Page 1 of 3
Riddling Talk
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2018 11:31 am
by kober
Riddling Talk wrote:[...] Playable on a character whose company is facing an attack of the type listed below. Character makes a roll [...] then name a card and opponent must reveal his hand. If the named card is in opponent’s hand, the creatureʹs card is discarded (all of its attacks are cancelled) [...]
This might be just reading between the lines, but could Riddling Talk be played on an automatic-attack? There wouldn't be a "creature's card" to discard, if yes.
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2018 2:28 pm
by Konrad Klar
I think that only
declared action caused by Riddling Talk is a dice roll.
What will happen (or will not happen) later depends on result of the roll, therefore any objects manipulated by eventual later actions are not targets. Creature card is not target, its attacks are not targets.
So answer is: yes, Riddling Talk may be played on character facing an automatic-attack.
I can repeat my opinion expressed in other threads.
It is very visible at example of A Lie in Your Eyes.
A Lie in Your Eyes wrote:Playable on an untapped non-Ringwraith, non-Wizard character. Your opponent may either: tap the character, tap an ally the character controls, or choose for you to make a roll (draw a #). If the result is greater than the character's mind plus 6, the character is discarded (along with all cards he controls). 'That won't do... What did you see, and what did you say?'-LotRIII
At declaration it is not know what an opponent will choose: tapping target character, tapping an ally the character controls (if available), or making a dice roll. Result of the roll in not known too.
Therefore it cannot be said that tapping the character, tapping an ally, dice roll, or discarding the character are declared actions.
And because target of an action must be specified at declaration of the action, the character is not target of action "tap", nor action "discard", an ally is not target of action "tap". Character is still target of A Lie in Your Eyes, just because the card is played on it, but not because any action, potentially created by A Lie in Your Eyes may operate on it. Only declared action of A Lie in Your Eyes is choice.
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:07 pm
by Konrad Klar
Some (disappointing) addition.
While I'm maintaining all I wrote in my previous post I must add that Riddling Talk is not able to cancel an automatic-attack.
"the creatureʹs card is discarded (all of its attacks are cancelled)" implies that attacks of creature may be potentially canceled (but not other attacks).
If the text would be instead "the attack is canceled and the creatureʹs card is discarded (all of its [remaining] attacks are cancelled)" then the automatic-attack could be canceled.
So only potential benefit of playing the card on character facing an automatic-attack is forcing an opponent to reveal his hand.
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:27 am
by kober
Okay, that makes sense. Thank you, Konrad!
Re: Riddling Talk and Ahunt attacks
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 1:58 pm
by Darksatin
Hello,
How works Riddling Talk against a Dragon Ahunt attack ?
This attack is considered as a hazard creature attack.
So, this attack can be cancelled with a Riddling Talk ?
If it is cancelled, is the Dragon Ahunt card discarded?
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:03 pm
by Konrad Klar
"A hazard creature attack" is not he same as "attack from creature".
The attack cannot be canceled with a Riddling Talk. The Dragon Ahunt card is not discarded.
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2019 9:37 pm
by the JabberwocK
Konrad Klar wrote: ↑Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:03 pm
"A hazard creature attack" is not he same as "attack from creature".
The attack cannot be canceled with a Riddling Talk. The Dragon Ahunt card is not discarded.
I must disagree.
RIDDLING TALK ‐ Short‐event (U)
Riddling attempt. Playable on a character whose company is facing an attack of the type listed below. Character makes a roll (or draws a #) modified by: +2 for each sage and +1 for each Hobbit in his company. If the result is greater than: 8 against Dragons and Drakes, 10 against Men and Giants, 12 against Slayers, Awakened Plants, Orcs, Spiders, and Trolls; then name a card and opponent must reveal his hand. If the named card is in opponent’s hand, the creatureʹs card is discarded (all of its attacks are cancelled) and the hazard limit against the character’s company is decreased by three.
BAIRANAX AHUNT ‐ Long‐event (U)
[MP: 3]
Unique. Any company moving in Withered Heath, Gundabad, Anduin Vales, and/or Grey Mountain Narrows immediately faces one Dragon attack (considered a hazard creature attack) ‐ 3 strikes at 12/6 (attacker chooses defending characters).
If Doors of Night is in play, this attack also affects: Northern Rhovanion, Iron Hills, Southern Rhovanion, and Angmar.
"Playable on a character whose company is facing an attack of the type listed below."
Does the Dragon Ahunt qualify? Yes, it does.
"faces one Dragon attack (considered a hazard creature attack)"
What is the point of this statement? The attack is meant to be treated the same as an attack from a hazard creature.
"If the named card is in opponent’s hand, the creatureʹs card is discarded"
Since the attack is considered a hazard creature attack, that means there is a creature involved. As such, the creature has a card associated with it (which is discarded), even if the card itself is not a "hazard creature card."
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 4:30 am
by CDavis7M
I'm not sure how much weight to put on the Players Guides, but they are supposedly signed off by the designer/creator. Else where the Guide mentions canceling auto attacks in addition to the passage in this image.
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 5:27 am
by Konrad Klar
the Jabberwock wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2019 9:37 pm
"faces one Dragon attack (considered a hazard creature attack)"
What is the point of this statement?
(among others)
Bow of Dragon-horn may be used against such attack.
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 5:35 am
by Theo
CRF wrote:Automatic-attacks
A card that can cancel an attack can cancel an automatic-attack, and this counts as facing the automatic-attack.
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2019 12:30 am
by CDavis7M
^ That is a good find. And definitely helpful in understanding the intention here.
I wonder if the confusing "discard" language arose because the writer/developer of this card was questioning "how can I write the card to refer to all of the attacks of a Slayer when this card is playable on 'an attack' ?"
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:42 am
by Konrad Klar
CDavis7M wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 12:30 am
wonder if the confusing "discard" language arose because the writer/developer of this card was questioning "how can I write the card to refer to all of the attacks of a Slayer when this card is playable on 'an attack' ?"
Author could write:
"If the named card is in opponent’s hand, the attack is cancelled (creatureʹs card is discarded and its remaining attacks are cancelled)"
But he wrote, what he wrote.
"If the named card is in opponent’s hand, the creatureʹs card is discarded (all of its attacks are cancelled)".
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2019 7:57 pm
by TomG
So, what is the verdict regarding whether Riddling Talk can cancel automatic attacks? The player guide reference is interesting! I'm hoping it can cancel such attacks
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2019 10:31 pm
by Theo
The verdict is contentious.
Hopefully your play group can read the ideas discussed and come to a mutually acceptable, consistent decision for yourselves.
If this came up at e.g. Worlds... it would probably go to the loudest group present, regardless of thoughtful discussion. Speculating.
Re: Riddling Talk
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2019 1:04 am
by TomG
Maybe a question for annual rules voting?
