Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

The place to ask all rules questions related to MECCG.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2110
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by CDavis7M »

miguel wrote:
Tue May 19, 2020 10:31 am
CDavis7M wrote: I've read over 4,000 pages of ICE rulings.
I'll take your word for reading them
👍 As someone who has read them, I can tell who has and who hasn't by their words.
miguel wrote:
Tue May 19, 2020 10:31 am
Well, at least you're consistently inconsistent. :roll:
The apparent inconsistency is because you've taken these statements out of context. Some statements were describing the intention/purpose of Annotation 25a and other statements were describing what it actually covers. The context is important.
miguel wrote:
Tue May 19, 2020 10:31 am
CDavis7M wrote: If not returned to origin, the character with Alone and Unadvised would make their corruption checks after reconciling hand size
WHAT? Are you for real? The rolls absolutely happen before reconciling hand size. I'll explain in detail a bit further down this post.
That post was a long time ago (Mon Oct 21, 2019) and I understand the rules better since and I've changed my mind. I'm open to changing my mind and there are many things I've changed my mind on over 12 months. You could have understood that I already changed my mind by reading my recent posts (May 2020) in this thread and discussion of Steps 4, 5, and 6 of the movement/hazard phase.
miguel wrote:
Tue May 19, 2020 10:31 am
And btw, it's common courtesy to clearly state where you are quoting from. It's not sufficient to say "from ICE" simply because you've read 4000+ pages of rulings and think you're the bee's knees. See below how it's done.
The there are over a hundred ICE Digests. It's not clear where you are quoting from. It would be common courtesy to clear state that it's from Digest 83 - 1998/05/15.

User avatar
miguel
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by miguel »

CDavis7M wrote:
Tue May 19, 2020 4:58 pm
That post was a long time ago (Mon Oct 21, 2019) and I understand the rules better since and I've changed my mind. I'm open to changing my mind and there are many things I've changed my mind on over 12 months. You could have understood that I already changed my mind by reading my recent posts (May 2020) in this thread and discussion of Steps 4, 5, and 6 of the movement/hazard phase.
It's not about whether you have changed your mind or not, and in fact contrary to what you claim, I already knew you had done so... But you present all your views as facts from ICE, even though at this point (after changing your mind many times within a year) it should be clear to you that you may not always be right.

Back on the actual topic, does anyone else have thoughts about the possibility of a nested chain when returning to the site of origin? Konrad? Theo? :)

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3531
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by Konrad Klar »

miguel wrote:
Thu May 21, 2020 8:43 am
Back on the actual topic, does anyone else have thoughts about the possibility of a nested chain when returning to the site of origin? Konrad? Theo?
For me: there is an "end of phase" period. After the period passes, a phase ends. For M/H there is additional conclusion of M/H phase procedure.
An "end of phase" period cannot be invoked/triggered. End of phase can be.

I do not see a need for nested chains of effects in which actions triggered/declarable only by/in "end of phase" period could be declared.
The actions are not/cannot be declared if end of phase happened suddenly (without "end of phase" period).
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2110
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by CDavis7M »

miguel wrote:
Thu May 21, 2020 8:43 am
(after changing your mind many times within a year) it should be clear to you that you may not always be right.
I'm not always right. And certainly not at first. But it only took me 1 year to make sense of it all from reading ICE's own explanation for their own rulings.

Changing your mind is no fault. Other people might not change their mind because their mind has been set for decades, settling on their own explanations for someone else's words.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1132
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by Theo »

miguel wrote:
Thu May 21, 2020 8:43 am
Back on the actual topic, does anyone else have thoughts about the possibility of a nested chain when returning to the site of origin? Konrad? Theo? :)
My impression was that ICE was strongly against the concept of nested chains in general, and the only place I've seen ICE use nested chains is with regards to combat. I don't think CoE rulings have changed that precedent up to this point, though there are a couple ARV proposals that use nested chains.

My opinion is that the phrase "the movement/hazard phase immediately ends" when a company is returned to origin is meant to interrupt and fizzle *any* remaining cards in a resolving chain of effect. Without nested chains I don't see how there could be another alternative to fizzling an ongoing chain, since last I knew ICE ruled that, e.g., each discarded card is a separate action, and in order to know when to stop discarding each would have to individually resolve before the next is declared.

Beyond CoE #63, the only occurrence from ICE NetReps I've seen that seems like it might speak to "immediately end" precluding any (at least actively) declared end of phase effects is too muddied to do more than speculate as to its possible intent: (It seems to me that both the question and answer got Iron-road mixed up with another card.)
ICE Rules Digest 582 wrote:>1. If a company doesn't "successfully" move to a Darkhaven (example: I discard Baduila at the new site, Carn Dum, and force him to return to his site of origin, Dol Guldur), can he play Iron-road at Dol-Guldur to attempt to move again to Carn Dum?

If a company returns to it's site of origin, it's movement/hazard phase immediately ends. There is no opportunity to play Iron Road
But I've seen no examples that suggest active or passive effects can occur.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!

User avatar
miguel
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by miguel »

The CoE #63 ruling is unfortunately based (at least in part) on an erroneous quote from the ICE Digest 582. Van was misquoted saying that there is no opportunity to play cards at the end of the movement/hazard phase, when in fact he said it only about Iron Road (assumed to mean Forced March). Up until then there was a discussion of different possibilities within the NetRep Team. Also note, that the Coe #63 ruling overturned this earlier ruling, which suggests the presence of a nested end of the movement/hazard phase IMO:
CoE Digest #60 wrote:Under Turn Seq Rulings, Returning to Site of Origin, it says if company is returned to site of origin the m/h phase immediately ends. The card Bridge says if a company actually moved to a haven you can move again; Brian once ruled that "If you get sent back to site of origin your m/h phase ends immediately and you are not considered to have "moved" anywhere (i.e., a card like Bridge won't work)." However, what about cards like Leg it DoubleQuick ("playable on a moving company") and Shadowfax ("tap [at any time] to allow to move again") and Carambor ("tap at end of m/h phase"), which allow you to move again and don't restrict you to playing them on moving companies--can these cards be played on a company that is returned to its site of origin in order to allow that company to move again? If it's a gray area, I would suggest yes, in order to slightly curb the power of roadblock.

*** Leg It Double Quick will not work because the company is not moving, but the other two cards will work.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1132
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by Theo »

In my opinion, CoE #60 was also too sloppy to read much into. Even if "immediately end" doesn't preclude declaring additional effects, Shadowfax's "move again" shouldn't work because there was no previous move. Similar for Carambor's "move to an additional"; there was no previous move to a site. I'm glad it was overturned.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!

User avatar
miguel
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by miguel »

Sure, I’m just referring to it for possible mechanics, not the specific content. I think the two questions are:

(i) is the end of the movement/hazard phase synonymous with an end of the movement/hazard phase chain of effects or can it occur without its own chain of effects
(ii) does the end of the movement/hazard phase occur when a company is sent back to its site of origin

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3531
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by Konrad Klar »

miguel wrote:
Sun May 24, 2020 8:08 am
Sure, I’m just referring to it for possible mechanics, not the specific content. I think the two questions are:

(i) is the end of the movement/hazard phase synonymous with an end of the movement/hazard phase chain of effects or can it occur without its own chain of effects
(ii) does the end of the movement/hazard phase occur when a company is sent back to its site of origin
(Maybe) except some exceptions there are no declarations possible at border between phases. Nonetheless there are cards playable at end of phase, and actions triggered by end of phase. I think that they imply an existence of period "end of phase". This period lasts during given phase.

I think that a drawing cards for movement, revealing of new site, are not part of company's M/H phase.
The activities do not interfere with e.g. declaration of attack from Bring our Curses Home.

Similarly a reconciling of a hand size, removing from play surface a site of origin, or a new site, are not part of company's M/H phase.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
miguel
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by miguel »

According to the CRF revealing a new site, drawing cards, removing the site of origin and reconciling hand sizes are all part of the company's movement/hazard phase.
CRF: Turn Sequence Rulings: Movement/Hazard Phase: General wrote: Annotation 25: A company is considered to be at the site given by its site card at all times except from the moment their new site card is revealed during their movement/hazard phase until their old site card is discarded during the same movement/hazard phase. During this period a company is considered to be en route between sites and not at any site.

Annotation 25b: Players drawing cards when a new site is revealed is synonymous with the resolution of the new site being revealed. It happens immediately, not in the following chain of effects.

Removing the site of origin and resetting to hand size are simultaneous actions, and they are the last actions in any movement/hazard phase. This means a moving company is not at a site until the site phase.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3531
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by Konrad Klar »

I am trying to speak about practical aspects.
As you know, if a company attempts to move between Under-deeps sites, it makes a dice-roll when its new site is revealed, BEFORE cards are drawn for movement (if at all). It is not know at this point whether a company will move or stay.

In my opinion the moment when a new site is revealed, cards are drawn for movement is PROLOG of company's M/H phase.
The moment when a hand size is reconciled, site cards are removed from play surface is EPILOG of company's M/H phase.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
miguel
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by miguel »

I think we can achieve all practical aspects using a (single) chain of effects, and still remain true to the quotes from the CRF. Using your example of under-deeps movement:

(i) new under-deeps site (and drawing of cards) is declared
(ii) the roll for under-deeps movement is declared

When resolving the chain, two things can happen.

(ii') the roll for under-deeps movement is resolved, and it is greater than or equal to the number required
(i') the new site resolves and players draw cards

OR

(ii'') the roll for under-deeps movement is resolved, and it is less than the number required, returning the company to its site of origin
(i'') the new site fizzles since the company is no longer moving to it, and no cards are drawn
Per under-deeps movement rules, the movement/hazard phase now proceeds as if the company had not moved.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3531
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by Konrad Klar »

Annotation 25b: Players drawing cards when a new site is revealed is synonymous with the resolution of the new site being revealed. It happens immediately, not in the following chain of effects.
At this stage it is not known whether a company attempting to move between Under-deeps sites will be moving, or will stay.

So
Annotation 25: A company is considered to be at the site given by its site card at all times except from the moment their new site card is revealed during their movement/hazard phase until their old site card is discarded during the same movement/hazard phase. During this period a company is considered to be en route between sites and not at any site.
should be read as AFTER the moment their new site card is revealed during their movement/hazard phase.
FROM (wrongly/optimistically) assumes a success of Under-deeps movement roll.

Underline mine.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2110
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by CDavis7M »

The "beginning" and "end" of game phase is not an ICE invention. This is a basic game mechanic in many games before and since. The entire point of having "end" of a game phase is because nothing happens in the phase after it. In this game, things happening in the same chain of effects are happening at the same game time. There is no possibility of another game "period" happening at the end of another game period, otherwise "end" has no meaning. And there is no gameplay reason to have the End be a period in this game.


Annotation 25 doesn't purport to describe all movement and it certainly doesn't supercede the Underdeeps movement rules that came later. It's clear how Underdeeps movement works.

Cards playable at the "end of the m/h phase" are clearly playable. What timing issue is there? Corruption checks at the "end" can be responded to according to other rules. No issues there. What problem is this discussion trying to solve?


By the way, did you guys know that Annotation 25 was already "fixed" by ICE?

User avatar
miguel
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Alone and Unadvised AND Returning to a site of origin

Post by miguel »

Konrad Klar wrote:
Sun May 24, 2020 1:19 pm
Annotation 25b: Players drawing cards when a new site is revealed is synonymous with the resolution of the new site being revealed. It happens immediately, not in the following chain of effects.
At this stage it is not known whether a company attempting to move between Under-deeps sites will be moving, or will stay.
I'd say revealing the new site should be considered synonymous with the declaration and resolution of the new site. Revealing is not over until the site resolves, and that is when the cards are drawn.

Also just to clarify my earlier example, the under-deeps roll itself does not come from the site, but from the under-deeps movement rules when certain criterion is met, which is why the roll gets declared on its own (instead of resolving at the same time with the site). First part of revealing the site (declaration) is what causes the movement roll's declaration.
CRF: Rulings by Term: Under-deeps wrote: When a company's site of origin is an Under-deeps site and the company reveals a new site at the start of its movement/hazard phase, the company is declaring it will make a roll to determine if the movement was successful. No cards can be played between the site being revealed and the roll except for Reach of Ulmo. Neither player draws cards for this movement if the roll is not successful.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”