Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

The place to ask all rules questions related to MECCG.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by Konrad Klar »

I agree.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by Konrad Klar »

1.
Theo wrote:
Sun Nov 24, 2019 3:39 am
Right; so different site cards, same site. Rebuild the Town would not make a site a different site; e.g. Weathertop with Guarded Haven would still prevent the play of Marshalling Points items at opponent's Weathertop with Rebuild the Town
Wait.

"Rebuild the Town would not make a site a different site"
OK.

"e.g. Weathertop with Guarded Haven would still prevent the play of Marshalling Points items at opponent's Weathertop with Rebuild the Town"
Weathertop with Guarded Haven would still prevent the play of Marshalling Points items at opponent's Weathertop with Rebuild the Town but not because it is the same site, but because Guarded Haven (since errata) states:
"Cards that give marshalling points may not be played at any version of the site by your opponent in all cases".
Without above change
A permanent-event played on a site affects only the copy of the site it is played on, unless otherwise specified.
would take an effect.

2.
If I understand you, if there are two copies of the same site, one [-me_rl-] - used by agent, other [-me_bh-] - used by company,
then the company is considered moving to/being at the same site as used by agent, and the same site is considered to be both [-me_rl-] and [-me_bh-].
(If it is the agent's home site there is more of creature types that may be played)
Right?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by Theo »

Right. The player checks for the site having the attribute; any site card of that site having such an attribute would imply that the site has that attribute and could satisfy the requirement for creature play.
---
Konrad Klar wrote:
Sun Nov 24, 2019 10:12 am
Weathertop with Guarded Haven would still prevent the play of Marshalling Points items at opponent's Weathertop with Rebuild the Town but not because it is the same site, but because Guarded Haven (since errata) states:
"Cards that give marshalling points may not be played at any version of the site by your opponent in all cases".
Right. Weathertop card with Rebuild the Town must still be the same (named) site as Weathertop card with Guarded Haven.
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
CDavis7M
Posts: 1910
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by CDavis7M »

which site is the agent's site?

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by Konrad Klar »

CDavis7M wrote:
Mon Nov 25, 2019 4:48 am
which site is the agent's site?
The one occupied by agent. Tautology.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 1910
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by CDavis7M »

That was simple. Thanks.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by Konrad Klar »

CDavis7M wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 5:39 am
That was simple. Thanks.
I did not want to be spiteful, but "The one occupied by agent. Tautology." is only fair answer I know.
Theo wrote:
Sun Nov 24, 2019 10:35 pm
Right. The player checks for the site having the attribute; any site card of that site having such an attribute would imply that the site has that attribute and could satisfy the requirement for creature play.
I'm glad that I understand you.
But maybe your conclusion is straight, literal inference from imprecise text.

Why I am suspecting that the text of "Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site" chapter is imprecise:

Where (to the which site) the creatures are keyed?
Normally a creatures played against a company cannot be keyed to the site other than the company's current or new site.
The company that moves/is at Wizardhaven The White Towers does not move/is not at [-me_rl-] The White Towers (occupied by an agent).
The agent is at The White Towers, but he is not at Wizardhaven.

Other straight, literal conclusion that is inference from imprecise text:
If type of site used by a company and used by an agent differ, then the company and the agent are not at then same site of given type/the company does not move to the same site of given type as occupied by the agent.
If given type of site is described as ( [-me_rl-] OR [-me_sh-] OR [-me_dh-]) then given type of sites matches if both are ( [-me_rl-] OR [-me_sh-] OR [-me_dh-]) (e.g. company is moving to [-me_rl-] Moria, agent is at [-me_sh-] Moria).
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by Theo »

Konrad Klar wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:06 am
Where (to the which site) the creatures are keyed?
Normally a creatures played against a company cannot be keyed to the site other than the company's current or new site.
The company that moves/is at Wizardhaven The White Towers does not move/is not at [-me_rl-] The White Towers (occupied by an agent).
The agent is at The White Towers, but he is not at Wizardhaven.
I think it is worth challenging what I think you are trying to say here. The original rules texts give us no indication how to handle the incongruity of having multiple versions of the same site with different site types in play at the same time. Some places in the rules do indicate a need to differentiate site (by name) from site card. Noting that creatures keyed to site types only check that the type matches the site, not a specific site card, it seems reasonable to believe that an agent at a different type of a site does allow new hazards to affect a company.

Alternatively, it is arguably more reasonable to believe that ICE implicitly intended a rule such as:
hypothetical wrote:Effects on companies based on site properties use the properties of the site card the company is at or moving to.
This would need to be made explicit in an ARV, though, otherwise I will continue to believe that named sites inherit their properties from all available cards with their name.

As far as story consistency, the only better alternative I see would be to disallow any activity that would cause a different version of an in-play site to simultaneously be in play. Essentially, a generalized version of the rule that https://councilofelrond.org/forum/viewt ... 145&t=3737 is seeking to restrict. This could definitely cause some havoc for strategies; e.g. opponent rushes to Free-hold Rhosgobel to block Fallen Radagast's auto-protected haven. Hidden Haven and Mischief in a Mean Way would become offensive even without being Guarded.
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!

dirhaval
Posts: 655
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:39 am

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by dirhaval »

I see that the card to use for the site effect is the card used by the agent.
Thus, If Fallen-Gandalf makes Bag End a wizardhaven with Chambers in the Royal Court. Then an agent, Lobelia,
may move to Bag End used by opponent, which is a Free-hold. Creatures can be keyed now to Free-holds per agent rule,
but canceled by stage event or can be keyed to the site if The Shire is turned into a Wilderness affected by Nature's Revenge.
Sons of Kings can be keyed; Aragorn does mean Tree-lord.

Also, News of the Shire then Vile Fumes on a Bag End makes a Ruines and Lair on all sites in play and face-up
including those used by agents.
A different situation is when an agent is at a Ruins and Lairs home site when Deeper Shadow is used to make a Shadow-hold.
I think that the agent has influence because of the site that an opponent cannot always overcome.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by Theo »

Lobelia may not move to Bag End once Fallen Gandalf has played Chambers of the Royal Court on it.
CRF wrote:Only Elven agents can move to a site that is a Wizardhaven.
She can just be there without moving, though.
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by Konrad Klar »

Theo wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 6:32 pm
I think it is worth challenging what I think you are trying to say here.
So if a company is at Wizardhaven The White Towers and other player uses [-me_rl-] The White Towers, the Rats! may be played on the company?

For the same reason for which the company cannot play Wild Hounds - it is at Wizardhaven , it is not at [-me_rl-] in [-me_wi-] - Rats! cannot be played on it.
Or Rats! may be played on it and the company may also play Wild Hounds - because it is at a site of both types.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by Theo »

If we assume:
hypothetical wrote: Effects on companies based on site properties use the properties of the site card the company is at or moving to.
then the company cannot play Wild Hounds nor have Rats! played on it.

This seems reasonable since companies must always be at or moving to a site card. This would restrict the agent tap abilities as needing to be satisfied by the properties of the site card of the company they would affect, and the automatic-attack would need to be from the company's card.

But as far as agents are concerned, the careful observer will note that they don't actually have to be at a site card at all! It instead seems that their location is based only on site-by-name, with site cards used only to denote which site-by-name they are at when not at one of their home sites. The other properties of the (potential) site card for the agent don't matter for these abilities because the company being at a site card with qualifying properties is sufficient for the agent's site-by-name to inherit the properties.

The same cannot be said more widely...

A perhaps more curious example to consider is Shadow Out of the Dark:
... If agent is revealed and not in a Free‐hold [ [-me_fh-] ] or Haven [ [-me_ha-] ], he can tap to allow any Undead hazard creatures to be played at his site this turn. ...
Note that no company is referenced; this could even be played during an earlier company's movement/hazard phase in anticipation.

Say the agent was moved to Bag End using a Free-hold card.
An opposing company moves to Bag End using a Free-hold card, but then New Moon turns their Free-hold into a Border-hold until end of turn.
Hazard player then wants to play Shadow Out of the Dark.

With my inheritance assumptions and how I'd like the ARV to resolve, Bag End would qualify as a Free-Hold regardless of whether their version of the card was in play or not (so long as it wasn't simultaneously turned into a Border-hold).

With my inheritance assumptions but with how Konrad proposed the ARV, Bag End would qualify only as a Border-hold until the agent was revealed, at which point it would also qualify as a Free-hold and Shadows Out of the Dark could not have further effects.

Now instead consider if the agent could have (hypothetically) been at their home site without a site card.

With my inheritance assumptions and how I'd like the ARV to resolve, Bag End would count as a Free-Hold regardless of whether their version of the card was in play or not (so long as it wasn't simultaneously turned into a Border-hold).

With my inheritance assumptions but with how Konrad proposed the ARV, Bag End would count as a Border-hold until the agent was revealed. IF the player chose to play the Bag End site card, Bag End would also be a Free-hold and Shadows Out of the Dark could not have further effects. If instead the player chose not to play the Bag End site card (requiring the agent to be discarded by the end of the turn), Shadows Out of the Dark could have full effect.
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by Konrad Klar »

You are consistent and you are understanding the ARV (https://councilofelrond.org/forum/viewt ... 145&t=3633) proposed by me.

I think that solution of the problem presented in this tread would require an errata.
The errata would be:
"A creatures playable in result of agent action that taps to make certain creature playable (or in result of certain cards that require an agent), are playable at company's site. Therefore a type of site used by company is used to determine which creature are playable in this manner."

Without the errata either:
- agent cannot tap to make certain creatures playable if types of sites used by him and by company do not match,
- agent can tap to make certain creatures playable according to both types of sites used by him and by company (and consistently company can play resources that can be played at any version of its current site currently in play; hazards may be played against the company that require any version currently in play of its current or new site).
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 1910
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by CDavis7M »

Konrad Klar wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 10:05 pm
Without the errata either:
- agent cannot tap to make certain creatures playable if types of sites used by him and by company do not match,
- agent can tap to make certain creatures playable according to both types of sites used by him and by company (and consistently company can play resources that can be played at any version of its current site currently in play; hazards may be played against the company that require any version currently in play of its current or new site).
Are you saying that this is how the rules currently operate? Either one or the other? I disagree with both.

The site type of the company has no bearing on the agent's action to make creatures playable. Only the site name of the company's site and the site name of the agent's site need to be the same. There is no requirement that the site type be the same. The agent's site type matters for whether/which creatures are playable by the agent action. The company's site type does not matter for the agent action to make creatures playable.

Obviously a company cannot play resources based on the agent's site type of the same site name.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Playing Creatures at an Agent’s Site

Post by Theo »

Konrad Klar wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 10:05 pm
Without the errata either:
- agent cannot tap to make certain creatures playable if types of sites used by him and by company do not match,
- agent can tap to make certain creatures playable according to both types of sites used by him and by company (and consistently company can play resources that can be played at any version of its current site currently in play; hazards may be played against the company that require any version currently in play of its current or new site).
Third option:
The agent site card (because there could be none) affects nothing other than tracking which site-by-name the agent moved through. Agent can may creatures playable if its current site matches company's current site, but only the properties of the site card of the company matters.
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!

Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”