Open To The Summons In The Pool

[Mordakai]

Well, the previous phrase on the card is

This card may be played with a starting company in lieu of a minor object.

That would limit the number of copies in the pool to 2. If you add it to:

reveal it when starting companies are determined as if it were a character

then you have:
a- 2 copies max in the pool, as it must be treated as a minor object
b- revealed as a character, not as a permanent-event

That should solve the problem, I think.

PS: I'm not a fan of little corners of the wording, but "This card may be played with a starting company in lieu of a minor object". That "with" instead of "on" may also guive some guidance (because the first phrase on the card, the one you should abide to if you want to play it during the game, not at the draft, is "playable on a company").

[Konrad Klar]

I think that I do not get a point of:

PS: I'm not a fan of little corners of the wording, but "This card may be played with a starting company in lieu of a minor object". That "with" instead of "on" may also guive some guidance (because the first phrase on the card, the one you should abide to if you want to play it during the game, not at the draft, is "playable on a company").

I think that an existence of cards like Open To The Summons, Wizard's Myrmidon, Hidden Haven makes non-draft starting methods problematic.
There is a chance/risk that after discarding/setting aside duplicate cards, Open To The Summons, Wizard's Myrmidon (that require a target) will remain in play hanging on air. Or that company containing both Orcs and Elves will be at the same non-haven site.

Exclude what is impossible (e.g. draft is must, revealed cards are played if not set aside/discarded) and you will end with most incredible truth.

[Mordakai]

Yes, it's problematic and can happen, I agree. But in the specific case of Open to the Summons, if the character you intended to play bounces, you can paly another agent, or just leave the card in the starting company and try to use it during the game. This specific card will not cause you "legality problems".

My point in "with <> on" was trying to see if there is a difference there. You play some cards on characters, other cards, companies... But you play other cards with companies (They Ride Together, Strider's ability). Mithril is an interesting one, as you play it with a sage or dwarf... . Lol, maybe all this language stuff is just not watertight enough...

[Konrad Klar]

This specific card will not cause you "legality problems".

This specific card will cause a legality problem in conjunction with specific circumstances.
Specific circumstances are: all revealed characters are set aside.
For other (in practice, stage resource) cards there are variety of specific circumstances that can cause a legality problem.

[Konrad Klar]

I agree that "you play it with a sage or dwarf." is scandalous. "you play it under control of a sage or dwarf" would be acceptable.

[Konrad Klar]

Or "sage or dwarf may play it".
There is a difference.

[Konrad Klar]

PS: I'm not a fan of little corners of the wording, but "This card may be played with a starting company in lieu of a minor object". That "with" instead of "on" may also guive some guidance (because the first phrase on the card, the one you should abide to if you want to play it during the game, not at the draft, is "playable on a company").

Little corners revisited.
Are you suggesting that during draft Open To The Summons is not played on company?
Could you say the same about:

Against the Shadow: Orders from Lugbúrz
Rarity: Uncommon, Precise: U3

Resource: Permanent-event

Playable on a company. May be played with a starting company in lieu of a minor item. This company may contain a Troll leader in addition to another leader. +1 to all corruption checks by followers of Troll leaders in this company. Discard if Ren is your Ringwraith or when a leader leaves the company. Cannot be duplicated on a given company. "'A great cave-troll, I think, or more than one.'"-LotRII

?

[Mordakai]

Yes, I'm suggesting that, because of the "revealed as a character" thing.

I think Orders from Lugbúrz is different, as it does not say that, it says that must be played with the company in lieu of a minor item, so there is an actual need of some kind of company. You could not play a minor item if there are nocharacters either.

This specific card will cause a legality problem in conjunction with specific circumstances.
Specific circumstances are: all revealed characters are set aside.

Maybe. Or maybe you play it as a character, and then, if after the draft there are no characters in your starting company (because of bouncing or whatever) then the game starts and Open to the Summons just discards because it has nothing to tether it to the table... But I'm just guessing here.

[Konrad Klar]

You could not play a minor item if there are nocharacters either.

Are you suggesting that Orders from Lugbúrz played In lieu of minor item is played as item
and Open To The Summons played In lieu of minor item is played as character (because is "reveal it when starting companies are determined as if it were a character." )?

[Konrad Klar]

This specific card will cause a legality problem in conjunction with specific circumstances.
Specific circumstances are: all revealed characters are set aside.

Maybe. Or maybe you play it as a character, and then, if after the draft there are no characters in your starting company (because of bouncing or whatever) then the game starts and Open to the Summons just discards because it has nothing to tether it to the table... But I'm just guessing here.

Actual part of the legality problem is that card "playable on X" appeared in play when there was no X.
Actually there is no problem what to do with Open To The Summons (or with Palm to Palm) when there is no (longer) its target company.

I was curious whether "may be played with a starting company" changes (negates) playability condition "Playable on company" during startup.

[Mordakai]

I was curious whether "may be played with a starting company" changes (negates) playability condition "Playable on company" during startup.

Yeah, that was my train of thought. Cards that work in a different way when revealed on guard (Foolish Words, Near to Hear a Whisper and ohters) do that precisely because they have an specific text that supersedes the rules regarding revealing cards on guard. I was thinking that cards that have specific mechanics to be revealed during the draft probably worked the same way.

EDIT: Fixing wording error

[Konrad Klar]

Good that I understand your point, even if I disagree with it.

Some theoretically possible interpretations lead to practical problems.

Cards hanging on air after draft due to lack of target.
Things to expect if This card may be played with a starting company in lieu of a minor item. When played as such, reveal it when starting companies are determined as if it were a character would supersede You may not start such a card if the conditions required to play the card do not exist .

Four FW players, each starting with Hidden Haven, one of them (who has to decide which?) unable to start at Wizardhaven but his company has Orc and Elf.
May happen if non-draft method is used (practically implies that You may not start such a card if the conditions required to play the card do not exist is not respected).

Theoretically possible interpretation:
For the same reason for which FW player may not reveal/play 6 mind character if there is no Thrall of the Voice already revealed/played, Open To The Summons may not be revealed/played if there is no company.

[Mordakai]

Theoretically possible interpretation:
For the same reason for which FW player may not reveal/play 6 mind character if there is no Thrall of the Voice already revealed/played, Open To The Summons may not be revealed/played if there is no company.

But 6 minders are not allowed to go into the draft unless Thrall of the Voice is already on the table (there is a hard restriction in the rules, you cannot play 6-minders, only Thrall can bypass that). If Open to the Summons "could be on the table" without a company (due to superseding his playability condition with the "reveal as character" thingie), the situation would not be the same. You would have to discard it if, at the end of the draft, you could not manage to have any character on the table (the same would happen if, during the game, you wipe out a company with Open to the Summons on it, I suppose).

I think I've reached my reasoning thread here, no ammo left