panotxa wrote: ↑Fri Oct 16, 2020 5:01 pm
Digest 55 states:
H) There is nothing stopping one from using Regiment of Black Crows on ones own Dragon Ahunt.
So, for me, it’s clear that you can cancel the ahunt attack
It would be helpful to state that you are discussing the COE Digest 55 since there is also the ICE Digest 55.
Also, I would not necessarily rely on the COE's rulings since they are riddled with incorrect rulings and inconsistencies based on failure to read the rules or ICE's rulings:
viewtopic.php?f=68&t=4170
And the particular set of rulings from CoE Digest 55 that you brought up is also wrong on several things and full of misinformation:
CoE Digest 55 wrote:
There was a gigantic discussion about the interaction of Bring Our
Curses Home and Ride Against the Enemy. The following rulings resulted
from that discussion:
First of all, Bring Our Curses Home may not be played on an attack
created by Ride Against the Enemy due to the following CRF entry: CRF,
Card Errata and Rulings, Ride Against the Enemy: Hazards have no effect
on the attack, and any resource effects that benefit the attack are
cancelled.
This ruling is wrong and it misunderstands the CRF entry. Bring Our Curses Home CAN be played on an attack creature by Ride Against the Enemy because Ride Against the Enemy creatures a hazard creature attack. It's true that there is no creature card associated with the hazard creature attack created by Ride Against the Enemy and so there is no possibility of creating additional attacks. Still, Bring our Curses Home will give 3 corruption points.
To understand the CRF entry, first recognize that Ride Against the Enemy states "
Other cards have no effect on this attack." This indicates that the attack cannot be cancelled. The CRF entry clarifies that the attack can actually be cancelled but that "
Hazards have no effect on the attack, and any resource effects that benefit the attack are cancelled. The attack may still be cancelled." This is all the CRF entry on Ride Against the Enemy is doing. Nothing more.
Bring Our Curses Home DOES NOT affect the attack. There is literally no effect on the entire card that modifies the attack. The attack is merely used as an active condition for playing BOCH and as a passive condition for effects of BOCH. But the attack is not affected by the effects of BOCH.
ICE wrote:From: Craig Ichabod O'Brien
Subject: [MECCG] Rules Digest 81
Date: 1998/05/10
>Ride Against the Enemy
>The important line is "Other cards have no effect on this attack." This
>is obviously intended to stop creature pumpers affecting this attack.
>Does this however also prevent a card from cancelling this attack?
It means that hazards have no effect on the attack, and resources which
benefit the attack are canceled. (CRF, Card Rulings, Ride Against the
Enemy)
----------
CoE Digest 55 wrote:
B) You cannot target the card with an in play BOCH as it is "off to the
side" and if it is a long event it won't follow the normal discard after
two turns rule either.
This is misleading. The CoE Netrep doesn't understand what "targeting" is. The issue is not "targeting" it is "affecting." The rules on the long-event phase do not specifically "target" the long-events for discard. This is because "targeting" necessarily requires choosing a specific entity while the rules on long-event apply to all long-events of a specific class without choosing.
(MELE p. 91)
Targeting: Choosing a specific entity through which a card or effect will be played out. An entity chosen as such is the "target" of the action... Cards which affect an entire class of other cards do not target.
(MELE p. 92)
Long-event Phase. First, remove all of your resource long-events in play. Then, you may play new resource long-event cards. Finally, remove all of your opponent's hazard long-events.
Again, the rules on discarding long-event apply to all long-events of a specific class without choosing, so they do not "target". However, the rules on "off to the side" cards do not only cover "targeting," they also cover "affecting" such cards:
(MEDM p. 1 and MEBA p.4)
Any card placed off to the side absolutely cannot be targeted or otherwise affected by the game except by cards that specifically affect cards placed "off to the side."
If targeting was the only issue, the rules on long-events would actually discard the Ahunt long-event placed with BOCH. However, the rules on long-events absolutely cannot "affect" the card placed with BOCH. This is why the Ahunt long-event would not be discarded.
----------
CoE Digest 55 wrote:
C) From the METD insert, Manifestations of Dragons: If at any time an
attack from a manifestation of a unique Dragon is defeated or if the
manifestation is otherwise removed from the game: 1) All existing
manifestations in play of the same Dragon are removed from the game. 2)
No further manifestations of the same Dragon may be played. ..
So if a dragon manifestation is killed and BOCH has a manifestation of
that dragon off to the side, the Dragon on BOCH goes out of play.
This is wrong. I don't know how the CoE Netrep can read the rules on "Off to the Side" and then somehow end up with this wrong conclusion.
(MEDM p. 1 and MEBA p.4)
Any card placed off to the side absolutely cannot be targeted or otherwise affected by the game except by cards that specifically affect cards placed "off to the side."
The dragon on BOCH
absolutely cannot be affected by the game, including The Dragons rules on manifestations.
The Dragons rules do state "No further manifestations of the same Dragon may be played." However, the long-event on BOCH is not being "played" when the attack is created by BOCH.
This is a bit weird but it follows the rules.
---------
CoE Digest 55 wrote:
D) There are some cards (resources) that will discard a creature
currently attacking or put it back into its owners hand. Examples are
Regiment of Black Crows and Riddling Talk. When successfully played,
such cards remove the creature from BOCH.
Again,
Any card placed off to the side absolutely cannot be targeted or otherwise affected by the game except by cards that specifically affect cards placed "off to the side."
Regiment of Black Crows and Riddling Talk do not specifically affect cards placed "off to the side." Therefore, they absolutely cannot affect the creature placed with BOCH.
---------
CoE Digest 55 wrote:
E) A long ago Brian issued this ruling: Great Secrets Buried There is
discarded if there is no item on it, to avoid cheezy plays and added
confusion due to more exceptions. This is based upon the rule for
capturing host cards. It is extended to affect all host cards that
cannot have other cards played upon them. -- Ruled by Brian in CoE
Rulings/Clarifications 11
This also applies to BOCH when the creature placed off to the side with
it is removed from play.
There is no need to make this new ruling because the rules absolutely do not allow the creature with BOCH to be removed from play by cards that do not specifically affect cards placed "off to the side."
I know that Brian especially made a bunch of wrong rulings long ago so let's check CoE Digest 11... well on my way I noticed several wrong rulings in CoE 11. I don't understand how so many of these CoE rulings are wrong. Well, I understand why they wrong -- it's because they didn't bother to refer to the rules or read the ICE rulings -- but I don't understand why they didn't read and refer to those rules and rulings.
COE Digest 11 alone includes numerous wrong rulings: like the incorrect ruling on Shadow of Mordor (the hazard limit effect only lasts until the card is discarded per the rules on Permanent-events), the incorrect ruling on Spider of Morlat (the effect is to "face" an attack, not "create" an attack and so you can't force the company to face multiple attacks), the incorrect ruling on Hoarmurath (Hoarmurath is unique, this should be obvious), the incorrect ruling on Winds of Wrath (the CRF states Chance of Being Lost will change your site path and the same applies to Winds of Wrath), the incorrect ruling on Dragon's Hunger (the creature must necessarily resolve before Dragon's hunger can even be played), the incorrect ruling on skill cards (you can play multiple skill cards when facing an attack, just not at Step 4 of the Strike Sequence), the incorrect ruling on Nature's Revenge (Hidden Haven cancels attacks on your company "at this site" and not "at this wizardhaven" and so it will cancel the attack of Nature's Revenge)... Wow...
Anyway the ruling on GSBT is also misleading but ends up at the right result so whatever. Not the worst ruling.
---------
CoE Digest 55 wrote:
I) A character played with Ride Against the Enemy is not able to be
taken as a trophy. CRF under Keyword Trophy: Characters may not be taken
as trophies.
It's not just that, but the character in Ride Against the Enemy is not even attacking the company. Ride Against the Enemy merely creates "
a single-strike hazard creature with the attributes of the revealed character, except the prowess is increased by 7."