Wizard's Trove as Quest Bypass?

[Theo]

Wizard's Trove alternative use:

...
Alternatively, you may store one miscellaneous marshalling point card at one of your Wizardhavens [ ]. Any reference to the site
where the card can normally be stored are transferred instead to the Wizardhaven [ ]. Place Wizardʹs Trove with the stored card
‐ which is worth full marshalling points.

Strict reading suggests that you may store one miscellaneous marshalling point card regardless of whether it could normally be stored. So wouldn't this, for example, bypass the quest requirements for cards like Fate of the Ithil Stone or Into the Smoking Cone?

CoE Rules Digest claims (underline mine):

19. Can any misc MP card be stored with Wizard's Trove, even if the card cannot normally be stored at all (e.g. Faithless Steward)? How about storing cards whose conditions are not yet met (uninverted Padding Feet, Fate of the Ithil- stone...) - worth full MP?

*** No and no. The card must be normally storable. The "full marshalling points" that the misc. MP card is worth is referring to more than the normal 1 MP that FW normally receive for non-stage cards. This does not mean that it is worth more than what it would be worth to a non-FW player.

But I just don't see where this is coming from, from the "makes its own allowance" perspective that permits such behaviors as characters coming into play outside the organization phase with A Chance Meeting.

[CDavis7M]

But don't those events require the cards to be inverted in order to be stored? I don't think Wizards Trove trumps an explicit requirement.

And, I may be wrong, but isn't the Chance Meeting decision based on the fact that it isn't required to be played during the organization phase, unlike many other cards which have that requirement.

My confusion with Wizards Trove is: what other storable misc MP cards are there that are not already storable at a Haven? I can't think of any, which makes me think that even non-storable misc MP cards can be stored (eg King Under the Mountain).

[Konrad Klar]

But I just don't see where this is coming from,

From here:
"Any reference to the site where the card can normally be stored are transferred instead to the Wizardhaven [ ]"
Any reference to other conditions under which the card can be stored are not changed.

[Konrad Klar]

But I just don't see where this is coming from, from the "makes its own allowance" perspective that permits such behaviors as characters coming into play outside the organization phase with A Chance Meeting.

1. Wizard's Trove does not create any action at time of its resolution.
If it would create such action, otherwise allowed only in other phase than organization phase, then yes, the action would happen in organization phase.
2. There is rule that says a factions, allies, items (other than special item rings) may be played only in site phase.
The rule may be overridden implicitly, i.e. when a card/effect that allows/causes playing a faction, ally, item at its resolution is not limited to be played only in a site phase.
3. There is no rule that restrict a playing/discarding a character outside of organization phase. Player may make such action in organization phase without help any other effects. Similarly, untapping/healing is not restricted to untap phase, discarding one card from hand is not restricted to end-of-turn phase. In result of other cards/effects player may/must play character, discard character, untap a card, heal character, discard one card from hand in any phase and in any turn. Conditions of playing/activating such other cards/effects must be respected.

[Theo]

From here:
"Any reference to the site where the card can normally be stored are transferred instead to the Wizardhaven [ ]"
Any reference to other conditions under which the card can be stored are not changed.

"Any" number could be zero. Nothing about this creates a requirement that the card must normally be able to be stored.

But I just don't see where this is coming from, from the "makes its own allowance" perspective that permits such behaviors as characters coming into play outside the organization phase with A Chance Meeting.

1. Wizard's Trove does not create any action at time of its resolution.
If it would create such action, otherwise allowed only in other phase than organization phase, then yes, the action would happen in organization phase.

Neither does A Chance Meeting. Both are worded in terms of an option "may". In both cases, the effects are "implemented immediately." Either "may store"/"may bring into play" should count as making its own allowance outside of the normal rules of the game, or it shouldn't. Consistency is all I'm asking.

2. There is rule that says a factions, allies, items (other than special item rings) may be played only in site phase.
The rule may be overridden implicitly, i.e. when a card/effect that allows/causes playing a faction, ally, item at its resolution is not limited to be played only in a site phase.

And there is a rule that says that the only things that can be stored are items and events that say they can be stored, but this may also be overridden implicitly, which Wizard's Trove does by not placing any other requirements on the type of miscellaneous marshalling point card it allows to be stored.

3. There is no rule that restrict a playing/discarding a character outside of organization phase. Player may make such action in organization phase without help any other effects. Similarly, untapping/healing is not restricted to untap phase, discarding one card from hand is not restricted to end-of-turn phase. In result of other cards/effects player may/must play character, discard character, untap a card, heal character, discard one card from hand in any phase and in any turn. Conditions of playing/activating such other cards/effects must be respected.

We've gone over this before. Playing a character is defined in the section of the rules entitled "Bringing Characters into Play." Untapping, healing, discarding, etc. are not defined in that way. But this is not the point of this thread. I'm not sure what this has to do with Wizard's Trove other than to permit its storing allowance to occur during any phase?

[Theo]

My confusion with Wizards Trove is: what other storable misc MP cards are there that are not already storable at a Haven?

Kill All But Not The Halflings, News of the Shire, Use Your Legs store at specifically Barad-dur, so don't automatically transfer to a generic Wizardhaven.

[Konrad Klar]

Konrad Klar wrote: ↑
06 Feb 2019, 10:26
From here:
"Any reference to the site where the card can normally be stored are transferred instead to the Wizardhaven [ ]"
Any reference to other conditions under which the card can be stored are not changed.

"Any" number could be zero. Nothing about this creates a requirement that the card must normally be able to be stored.

"Any number" may be 0. Non-number may not be 0.
If there is no reference to the site where the card can normally be stored, no reference is transferred instead to the Wizardhaven.

Neither does A Chance Meeting. Both are worded in terms of an option "may". In both cases, the effects are "implemented immediately." Either "may store"/"may bring into play" should count as making its own allowance outside of the normal rules of the game, or it shouldn't. Consistency is all I'm asking.

Difference between short-events and non-short-events cards.

Life of short-events is short. For short-events "may" must be used when a short-event executes in chain of effects. If a possibility which the "may" gives should survive a discarding the short-event, it must be specifically mentioned.

For other cards, a possibility that the "may" gives lasts longer, because the cards stay in play longer. And other conditions required by actions that "may" be taken thanks to the cards must be observed. Bad Company allows to play Orc and Troll characters and included them in starting company. But they are only possibilities that the card gives. Player can use the possibilities many times, as long the card is in play, but other conditions of playing a character must be fulfilled. And obviously (I think) Orc and Troll characters are not played in result of Bad Company (in chain of effects in which the card resolves).

Konrad Klar wrote: ↑
06 Feb 2019, 11:21
2. There is rule that says a factions, allies, items (other than special item rings) may be played only in site phase by their texts.
The rule may be overridden implicitly, i.e. when a card/effect that allows/causes playing a faction, ally, item at its resolution is not limited to be played only in a site phase.

And there is a rule that says that the only things that can be stored are items and events that say they can be stored, but this may also be overridden implicitly, which Wizard's Trove does by not placing any other requirements on the type of miscellaneous marshalling point card it allows to be stored.

This is still a matter of the difference between short-events and non-short-events cards.
Please note that some short-events that allow to play an extra item at site are still limited to site phase.

Safe from the Shadow, Tokens to Show do not mention that a resources need to be storable.
Possibility they give may be used as long the cards are in play. But the cards only alter a phase in which a resources may be stored.

Messenger of Mordor, Fealty Under Trial mention which resources may be stored.

[CDavis7M]

My confusion with Wizards Trove is: what other storable misc MP cards are there that are not already storable at a Haven?

Kill All But Not The Halflings, News of the Shire, Use Your Legs store at specifically Barad-dur, so don't automatically transfer to a generic Wizardhaven.

Theo, I noticed that these minion misc MP Barad-Dur-storable events are actually specifically excluded from being used by Fallen Wizard players in the folded insert sheet.

So then, there are no misc MP cards playable by Fallen Wizards that are already storable but that couldn't be stored at a Haven already. So then, what is the point of the last paragraph?

I noticed that The White Tree is "sage only at Minas Tirith." It is not storable. Many un-stored permanent events played on sites say to discard if the site is discarded. Presumably White Tree would also be discarded.

Anyway, the explicit workings of White Tree with Wizards Trove makes it clear that the last paragraph has no meaning UNLESS it enables non-storable items to be stored. Things like Mallorn, which is similar to white tree but is "playable at Bag End" (which FW Gandalf can make a Haven). Or Faithless Steward which receives MP if the character is at a free/border hold. King Under the Mountain, Map to Mithril, Return of the King, Stone of Erech, maybe even Smoke on the Wind, tower raided, etc.

It seems the intention of Wizards Trove is to give you full MP for these cards.


I'm still trying to work out Konrad's explanation, but I do think there is a difference between Trove and A Chance Meeting give the standard rules.

Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk

[Theo]

No wonder I've never seen that alternative use for Wizard's Trove...

Life of short-events is short. For short-events "may" must be used when a short-event executes in chain of effects. If a possibility which the "may" gives should survive a discarding the short-event, it must be specifically mentioned.

For other cards, a possibility that the "may" gives lasts longer, because the cards stay in play longer.

There is no must. The "may" could not be used/usable for other reasons. For example, Aware of Their Ways could reveal four unique cards, leaving you unable to perform the "may". Or a ring test could give you a roll for which you have no corresponding ring.

The short-event vs non-short-event distinction is a curious one. I still find no support for such a distinction in the written rules, but at least it prevents permanent events from totally changing the game dynamics like your short events!

However, I think some permanent-event effects need to happen only once at card resolution, just like short-events. Take Sacrifice of Form: we don't normally play that it creates an ongoing effect of discarding the Wizard should he ever return. But maybe we should be, for consistency? Or how do players know that this is a one-time effect? At least some permanent events are explicitly written as a one-time effect, like the play effect of Open To the Summons.

But regardless of whether it is sensible to make a distinction between short and other events, the first effect of Wizard's Trove is just such a "creates its own allowance", even though it is a permanent event! At least, according to the CoE:

You have in play the Wizard's Trove and you have stored a Sapling. Now do you have to discard the Sapling if you play the White Tree ?? You could argue no, becauce the WT's text is ignored(due to the Trove), but does this still apply if the text is ingnored AFTER the play of the Tree?

*** You do not have to discard the Sapling because Wizard's Trove provides an alternate means of playing The White Tree, therefore the playability text on The White Tree is not used.

So why shouldn't it provide an alternative means of storing? It's the same type of card as itself.

[edit: correct Form -> Trove]

[Konrad Klar]

Konrad Klar wrote: ↑
07 Feb 2019, 12:48
Life of short-events is short. For short-events "may" must be used when a short-event executes in chain of effects. If a possibility which the "may" gives should survive a discarding the short-event, it must be specifically mentioned.

For other cards, a possibility that the "may" gives lasts longer, because the cards stay in play longer.

There is no must. The "may" could not be used/usable for other reasons. For example, Aware of Their Ways could reveal four unique cards, leaving you unable to perform the "may". Or a ring test could give you a roll for which you have no corresponding ring.

Right. I was not precise. I mean: "For short-events "may" can be only used when a short-event executes in chain of effects."

The short-event vs non-short-event distinction is a curious one. I still find no support for such a distinction in the written rules, but at least it prevents permanent events from totally changing the game dynamics like your short events!

You have said "Consistency is all I'm asking."
So just look at the way you are interpreting short-events and non-short-events cards.
How you are interpreting Ringlore? Can you replace Gold Ring with any ring from your hand outside the moment when Ringlore executes in chain of effects?
How you are interpreting Farmer Maggot? Can you replace a site only at the moment, when Farmer Maggot executes in chain of effects?

However, I think some permanent-event effects need to happen only once at card resolution, just like short-events. Take Sacrifice of Form: we don't normally play that it creates an ongoing effect of discarding the Wizard should he ever return. But maybe we should be, for consistency? Or how do players know that this is a one-time effect?

I think so too.
If an effect of permanent-event is a directive, not a possibility (and no action activated by occurrence of passive condition), then it should be interpreted in such way.

But regardless of whether it is sensible to make a distinction between short and other events, the first effect of Wizard's Form is just such a "creates its own allowance", even though it is a permanent event! At least, according to the CoE:

CoE #65 wrote:
You have in play the Wizard's Trove and you have stored a Sapling. Now do you have to discard the Sapling if you play the White Tree ?? You could argue no, becauce the WT's text is ignored(due to the Trove), but does this still apply if the text is ingnored AFTER the play of the Tree?

*** You do not have to discard the Sapling because Wizard's Trove provides an alternate means of playing The White Tree, therefore the playability text on The White Tree is not used.

So why shouldn't it provide an alternative means of storing? It's the same type of card as itself.

I think that you mean Wizard's Trove, not Wizard's Form. Right?
First use of Wizard's Trove supersedes a playbility conditions and effects of The White Tree.
Alternative use of Wizard's Trove supersedes the reference "to the site where the card can normally be stored"* and causes that the card is worth full MPs.

*) Yes. In practice it is unusable currently. All storable miscellaneous MP cards that FW player can use are normally storable at Haven or at Darkhaven and the reference is automatically converted to Wizardhaven for FW player. For potential future cards it may have practical meaning. It may also have a practical meaning if "Wizard to Fallen-wizard Conversion" optional rule is in use; then Kill All But Not The Halflings, News of the Shire, Use Your Legs may be used by FW Player converted from Wizard player.

[Theo]

But regardless of whether it is sensible to make a distinction between short and other events, the first effect of Wizard's Form is just such a "creates its own allowance", even though it is a permanent event! At least, according to the CoE:

CoE #65 wrote:
You have in play the Wizard's Trove and you have stored a Sapling. Now do you have to discard the Sapling if you play the White Tree ?? You could argue no, becauce the WT's text is ignored(due to the Trove), but does this still apply if the text is ingnored AFTER the play of the Tree?

*** You do not have to discard the Sapling because Wizard's Trove provides an alternate means of playing The White Tree, therefore the playability text on The White Tree is not used.

So why shouldn't it provide an alternative means of storing? It's the same type of card as itself.

I think that you mean Wizard's Trove, not Wizard's Form. Right?
First use of Wizard's Trove supersedes a playbility conditions and effects of The White Tree.
Alternative use of Wizard's Trove supersedes the reference "to the site where the card can normally be stored"* and causes that the card is worth full MPs.

*) Yes. In practice it is unusable currently. All storable miscellaneous MP cards that FW player can use are normally storable at Haven or at Darkhaven and the reference is automatically converted to Wizardhaven for FW player. For potential future cards it may have practical meaning. It may also have a practical meaning if "Wizard to Fallen-wizard Conversion" optional rule is in use; then Kill All But Not The Halflings, News of the Shire, Use Your Legs may be used by FW Player converted from Wizard player.

What textual difference is there between the first Wizard's Trove "may play" and the second "may store" that makes you think that one creates its own allowance and one does not? Is your statement that the following effect of replacing any instance of where it could normally be stored is the only thing that creates this difference? Because that is a different effect.

Your short vs. long argument seems to suggest that the "may play" should not be creating its own allowance. So why do you not agree with yourself in the case of Wizard's Trove? Or does Wizard's Trove undermine the short vs. long distinction you are trying to make?

[Konrad Klar]

What textual difference is there between the first Wizard's Trove "may play" and the second "may store" that makes you think that one creates its own allowance and one does not?

"may play The White Tree if xyz" replaces playability conditions of The White Tree.
"may be stored here or there" replaces a condition "where can be stored" of a given card.
If a given card cannot be stored, there is nothing to replace.

Effect that allows to play "one additional hazard against a company" does not allow to play against it Will Shaken, that cannot be played at all.

[Theo]

So it is because The White Tree is particularly named? Otherwise why can't "play an additional hazard" be interpreted as replacing the playability condition of that hazard?

If a given card has nothing to replace, that means there is no replacement effect, which is an allowed possibility of "any" turning out to be zero replacements. That speaks not at all to the storing effect.

[Konrad Klar]

So it is because The White Tree is particularly named?

Because it provides altered playability conditions. Not because The White Tree is particularly named.

Otherwise why can't "play an additional hazard" be interpreted as replacing the playability condition of that hazard?

Because "play an additional hazard" does not provide altered playability conditions.
Compare with primary effect of Sleepless Malice.

If a given card has nothing to replace, that means there is no replacement effect, which is an allowed possibility of "any" turning out to be zero replacements. That speaks not at all to the storing effect.

I do not know whether I understand.
Changing reference to the site where a card can be normally stored does not affect a procedure of storing. It only change a site where the procedure may be taken.

[Theo]

I am similarly confused.

Sleepless Malice is a great example of one way to achieve one additional hazard without phrasing it in terms of a play.

These literal sentences follow the same general structure:
Wizard's Trove: "You may play The White Tree at one of your Wizardhavens [ ] if Sapling of the White Tree is stored there."
Lost in the Wilderness: "You may play one additional hazard on target company for each Wilderness [ ] in its site path."
"You may [action] [noun] [prepositional phrase] [conditional]."

You are claiming Wizard's Trove is somehow special, that it (and it alone of permanent events?) creates its own play allowance, despite not being a short-event, and despite having the same phrasing as several other short-events which for some reason do not create their own allowance despite you saying that short events create their own allowance. From what text are your opinions deriving from?

Meanwhile, the exact same card with the simpler sentence structure:
"You may store one miscellaneous marshalling point card at one of your Wizardhavens [ ]."
"You may [action] [noun] [prepositional phrase]."
doesn't even have a condition, but for some reason is less permissive? What textual reason??