Theo wrote: ↑Thu Nov 18, 2021 6:40 pm
It seems to me that CDavis7M's entirely claim of certainty rests on interpreting the phrase, "Any cards which modify a company's hazard limit played prior to this point" to mean to include the hazard limit modification of Mountains of Shadow but to exclude the hazard limit modification of Mount Doom.
Was Mountains of Shadow not played before Mount Doom was played? Certainly Mount Doom was not played before Mount Doom was played.
Theo wrote: ↑Thu Nov 18, 2021 6:40 pm
Although CDavis7M may insist otherwise, this phrase is linguistically incorrect. Possible corrections include:
1) "Any cards [that] modify a company's hazard limit played prior to this point"
2) "Any cards [that could] modify a company's hazard limit played prior to this point"
3) "Any cards[,] which [could] modify a company's hazard limit[,] played prior to this point"
To me, option (1) is the most reasonable. The difference from option (2), presumably favored by CDavis7M, is as Konrad has already pointed out; (1) only includes cards like Horses, and does not include cards that conditionally modify a company's hazard limit---these cards are left to the CRF ruling, which only says the effects are
declared after the new site is revealed.
You're mistaken. Those cards are NOT left to the CRF ruling. There is a common fallacy among a few players which is the key the understanding many of ICE's rulings. There is no way for the CRF ruling to apply in this case. Discovering why makes many rulings clear.
Theo wrote: ↑Thu Nov 18, 2021 6:40 pm
As Konrad has pointed out, it also does not make sense to "apply" a card to a company's base hazard limit. Regardless of (1) vs. (2), the use of "applied" with respect to a card (vs. "resolve" a hazard-limit modifying effect) implies, to me, that the effects of such candidate cards are already established.
Yes... the card was already played (including resolution) at the end of the organizations phase. So the effect is "applied," not "resolved." This makes sense because normally game effects are implemented at "resolution" but in some cases the timing is specified differently.
Theo wrote: ↑Thu Nov 18, 2021 6:40 pm
Even if establishing a passive condition for the application of the modification (such as Mountains of Shadow) was sufficient to be considered a card that (could) modify the company's hazard limit,
that would then mean that one would then "apply" the establishment of the passive condition to a company's base hazard limit, which wouldn't be a sensible thing to do. Even if successfully "applied", one would still then need to resolve the passive condition.
You are being unclear, if not grammatically incorrect. It is not possible to "resolve the passive condition" because a passive condition is not something that can be "resolved" in MECCG. Similarly, in MECCCG, there is no such thing as "apply" the establishment of the passive condition." You're just making words up and using them in a way that is not used by the rules of the game. Passive "conditions" are "conditions," they are not resolved or applied. It is just a condition that can be checked to see if it was met or not. The conditions are based on actions of the game, which are often resolved (though sometimes not, as is the case here), but the "passive condition" itself is not "resolved," not is it "applied."
The bottom line is that there is confusion about how the rules work. Which is easy to do when someone hasn't read the original rulings and hasn't followed the game. This has happened over and over again on this forum.
If anyone else is wondering what the fallacy is, PM me. But I don't think anyone else would be confused otherwise I would have explained why already.