Special Orc & Troll Rules for Fallen Wizards: hero permanent-events

The place to ask and debate all rules issues related to MECCG.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 7:58 pm You are making up a discrepancy between "your company there: bears an item" and "discard the item."
Rather I see a difference.
Some action may require first or may require second.
If main effect of the action is "discard the item" then condition may not be "discard the item".

Of course, if a condition is "discard an/the item" then an/the item must be in specified location just before the condition will be fulfilled.
If a condition is "tap some card", them the card must be in untapped state just before the condition will be fulfilled.

As you probably know a playing of an item at a site requires by default an untapped site. Tapping the site is not condition. The site taps in result of successful playing of the item.

Active conditions are not named "active" because they necessarily involve some activity. Some of them involve, some not. They are named "active" because they are conditions of player's activity.
A target of an action must be in play. A target is an active condition. But being in play (or just being) is not activity.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 9:57 pm Rather I see a difference.
But there is no basis for this difference in the rules and it causes the game to not work. So this understanding must be wrong.
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 9:57 pm If main effect of the action is "discard the item" then condition may not be "discard the item".
"Discard the item" is clearly not the main effect of Tower Raided. That would be bogus. There must be a reading comprehension issue here.
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 9:57 pm As you probably know a playing of an item at a site requires by default an untapped site. Tapping the site is not condition. The site taps in result of successful playing of the item.
What is the point in stating this? We are discussing Active Conditions. Playing an item at a site has nothing to do with active conditions. So I wonder why you brought it up.
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 9:57 pm Active conditions are not named "active" because they necessarily involve some activity. Some of them involve, some not. They are named "active" because they are conditions of player's activity.
Active conditions DO necessarily involve some activity, even if the active condition itself does not require activity. There must be an action (activity in the game) for there to even be an active condition to speak of. So all active conditions necessarily involve some activity.
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 9:57 pm A target of an action must be in play. A target is an active condition. But being in play (or just being) is not activity.
There's no point in saying what you just said. You just made a bunch of statements with no conclusion to follow them up.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 10:29 pm What is the point in stating this? We are discussing Active Conditions. Playing an item at a site has nothing to do with active conditions. So I wonder why you brought it up.
I was trying to put attention on other situation where a condition is an untapped card and a tapping the card is effect.
May help to accept the idea that "tap" may be either active condition condition or main effect.

I see not point in stating in text of a card that a company must bear an item if active condition is discarding the item.

One of active conditions of Tower Raided is "discards for no effect a Stolen Knowledge card it [company] controls".
I would see no point of stating additionally in text of the card that a company must control a Stolen Knowledge card.
If the active condition would be "discards for no effect a Stolen Knowledge card from hand", there would not be a point to state in text of the card that the Stolen Knowledge card must be in hand.
CDavis7M wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 10:29 pm Active conditions DO necessarily involve some activity, even if the active condition itself does not require activity.
Yes. Well said.
I had in mind the active conditions themselves.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Konrad Klar wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:40 am May help to accept the idea that "tap" may be either active condition condition or main effect.
I can tell that you completely misunderstand what a "main effect" of a card is because tapping is NEVER a "main effect" of a resource card. I wonder if you are considering "main effect" to simply mean "card effect," as in, the effects that are declared and resolved as a card is declared and resolved. But this is not the case.

The term "main effect" comes from Annotation 5 and 6. If you read them in context, and understand the game's design, then it becomes clear what a "main effect" is.
Active and Passive Conditions
There are two types of conditions for actions in METW: active and passive.

An active condition must be in play or established when the action requiring it is declared. Typical active conditions are tapping a card and discarding a card. For example, Magic Ring of Stealth can cancel a strike against its bearer if two particular active conditions are met: the bearer must be a scout and Magic Ring of Stealth must tap. These are called active conditions because a player actively decides to invoke the action they satisfy. Active conditions serve as the price of an action. They are restrictions to the player invoking the action. In the case of Magic Ring of Stealth, the player cancelling the strike must have provided a scout and he must tap the ring, which renders the ring unable to be used again until his next turn.

Annotation 5
If an action requires an entity to tap as a condition for the action's main effect, that entity must be untapped when the action is declared; else, the action may not be declared. Tap the entity at this point; this is considered synonymous with the action's declaration, i.e., it is not a separate action. When it comes time to resolve the action in its chain of effects, that entity must still be in play and tapped or the action is cancelled.

Annotation 6
If an action requires an entity to be discarded as a condition for the action's main effect, that entity must be discarded when the action is declared; this is considered synonymous with the action's declaration, i.e., it is not a separate action.

Annotation 7
If any other active condition for an action does not exist when the action is resolved, the action has no effect; if the action were playing a card from your hand, it is discarded.

Annotation 8
An action that requires a target is considered to have the active condition that the target be in play when the action is declared and when it is resolved. An action may not be declared if its target is not in play. However, dice-rolling actions may always be targeted by other actions declared later in the same chain of effects
MECCG does not have currency or tokens or values to use for playing cards like other games. There is no mana, resource, force, energy or anything that is used to pay for playing cards. The cards do not have an explicit cost value. Instead, the "cost" of the card is a required game state and/or a change to that game state. The term "active condition" is the MECCG term for "cost." Having a particular type of card in play, discarding a particular type of card, tapping a particular type of card. These are all restrictions on the player -- they are costs to be paid. And discarding and tapping are restrictions on further actions since cards can only be untapped or retrieved through limited means, often requiring other cards, which is a restriction.

So when describing the "costs" that are paid to play the card, the term "main effect" can only refer to the desired effects that the player is paying for. A main effect of a resource card would never be tapping or discarding because those are restrictions on the player, not advantageous effects that the player would pay for. It's possible that a hazard could have a main effect of tapping or discarding an opponent's card because that is the desired effect of playing a hazard. And while there are certain scenarios where a player would like to have their card tapped or discarded, that does not make it a "main effect."

The only "main effects" of the action of playing Tower Raided are receiving 6MP, making the site a Ruins & Lairs, and preventing the opponent from playing factions at their version of the site. Every other effect of the card is a restriction on the player, and thus not a "main effect."

---

It's also important to understand that the rules on active conditions are inherently timing rules. The entire point is to set the game timing of the costs so that the costs MUST be paid. The costs must be paid. That's why they are paid upfront at declaration without following the game timing using chains of effects. So when a card effect sets a different game timing for an action that is a restriction on the player, it's not actually an active condition because the timing is explicit.

"By the end of the site phase, tap a scout in the company" is not an active condition because the timing explicitly makes it not an active condition. But this is still not a "main effect" as this term is used in the rules on active conditions because this is still a "cost" (and thus not a main effect) even if this cost has different timing compared to active conditions.

Most (other) experienced board and card game players just inherently recognize the cost of cards and don't even need to rely on the active condition rules when playing cards in the site phase. The only questions that arise concern timing when an opponent responds during the M/H phase.

It's unfortunate that the ICE Netreps never bothered to explain this better and even more unfortunate that the CoE Netreps didn't understand active conditions.

----------
Konrad Klar wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:40 am I see not point in stating in text of a card that a company must bear an item if active condition is discarding the item.
Because such text requires the item that must be discarded to be borne by the company... The card could be worded differently but there is only 1 understanding that makes sense.

----------
Konrad Klar wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:40 am One of active conditions of Tower Raided is "discards for no effect a Stolen Knowledge card it [company] controls".
I would see no point of stating additionally in text of the card that a company must control a Stolen Knowledge card.
If the active condition would be "discards for no effect a Stolen Knowledge card from hand", there would not be a point to state in text of the card that the Stolen Knowledge card must be in hand.
You identified a difference in the wording between discarding the item and discarding the stolen knowledge -- but what is your point? There is no difference in how the discarding of these 2 cards work. They are both active conditions.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 6:46 pm I can tell that you completely misunderstand what a "main effect" of a card is because tapping is NEVER a "main effect" of a resource card.
It looked from beginning that you believe so. But it is better to hear it directly from you.
CDavis7M wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 6:46 pm I wonder if you are considering "main effect" to simply mean "card effect," as in, the effects that are declared and resolved as a card is declared and resolved.
If "main effect" would mean simply "card effect" then I wonder why it would be named "main".
CDavis7M wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 6:46 pm Annotation 7
If any other active condition for an action does not exist when the action is resolved, the action has no effect; if the action were playing a card from your hand, it is discarded.

Annotation 8
An action that requires a target is considered to have the active condition that the target be in play when the action is declared and when it is resolved. An action may not be declared if its target is not in play. However, dice-rolling actions may always be targeted by other actions declared later in the same chain of effects
Costs paid by an existence.
CDavis7M wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 6:46 pm So when describing the "costs" that are paid to play the card, the term "main effect" can only refer to the desired effects that the player is paying for.
Rules are desire-agnostic.
Player may desire both discarding an event and cc-2, when he is playing Marvels Told. Or only first, or only second effect, or none (but still he may desire to have that sage tapped).
For you and for your playgroup "is it desired?" may be criterion of estimating whether something in text of a card belongs to "main effects" or to the "active conditions" of the card.
CDavis7M wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 6:46 pm Because such text requires the item that must be discarded to be borne by the company... The card could be worded differently but there is only 1 understanding that makes sense.
CDavis7M wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 6:46 pm You identified a difference in the wording between discarding the item and discarding the stolen knowledge -- but what is your point? There is no difference in how the discarding of these 2 cards work. They are both active conditions.
The point is that your understanding of Active Conditions is immune to everything.
This is not accusation. Perfect understanding should be bulletproof.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Konrad Klar wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 10:15 pm
CDavis7M wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 6:46 pm So when describing the "costs" that are paid to play the card, the term "main effect" can only refer to the desired effects that the player is paying for.
Rules are desire-agnostic.
Player may desire both discarding an event and cc-2, when he is playing Marvels Told. Or only first, or only second effect, or none (but still he may desire to have that sage tapped).
For you and for your playgroup "is it desired?" may be criterion of estimating whether something in text of a card belongs to "main effects" or to the "active conditions" of the card.
The "main effect" being desired by the player is the general case. The Designer sets the cost based on what they thought the value of the "main effect" would be to the player. It doesn't matter what the player actually desires, but the "main effect" is still the desired effect from the Designer's perspective. So you are wrong when you say:
Konrad Klar" wrote: "tap" may be either active condition condition or main effect.
Tapping a card, thereby restricting the player from taking further actions with that card, could never a "main effect" of a resource action. The player doesn't pay for the privilege of incurring more costs.
Konrad Klar wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 10:15 pm The point is that your understanding of Active Conditions is immune to everything.
This is not accusation. Perfect understanding should be bulletproof.
It's just reading comprehension.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 10:27 pm Tapping a card, thereby restricting the player from taking further actions with that card, could never a "main effect" of a resource action. The player doesn't pay for the privilege of incurring more costs.
Sometimes player must tap a sage at declaration and have him tapped to the resolution for luxury of facing cc-2 (in addition to discarding an event, by Marvels Told).
Sometimes he must have some card untapped both at declaration and at resolution of other card. Cost is a caring about untapped state. The card may be tapped anyway by action of "main effect" of the other card.

Rescue Prisoners requires a tapped site. Does it mean that you may tap an untapped site to fulfil the condition?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

The rules do not allow a player to take actions at whim. This goes back to the Hi Ho Cherry-o principle again -- the children know not to steal cherries from another child's bucket. The rules do not have to prevent stealing. It is sufficient for the rules to not allow it. This is how games are designed.

I already explained the answers to your other questions above.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

CDavis7M wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 10:27 pm The "main effect" being desired by the player is the general case. The Designer sets the cost based on what they thought the value of the "main effect" would be to the player. It doesn't matter what the player actually desires, but the "main effect" is still the desired effect from the Designer's perspective.
How are you ruling out that the set of all actions of a card that aren't conditions to other actions is the "main effect" of playing the card? That is what I would believe, and what I would believe the Designers intended, and what I would believe the Designers intended all players to believe.
CDavis7M wrote: Wed Feb 17, 2021 10:29 pm Neither Tower Raided nor its effects target an item. The discarding of the item (worth 2MP) is an active condition because of the rule "if an action requires an entity to be discarded as a condition for the action's main effect, that entity must be discarded when the action is declared." Only actions can have targets. The target is the entity that the action is played out through. Since discarding an item as an active condition is not an action, then it does not have a "target." The discarding of the item in Tower Raided does not follow any of the rules on "targeting."
ICE Rules Digest 86 wrote: The White Tree discards the sapling, so it targets, and can't be played that way. Same with Gollum's
Fate. (CRF, Term, Target)
Since discarding the item on Tower Raided is an effect that is NOT a condition for any other effect, it is NOT an active condition of playing the card, and it DOES target the item.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Theo wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:01 am
CDavis7M wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 10:27 pm The "main effect" being desired by the player is the general case. The Designer sets the cost based on what they thought the value of the "main effect" would be to the player. It doesn't matter what the player actually desires, but the "main effect" is still the desired effect from the Designer's perspective.
How are you ruling out that the set of all actions of a card that aren't conditions to other actions is the "main effect" of playing the card? That is what I would believe, and what I would believe the Designers intended, and what I would believe the Designers intended all players to believe.
I believe that the Designers intended for the players to... recognize the difference between a card "effect" in general and a "main effect" of a card paid for by the cost, especially since costs are being discussed.

----------
Theo wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:01 am
CDavis7M wrote: Wed Feb 17, 2021 10:29 pm Neither Tower Raided nor its effects target an item. The discarding of the item (worth 2MP) is an active condition because of the rule "if an action requires an entity to be discarded as a condition for the action's main effect, that entity must be discarded when the action is declared." Only actions can have targets. The target is the entity that the action is played out through. Since discarding an item as an active condition is not an action, then it does not have a "target." The discarding of the item in Tower Raided does not follow any of the rules on "targeting."
ICE Rules Digest 86 wrote: The White Tree discards the sapling, so it targets, and can't be played that way. Same with Gollum's
Fate. (CRF, Term, Target)
Since discarding the item on Tower Raided is an effect that is NOT a condition for any other effect, it is NOT an active condition of playing the card.
You just made a conclusion that discarding the item is not a condition for any effect without provided any reasoning.

Instead, recognize that discarding the item would restrict the player from taking the action of playing a second copy of Tower Raided should the first copy fail. This is what an active condition is -- a restriction on the player taking actions. Therefore, discarding the item IS a condition for the action of playing the Tower Raided card. The active conditions for playing a card are not always listed in the first line after the keywords. Many cards have active conditions listed along with the other card effects because The Wizards was designed before the Active Conditions rules and later cards often used similar formatting. The placement of discarding or tapping does not determine whether it's an active condition or not. Only specific non-active-condition timing makes such effects not be active conditions.

----------
Theo wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:01 am
ICE Rules Digest 86 wrote: The White Tree discards the sapling, so it targets, and can't be played that way. Same with Gollum's
Fate. (CRF, Term, Target)
Since discarding the item on Tower Raided ... and it DOES target the item.
My statements on "targeting" are correct according to the rulesbook and are consistent with the Designer's primary ruling on active conditions, and they avoid the confusion of the CRF's misleading summary. The ruling you quoted from the CRF author relies on the misleading summary. And also, it doesn't really support your position

Sure, it's fine to say that the discarding of the item in Tower Raided "targets" the item because a discarding action normally "targets" the affected card. But what is your point? My point was that since active conditions are defined to not be actions and since "targets" are targets of actions then active conditions do not follow the rules on "targeting" even if active conditions such as tapping and discarding would normally target the card being affected. Since the discarding of the Sapling for White Tree and Gollum's Fate do not follow the rules on Targeting per Annotation 8, I would not use that word, even if it doesn't really matter.

The ICE Ruling you mentioned goes back to the Gollum's Fate, Stone of Erech, and Mallorn questions. This CRF entry is just a summary of the primary ruling and it's a bit misleading because targets are also active conditions. You can see this confusion here on CoE Forums, in the URD, and even back on MECCG.net. But people that read the primary ruling from the Designers have avoided this confusion. They understand that it's not any "targeting" that matters (after all, active conditions do not follow targeting rules), it's the game state that matters. And it's possible that there could be some non-targeting active condition.

I'll let you discover the history on your own.
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)”