Hoard status of under-deeps sites (and hero Framsburg)

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

CRF wrote:Dragon Rules, Hoards: Change "Each site with a Dragon automatic-attack (i.e., each
Dragon's Lair) contains a hoard" to "Each site which had a Dragon automatic-attack
at the beginning of the turn contains a hoard."
Texts of some sites allow to play as a an automatic-attack a creature normally keyed to [-me_rl-] .

What if the creature is Cave-Drake?
Is then the site considered as a site which had a Dragon automatic-attack at the beginning of the turn?

I see that type of the AA is not defined until site-phase. However some sites (like Ovir Hollow) have printed "Dragon" as type of their AA, but the sites may appear in play during M/H phase (so not at beginning of the turn). And this (rather) does not make them not containing a hoard.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Site attributes exist even when not in play. There is no way Cave-drake as an additional automatic-attack would make the site contain a hoard under the CRF errata.
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Cave-Drake is not an additional automatic-attack.
"Opponent may play as an automatic-attack one non-unique hazard creature from his hand normally keyed to [-me_rl-]" is normal AA that appears as Cave-Drake at some moment.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

At the beginning of the turn, none of the automatic-attacks that the site had were of dragon type.

You are asking, "Of the automatic-attacks that the site had that were of dragon type at some unspecified point in time, did it have any at the start of the turn?"

I don't know if I know the name of a linguistic rule to point to here. The second option would essentially require splitting the "had" checking into two independent pieces, which seems unnecessarily complicated and vague about the dragon type timing, so (to me) not the likely intention.
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

:cry:
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Realm of fiction.

Company moving from Lorien to Rivendell using starter movement does not move through Anaduin Vales, High Pass.
Company moving from Lorien to Rivendell using region movement does move through Anaduin Vales, High Pass.
In both cases the company is moving through four regions. The company does not necessarily have the same region symbols in its site path in both cases.
Theo wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 4:16 pm You are asking, "Of the automatic-attacks that the site had that were of dragon type at some unspecified point in time, did it have any at the start of the turn?"
I am asking "If one of the normal automatic-attacks that the site had were the type of dragon at some point of time in current turn, is the site considered dragon AA that the site had at beginning of the turn?"

The normal AA is "Opponent may play as an automatic-attack one non-unique hazard creature from his hand normally keyed to [-me_rl-]", but during site phase company facing it faces Dragon AA. Player may use the first effect of Not at Home against the AA. He could not use it against the AA if the AA would be in form "Opponent may play as an automatic-attack one non-unique hazard creature from his hand normally keyed to [-me_rl-]".

In the realm of fiction some answers depends on "who asks?" or "what checks?".
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

I think I'm failing to understand what your reply is about.

A company moving from Lorien to Rivendell need not move through four regions, or any regions.

The CRF ruling doesn't care about "normal."

The wording on Under-deeps/Framsberg make the creature played as an automatic-attack, which Not at Home can cancel. Not at Home cannot cancel any automatic-attack before it is being faced.
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Theo wrote: Sun May 29, 2022 3:20 am The wording on Under-deeps/Framsberg make the creature played as an automatic-attack, which Not at Home can cancel.
I disagree. Not at Home can cancel Dragon, Drake, Troll AA. It cannot cancel "Opponent may play as an automatic-attack one non-unique hazard creature from his hand normally keyed to [-me_rl-]".

My point is that "Opponent may play as an automatic-attack one non-unique hazard creature from his hand normally keyed to [-me_rl-]", existed like normal AA of Ovir Hollow.
If Ovir Hollow appears in play in M/H phase but its AA is considered as existing at beginning of turn, then the same may be said about The Under-Leas and their AAs.

Question is whether the CRF rule takes into account that "Opponent may play as an automatic-attack one non-unique hazard creature from his hand normally keyed to [-me_rl-]" appeared at some moment as Dragon AA, or whether it does not take it into account.

The CRF rule does not check whether Dragon AA still exist after beginning of turn. If Bairanax at Home becomes defeated, then both normal AA and additional Dragon AA cease to exist. But still Ovir Hollow contains hoard until end of turn.

P.S.
Sorry for bothering with Framsburg. The site contains hoard anyway (hypothetical effect could change it anyway).
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Konrad Klar wrote: Sun May 29, 2022 8:27 am
Theo wrote: Sun May 29, 2022 3:20 am The wording on Under-deeps/Framsberg make the creature played as an automatic-attack, which Not at Home can cancel.
I disagree. Not at Home can cancel Dragon, Drake, Troll AA. It cannot cancel "Opponent may play as an automatic-attack one non-unique hazard creature from his hand normally keyed to [-me_rl-]".
My "which" was meant to reference the creature played as an automatic-attack, not the "Opponent may play as an automatic-attack one non-unique hazard creature from his hand normally keyed to [-me_rl-]."

I also now note that the creature played as an automatic-attack is at the site but not "had" by the site, so additionally would not be eligible for hoard status checking. It would be interesting to research whether any ICE netreps blurred that boundary.
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Theo wrote: Mon May 30, 2022 5:45 am I also now note that the creature played as an automatic-attack is at the site but not "had" by the site, so additionally would not be eligible for hoard status checking.
CRF wrote:Creatures revealed as automatic-attacks do not count as creatures.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Yes... why reference? Not at Home cancels automatic-attacks. Even if the creature was still a creature, it still wouldn't be keyed to the site.

To clarify my previous point, the "creature played as an automatic-attack" makes an automatic-attack at the site (which must be faced to play cards), but that the automatic-attack so made is not one that the site card "had" at the beginning of the turn. It would be a separate automatic-attack made by the site's second automatic-attack.

As fallout, this suggests that if the company had to face the automatic-attacks again (i.e. from Troll-purse), they might then see (1) the first automatic-attack, (2) the automatic-attack of the creature played by the site card's second automatic-attack when entering the site, (3) an automatic-attack of another creature played by the site card's second automatic-attack when having to re-face the automatic-attacks. I don't remember previously considering how (2) and (3) are distinct.
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

The Under-Leas "had" second AA like Ovir Hollow "had" Dragon AA.

About "fallout".
Troll-Purse does not say about duplicate of AAs (like Incite Minions, The Moon Is Dead say).
AAs must be faced again.
I would say that another creature may be played.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Konrad Klar wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 5:21 am About "fallout".
Troll-Purse does not say about duplicate of AAs (like Incite Minions, The Moon Is Dead say).
AAs must be faced again.
I would say that another creature may be played.
Maybe this is actually rooted in how long the automatic-attack created by the play of the creature persists. For my previous post I was assuming it persisted for the turn, but I see now that doesn't make any sense since the creature is discarded on completion of the attack. So yes, just another creature may be played.
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
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Some another fiction (for comparison).

Bill Ferny has two home sites - Bree, Cameth Brin.
He is in play face down. He did not move yet, so there is no site card under his card.
During site phase he is revealed at Bree (he could be revealed at Cameth Brin as well).
Could it be said that Bill Ferny was not at Bree before site phase?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)”