Council of Elrond

CRF, Tournament Rulings, Sites wrote: If you play a hazard forcing a Fallen-wizard to change site alignments, and he does
not have the other version of the site he is moving to, you must provide it for him.
After that it is his responsibility to provide sites.

1.
It does not cover the situations when such hazard is being played against not moving company. Also it does not cover the situations when such change occurs in result of discarding of such hazard (or resource ).

2.
Such hazards may only potentially force a Fallen-wizard player to change site cards. Whether they will force him to do may depend on amount of his stage points at resolution of such hazard (Heart Grown Cold) and/or on result of dice roll (Cast from the Order).

3.
FW player may make a virtue from lacks in his location deck.
Making a virtue from some lacks is not an offence in general. Lack of sages/diplomats in company makes it immune to Gnaw with Words, for instance.
But it seems against a direction of other rules that regulate the situations when player does not have an appropriate site card. If player controlling imprisoned characters does not have his copy of rescue site, he may use the opponent's copy, but the use is restricted. So there are penalties for not having an appropriate card. There is no putting a responsibility for such lacks on opponent.

I actually did try to get #3 to work, but couldn't make a practical deck out of it.

#2 is a non-issue; the rule is concerned only with what happens when the hazard is played. If the conditions are met when the card resolves, it forces the change, and that is when the rule applies.

#1 Is the problem, but I believe I would treat it the same way as for a moving company.

A player who is unable to provide their own opposite version of a site will be stuck not moving for the rest of the game, and will likely thereby lose. If neither player is able to replace their current site, it makes sense to leave it as is, but the site would be *unusable*. It would merely mark the location of the company, but the FW could not tap it or have his company enter the site, as the hazard makes it impossible to use the hero version.

Compare a minion player's inability to use a hero item and vice versa -- the fact that a card is in play does not mean that it can be used.

Bandobras Took wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 12:39 am #2 is a non-issue; the rule is concerned only with what happens when the hazard is played. If the conditions are met when the card resolves, it forces the change, and that is when the rule applies.

FW company is moving to , the FW player has 8 . Opponents plays Heart Grown Cold and FW player responds with Marvels Told on Inner Rot on his Wizard. Hazard player plays Call of Home on the sage enacting Marvels Told.

At declaration of Heart Grown Cold it is not know whether Heart Grown Cold will force the FW player to change site card to minion.
It will foce him if amount of will not be reduced, otherwise it will not force.
A playing of Heart Grown Cold includes a declaration of the card. Does not?

Bandobras Took wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 12:39 am If neither player is able to replace their current site, it makes sense to leave it as is, but the site would be *unusable*.

It makes sense to change the rules to bring the sense into work. Even if cards like Heart Grown Cold are not involved it may happen that overt company using minion version of or card will become non-overt and its player will not have hero/fallen version of the site card in location deck.

A card is not considered played until it successfully resolves. Until then, it does not force anything. The rule describes what to do upon successful resolution of the card. Any changes caused by other actions resolving afterward are the responsibility of the FW player, as described.