Phase, Combat, Strike Sequence).
Annotation 27 : If a card has optional effects, the player playing the card must choose which will take place. He must do this at the time the card is played, not when it is resolved in its chain of effects. When such a card is resolved, if any active conditions for the choice of effects do not exist, the card has no effect and is discarded. The player may not at this point choose to implement an alternative effect of the card.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Theo wrote: Tue Jul 30, 2019 12:58 am A point of annotation 16 is for hazards that effect characters wounded by an attack after the attack has resolved. E.g. Pale Sword can still be placed on a character wounded by an attack even if the character becomes unwounded later within that same attack resolution.
This is not what Annotation 16 says.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
DamienX207
Council Member
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:53 pm

But y’all are skipping over the “that are otherwise playable” bit, which would normally include other actions as mentioned.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

I think the use of "during" is important. Cramming a different character is not possible DURING the strike sequence of another character. So when resolving an attack within a card, there is no possibility to take actions BETWEEN strikes like you normally could.
User avatar
DamienX207
Council Member
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:53 pm

Ahhhhh k yes, mea culpa! Thanks all for bearing with my hopefully-understandable confusion —
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

I had just assumed that this is how it worked and never bothered reading about it. So thanks for bringing up the discussion. Who knows, maybe someone will point something out that we've missed.

Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk

Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)”