Sack Over the Head and character MPs

The place to ask and debate all rules issues related to MECCG.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Sack Over the Head
Minion Permanent-event
Playable on a Troll minion whose company is attacking a hero company with at least one Dwarf or Hobbit. For each successful strike against a Dwarf or Hobbit, the character is not wounded, but rather placed “off to the side” with this card. Discard if no characters are placed with this card. Target Troll cannot move to a Darkhaven [ [-me_dha-] ]. At the start of your turn, make a roll (draw a #) for each character placed with this card. If the result is greater than 8, the character is eliminated. If target Troll is wounded or removed from active play, discard this card and the surviving Dwarves and Hobbits form a company at the Troll’s current site or new site.
I looked and I'm surprised that I haven't seen any discussion on Sack Over the Head and the character's MPs, neither here nor anywhere.

Sack Over the Head has an effect which places an opponent's characters off-to-the-side with itself. It seems thematically similar to a "prisoner" card, maybe something like the once-mentioned-but-never-implemented "capture" mechanic. But the card doesn't say prisoner and the character is not a "prisoner," and the mechanics don't exactly line up anyway (being a resource). So then the usual off-to-the-side rules apply: "Unless stated otherwise on its host card, a card placed off to the side will give its marshalling points to its owner." The opponent is still the owner even though the character is not even in their play area (and the same could be said of many situations in which cards are placed off-to-the-side anyway). This seems novel but I guess the character would be worth MP if they were not eliminated by the skipped body check, and they will not be worth MP is eliminated by Sack.

Use Your Legs is similar and has a clarification about not being prisoners (as far as negative MP), but not about off-to-the-side positive MP: "The characters placed off to the side are not considered prisoners for MP purposes."
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Good find.

I was under impression that Sack Over the Head and Use Your Legs are imprisoning cards but if there is no rescue site and (as you noticed) they are resources then they would need explicitly say that affected opponent's characters are taken prisoner to be treated as imprisoning cards. They do not say so.

Also Press-gang is not imprisoning card.

EDIT: "Press Gang" > "Press-gang"
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: Wed Feb 22, 2023 11:32 am Also Press-gang is not imprisoning card.
Right. Though Press-gang is interesting since it explicitly has a negative marshalling point effect, similar to the prisoner rules. I noticed that Imprisoned and Mocked does not have this negative MP effect.

It seems like these off-to-the-side cards offer a trade-off: play the card and possibly get a more decisive effect (towards victory) but at the risk of not getting much.
Annatar
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:23 am
Location: Spain

CDavis7M wrote: Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:59 pm But the card doesn't say prisoner and the character is not a "prisoner," [...]
Maybe you are right, but it did not seem that way to Van Norton.
MECCG Rules Digest #527 wrote:I captured Glóin today in a game with Sack Over the Head. That was fun belive me. He carried Glamdring, Orcrist and Wormsbane, since all his mates died just a few seconds earlier. He was also very Alone and Unadvised. What happens to Alone and Unadvised? Does it stay on Glóin until he is brought back into play/eliminated/the game ends OR is it discarded?

Any items, allies or events except rings are discarded when a character is taken prisoner. Events includes hazard events so Alone and Unadvised is discarded.
Underline is mine.

https://groups.google.com/g/rec.games.t ... EyW_UcOqAJ

If the character is not taken prisoner, then he must keep his items, permanent-events, etc. until he is removed from game.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Annatar wrote: Sat Feb 25, 2023 5:08 pm
CDavis7M wrote: Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:59 pm But the card doesn't say prisoner and the character is not a "prisoner," [...]
Maybe you are right, but it did not seem that way to Van Norton.
I wonder whether Van would have responded to the question differently if he had attempted to cite to the rules. I think so.

By the way, nice to see people actually reading these things. Have you read many of Van's responses? What do you think about them in general? I have lots of thoughts about them.
Annatar wrote: Sat Feb 25, 2023 5:08 pm If the character is not taken prisoner, then he must keep his items, permanent-events, etc. until he is removed from game.
This statement of yours that I quoted is sort of a contrapositive of the prisoner rules -- it is not true in general, though it might be true in some specific cases.

In the example from Van (with Gloin, items, and a corruption card), the character is neither taken prisoner nor is he removed from the game. What do you think happens to Gloin's items and corruption? I don't think Van was looking at the right rules.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

In the example Gloin is not even removed from play.
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: Tue Feb 28, 2023 9:57 am In the example Gloin is not even removed from play.
Well, under the original rules he had left play, but under the revised rules there is a distinction, though with that out-of-play becomes a bit of a misnomer. This came in MELE and I think it's because METW was not so strict as it was really only characters and creatures being eliminated, and everything focused on "elimination" rather than whether something was removed from play. And all the talk about "removing" in METW was also confusing so that was removed ( [-me_cp-] ) for MELE, but not all of the language in the rules was made consistent (mostly things in Section 2 about the decks).

Anyway, I only recently started to notice these changes and I don't think it's been mentioned before. Well, some of the card interactions were mentioned but not the rule changes. And these change sort of explains why the wording on the cards changes between MEDM and MELE.

Worth looking into if someone is trying to figure out how "remove from play" works.
Annatar
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:23 am
Location: Spain

Konrad Klar wrote: Tue Feb 28, 2023 9:57 am In the example Gloin is not even removed from play.
Oh, I really wanted to say "...until he is eliminated." I didn't mean to start a discussion about to the differences between "eliminated" and "removed from play". I apologise, I could have made myself clearer. Thank you for clarifying that point.


CDavis7M wrote: By the way, nice to see people actually reading these things. Have you read many of Van's responses? What do you think about them in general? I have lots of thoughts about them.
It is true that Van Norton made some mistakes. After all, if one carefully reads the ICE's digests from beginning to end, it can be seen that Ichabod corrected Van Norton frequently, even when Ichabod was no longer a member of the NetRep. But that does not mean that all Van Norton's answers are incorrect.

This game can be complicated sometimes.


CDavis7M wrote: What do you think happens to Gloin's items and corruption? I don't think Van was looking at the right rules.
As I have already said, in this specific case, and if Glóin is not considered that he has been taken prisoner, then he must keep his items, permanent-events, etc. while it is "off to the side" under Sack Over the Head.
MEBA Rulesbook, PLACEMENT OF CARDS ''OFF TO THE SIDE'' (Clarification), p. 4 wrote:Usually the host card will state a mechanic that affects the cards placed off to the side with it.
But Sack Over the Head does not really spell out what happens with the character's items, permanent-events, etc. Therefore, we have no reason to believe a different matter than these cards remain in play with his controller.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Annatar wrote: Sat Mar 04, 2023 5:34 pm
CDavis7M wrote: What do you think happens to Gloin's items and corruption? I don't think Van was looking at the right rules.
As I have already said, in this specific case, and if Glóin is not considered that he has been taken prisoner, then he must keep his items, permanent-events, etc. while it is "off to the side" under Sack Over the Head.
MEBA Rulesbook, PLACEMENT OF CARDS ''OFF TO THE SIDE'' (Clarification), p. 4 wrote:Usually the host card will state a mechanic that affects the cards placed off to the side with it.
But Sack Over the Head does not really spell out what happens with the character's items, permanent-events, etc. Therefore, we have no reason to believe a different matter than these cards remain in play with his controller.
Close but there are other rules. In this example Gloin will lose the items and corruption card, etc.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 4:46 pm Close but there are other rules. In this example Gloin will lose the items and corruption card, etc.
Which rules are involved?
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: Mon Mar 06, 2023 5:18 pm
CDavis7M wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 4:46 pm Close but there are other rules. In this example Gloin will lose the items and corruption card, etc.
Which rules are involved?
The rules on “off to the side” and discarding.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Is Andúril, the Flame of the West on Narsil discarded when Narsil is placed "off to the side" with Sacrifice of Form?
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

I thought someone was supposed to be providing oversight.

by the way, Sacrifice works differently.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Service Company "Do it yourself".
Thanks for answer.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Annatar
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:23 am
Location: Spain

CDavis7M wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 11:54 pm
Konrad Klar wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 5:18 pm
CDavis7M wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 4:46 pm Close but there are other rules. In this example Gloin will lose the items and corruption card, etc.
Which rules are involved?
The rules on “off to the side” and discarding.


I assume you are considering that an "off to the side" card is not in active play.
MEBA Rulesbook, p. 4, Discarding Cards (clarification) wrote: When a card leaves active play (discarded, eliminated, returned to owner’s hand, etc.), discard all cards played on it.
But, is that the correct interpretation?
CRF, Rulings by Term, Discard wrote: If a card leaves active play, including being returned to a player’s hand, it immediately ceases having an effect on play.
A card "off to the side" has effect on play: A card "off to the side" are in play for the purposes of uniqueness; unless stated otherwise on its host card, a card placed "off to the side" will give its marshalling points to its owner; a card "off to the side" can be targeted by cards that specifically affect these cards.

Your assumption may not be appropriate, it still needs official confirmation.
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)”