Nenya

The place to ask and debate all rules issues related to MECCG.
TomG
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 12:19 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

If Galadriel is in a haven and plays Nenya, can she benefit from the "any one corruption check made by a character not in a Shadow-hold or Dark-hold is automatically successful"?
I read through posts on Nenya and saw a statement that Galadriel cannot benefit from her own cc and that appears to be what the old MECCG Wizard's Player Guide indicates,, but wondering what the rationale for that is since the card is a short-event and presumably applies for the turn?
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Nenya states:
Galadriel only. +2 prowess, +2 body, +2 for the rest of the turn. Galadriel makes a corruption check modified by -3, by -1 if in a Haven. Any one corruption check made by a character not in a Shadow-hold or Dark-hold is automatically successful.
There are clarifications and annotations to the rules on playing cards.
An active condition must be in play or established when the action requiring it is declared. Active conditions serve as the price of an action. They are restrictions on the player invoking the action.
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. (NOTE: later, not earlier)
Annotation 24: If a card specifies that more than one action occurs when the card itself is resolved in a chain of effects, all of these actions are to be resolved in the card's chain of effects uninterrupted and in the order listed on the card. No actions may be declared to occur between these multiple actions. The actions listed on the card are considered to have been declared in the reverse order as they are printed.

Annotation 23: When a character fails a corruption check, the standard effects of this (i.e., the character being discarded or eliminated and his items being discarded) are implemented immediately and are considered synonymous with the failed check. A card causing the corruption check may modify the standard effects of a failed check (e.g. The Precious), but this timing would not be changed. Certain cards, e.g., Traitor, which do not cause a corruption check, but specify an action that results from the passive condition of a failed check, take effect as the first declared action in a chain of effects immediately following the chain of effects that contains the corruption check.
Per Annotation 24, the effect "Any one corruption check made by a character not in a Shadow-hold or Dark-hold is automatically successful" is declared before the effect "Galadriel makes a corruption check" is declared. Per Annotation 8, the target corruption check that will automatically succeed must be in play when the success-effect is declared. However, Galadriel's own corruption check is not even declared yet.

Think about this another way. The card resolves in order. Galadriel received +2 prowess, then makes a corruption check, and then one corruption check succeeds. Galadriel might already be discarded or eliminated (per Annotation 23) before the succeed-effect comes into play.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

TomG wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 3:45 pm ...since the card is a short-event and presumably applies for the turn?
By the way, this is not how short events work. Or how permanent or long events work.

Check the rules under playing events and you'll see that short/long/permanent events are all "immediately implemented" and they called short/long/permanent based on how long they stay in play. The rules specifically state that some effects list a duration. A card only has an effect that applies for the turn if it says it does. All other effects in MECCG (unlike some games) are simply implemented immediately at resolution of the card.

Long and permanent events (and some other cards) have effects that can be triggered using "passive conditions" but this is different from an effect having a duration.

There is no card or effect in MECCG that can be played and then used later when the player wishes unless the card specifically tells you how to trigger the action later (like Great Ship). In fact, the MECCG rules state that a card must have an immediate effect on the game to be a legal play, or have some way to trigger it later. There are more rules on Legal Play are in MELE.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

1.
Eventually you may declare some action that causes cc by Galadriel and target that cc by Nenya declared in response.

2.
Above assumes that "Any one corruption check made by a character not in a Shadow-hold or Dark-hold is automatically successful" works like modifier for cc from Friend or Three, New Friendship.
If so, Nenya cannot be declared if eligible cc is not declared. Target must be present at declaration and at resolution.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
TomG
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 12:19 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Thank you! Good clarification.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 8:19 pm Above assumes that "Any one corruption check made by a character not in a Shadow-hold or Dark-hold is automatically successful" works like modifier for cc from Friend or Three, New Friendship.
If so, Nenya cannot be declared if eligible cc is not declared. Target must be present at declaration and at resolution.
Nenya can be declared even if an eligible CC is not declared because the action of playing Nenya (targets Galadriel) is a separate action from the action of making a target CC automatically succeed.
The rule is:
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.
Action: Any activity in the game(card play. a corruption check caused by Lure of the Senses, etc.)
The rule in annotation 8 is applied action by action. The (a) action of playing the Nenya resource card is just one action. It targets Galadriel ("Galadriel only"). Another (b) action is the prowess bonus and other bonuses which do not require additional targeting (selecting) by the player. Another (c) action is the corruption check, which is specified to be made by Galadriel and hence no targeting is needed. Another (d) action is the action that makes a target corruption check succeed.

It is entirely possible for Galadriel to be in play, satisfying the active conditions of the action of playing Nenya without a corruption check having been declared in that same chain of effects. Nenya resolves, gives Galadriel the bonuses, and causes a corruption check. Only the CC-automatically-succeeding action fails to resolve for lack of a target.

There is nothing in the rules that requires all of the effects/actions of a card to have proper targets in order for the other effects/actions (having proper targets or not needing targets) to resolve.

If Doors of Night is in play, you can play Praise to Elbereth for the prowess bonus without tapping any characters to cancel a Nazgul event.

The Evenstar can be played if Gates is in play to modify a region-type even if no elf is in play to be targeted by the prowess bonus.
TomG
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 12:19 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Thanks again. That helps to understand the application of the rules to the card.
If I may ask one more question (more a confirmation). If I have a stored Scroll of Isildur and my opponent plays Neither so Ancient nor so Potent, am I correct that I could immediately play Marvels Told to cancel the effect of Neither so Ancient nor so Potent so that my Scroll remains stored, buy once the turn is over if I haven't played Marvels Told I can't play it in a subsequent turn to "reverse" the effects of Neither so Ancient nor so Potent such that the Scroll comes out of my hand back to being stored?
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Fri Jul 29, 2022 12:43 am
If Doors of Night is in play, you can play Praise to Elbereth for the prowess bonus without tapping any characters to cancel a Nazgul event.
This works because none of the characters chosen to tap is target. Otherwise removing any of them before resolution would fizzle Praise to Elbereth. The same for Nazgul events/attacks.
An entity is either a target of action or is not target of action. It is not that it is a target for some purposes and not for other purposes.
TomG wrote: Fri Jul 29, 2022 11:57 am If I have a stored Scroll of Isildur and my opponent plays Neither so Ancient nor so Potent, am I correct that I could immediately play Marvels Told to cancel the effect of Neither so Ancient nor so Potent so that my Scroll remains stored, buy once the turn is over if I haven't played Marvels Told I can't play it in a subsequent turn to "reverse" the effects of Neither so Ancient nor so Potent such that the Scroll comes out of my hand back to being stored?
You cannot. Because before Neither so Ancient nor so Potent resolves the card is not in play. Stored cards are not in play except for purposes of uniqueness, so when it is resolved it may not be targeted too. Some cards makes exception for this (Neither so Ancient nor so Potent does it).
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
TomG
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 12:19 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

So Konrad if I understand correctly, Marvels Told is not a defence at anytime to Neither so Ancient nor Potent. Is there any card that would be?
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

I do not know such card.
Maybe enjoy 2 MP and plus item returned to hand.
I know. It is not compelling option in last turn.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

You may try to decrease HL to the point in which declared Neither so Ancient nor Potent cannot resolve.
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 Jul 29, 2022 2:44 pmThis works because none of the characters chosen to tap is target. Otherwise removing any of them before resolution would fizzle Praise to Elbereth.
It would only fizzle that one particular action. Annotation 8 applies to a particular action. Resolution of a single action of a card can be negated while other actions of that card still resolve. If you disagree then please point to a rule supporting your position.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

TomG wrote: Fri Jul 29, 2022 11:57 am Thanks again. That helps to understand the application of the rules to the card.
If I may ask one more question (more a confirmation). If I have a stored Scroll of Isildur and my opponent plays Neither so Ancient nor so Potent, am I correct that I could immediately play Marvels Told to cancel the effect of Neither so Ancient nor so Potent so that my Scroll remains stored, buy once the turn is over if I haven't played Marvels Told I can't play it in a subsequent turn to "reverse" the effects of Neither so Ancient nor so Potent such that the Scroll comes out of my hand back to being stored?
Konrad already noted that cards that are not in play cannot be targeted. This is because of the rule:
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.
So Marvels Told can only be declared in a chain of effects after the chain of effects in which Neither So Ancient resolved (bringing it is in play). However, when Neither So Ancient resolves, all of its effects are immediately implemented. There is no way to take back the action of the stored resource being moved to your hand.

Another important concept to recognize is the difference between "discard" and "cancel." An effect that "discards" a card is resolved by moving the card from the play area to the discard pile. This goes back to the fact that a card must be in play to be targeted for discard. There are also some cards that "cancel" a card or its effects. An effect that "cancels" a card or effect is resolved by negating the targeted card or effect -- meaning that if the canceled effect is a declared effect then it cannot resolve. Or if the canceled effect was an on-going effect already in play, then the effect is no longer in play. Many cards that say "cancel" will specify that it can target a card declared in the chain of effects but some cards do not, though they still can target despite annotation 8. Technically Annotation 8 does not apply to "canceling" effects as these do not involve any "action" as no "activity" (moving cards, rolling dice) by the players needs to happen by that effect.

Konrad is right that reducing the hazard limit is the only way to negate the effect of Neither So Ancient Not Potent. Most resource effects are discard effects and discard-effects are just inherently weaker than cancel-effects as the card that will be discarded still completed the actions list on the card. Only any on-going effects or triggerable effects are canceled.

Resource effects like Tom Bombadil, Great Ship and Leaflock are extremely powerful as they "cancel" but their regional-range is limited. Praise to Elbereth cancels Nazgul effects. I Know Much About You that cancels some agent effects. Some resources can cancel return-to-origin effects or site-tapping effects, like Goldberry, Govern the Storms, Promptings of Wisdom, etc.

There's no resource that is as generally powerful as Many Sorrows Befall.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Fri Jul 29, 2022 4:26 pm
Konrad Klar wrote: Fri Jul 29, 2022 2:44 pmThis works because none of the characters chosen to tap is target. Otherwise removing any of them before resolution would fizzle Praise to Elbereth.
It would only fizzle that one particular action. Annotation 8 applies to a particular action. Resolution of a single action of a card can be negated while other actions of that card still resolve. If you disagree then please point to a rule supporting your position.
Then play Marvels Told only for cc made by sage. Even if target event is not in play at resolution then only discarding of that event would be fizzled.
Or play Token of Goodwill. Even if at resolution a company does not face any attack, diplomat still would make cc.

I am trying to support your position.
CDavis7M wrote: Fri Jul 29, 2022 4:57 pm Praise to Elbereth cancels Nazgul effects.
According to its text its allows to tap a character to cancel event or attack. Result of tapping Adunaphel cannot be canceled. Event does not need to be represented by a card. So Witch-king of Angmar as long-event is eligible too.

Small update.

Neither so Ancient Nor so Potent is not stored.
But:
CRF, Rulings by Term, Marshalling Point Pile wrote:You may not target hazards in your opponent's marshalling point pile for removal.
Player may try to remove Neither so Ancient Nor so Potent from his MP pile (for non-obvious reasons).
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 Jul 29, 2022 5:46 pmThen play Marvels Told only for cc made by sage. Even if target event is not in play at resolution then only discarding of that event would be fizzled.
Or play Token of Goodwill. Even if at resolution a company does not face any attack, diplomat still would make cc.
Technically cards can be played as long as it meets the active condition (if any) and the Legal Play of Cards requirements. Causing a dice roll (e.g., corruption check) counts.
You may not play a card which has no effect on the game. Causing a dice roll is considered to be having an effect on the game.
The action of playing Token of Goodwill has the active condition that the company be facing an attack. If the action of playing the card fails to resolve, then of course the effects of that card are never resolved. So it's incorrect to say "Even if at resolution a company does not face any attack, diplomat still would make cc."

However, for Marvels Told there is no active condition for playing the card. There is only the active condition of "if a sage taps" for the discard effect. Marvels Told can be played and cause a corruption check even if at resolution there is no longer a hazard to be discarded (its got discarded by some other effect). However, at declaration of Marvels Told there still needs to be some hazard event in play to be targeted, otherwise the sage cannot tap as an active condition to discard it, and thus there is no sage specified to be making the corruption check.
Konrad Klar wrote: Fri Jul 29, 2022 5:46 pm
CDavis7M wrote: Fri Jul 29, 2022 4:57 pm Praise to Elbereth cancels Nazgul effects.
According to its text its allows to tap a character to cancel event or attack. Result of tapping Adunaphel cannot be canceled. Event does not need to be represented by a card. So Witch-king of Angmar as long-event is eligible too.
Praise to Elbereth cancels events, yes. But tapping Adunaphel results in Adunaphel becoming a short-event, which is an event and can be canceled by Praise to Elbereth. Of course, Praise to Elbereth cannot be played later to untap a character that was tapped by Adunaphel. Praise has a "cancel" effect. Not an "untap" effect. Not sure where you were going with that.

----------

More thoughts on Wizard Spells below.
Last edited by CDavis7M on Fri Jul 29, 2022 9:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)”