CoE Rulings Digest #119 Deabte

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

zarathustra wrote:The inference is invalid. A careful review of the MELE rules shows that these rules never explicitly say how to defeat a non-creature attack – whether it is detainment or non-detainment. Nevertheless, the rules presuppose (e.g., when they talk about defeating dragon factions) that a non-creature attack may be defeated. We therefore extend the rule for defeating attacks by non-detainment creatures to all attacks. A non-detainment attack is defeated if and only if all of its strikes directed against a company are defeated.
How about this:
Lidless Eye,Using MELE with METW, Combat, Marshalling Points wrote:A Wizard player does not receive marshalling points for defeating a creature with an "*" next to its marshalling points or for defeating a detainment attack.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
zarathustra
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 671
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 9:26 pm

That quotation is irrelevant. It doesn't specify how to defeat a non-creature attack; it merely clarifies one of the results of defeating such an attack.
http://www.alfanos.org
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Ach yes. Now I understand:
Detainment attacks from creatures - cannot be defeated.
Other attacks - can be defeated.

Right?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
zarathustra
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 671
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 9:26 pm

The issue is this: the MELE rules leave a gap. They only explicitly determine how to defeat non-detainment creatures.
DEFEATING AN ATTACK
An attack by a hazard creature is defeated if it is not a detainment attack and all of its strikes directed against (i.e., assigned to) a company are defeated.
That's good and all, but how is an attack by a anything other than a hazard creature defeated? The MELE rules simply do not say. Now, I suppose you could interpret this to mean that only hazard creature attacks can be defeated, but that would be more than a little silly. The MELE rules themselves presuppose at several points that non-creature attacks can be defeated. The question is: how? I've got a very intuitive and simple answer: the same way creature attacks are defeated. As I put it in the digest, "A non-detainment attack is defeated if and only if all of its strikes directed against a company are defeated." Detainment attacks, by contrast, cannot be defeated.
http://www.alfanos.org
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

So we have rule that actually says that Wizard player cannot receive marshalling points for something that is (for other reasons) not possible at all.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
zarathustra
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 671
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 9:26 pm

If you want to say that only non-detainment hazard creature attacks can be defeated, be my guest. I don't think you'll find too many opponents who want to play with you, though.

Just to exhibit once more the unclarity of ICE's discussion of defeating an attack, consider the following quotation from the METW (not MELE) booklet, which was written prior to detainment rules:
METW, Defeating an Attack wrote:An attack by a hazard creature is defeated if all of its strikes directed against (i.e., assigned to) a company are defeated. If a defeated attack is a hazard creature, the card is placed in the defender’s marshalling point pile.
After reading this, I'm inclined to ask, "What if a defeated attack is something other than a hazard creature??" There is clearly something wrong here. Attacks other than creature attacks can be defeated. ICE did not provide an explicit definition of how to do so. Our task is therefore to say how to do so, which is what I've done in this digest.
http://www.alfanos.org
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

While I would have preferred a broader definition, the need for such a definition is evident and clearly within the domain of the NetRep team IMO.

Now I've got to go make sure I have no decks based on defeating detainment AAs. :)
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

zarathustra wrote:If you want to say that only non-detainment hazard creature attacks can be defeated, be my guest. I don't think you'll find too many opponents who want to play with you, though.
I could not feel more faced by community than at this moment. :wink:
No. I want to say that only detainment attacks from hazard creature cannot be defeated.

Lidless Eye, Using MELE with METW, Combat, Marshalling Points suggest possiblity of defeating detainment attack.
And there are situations, where defeating of detainment attack would be potentially awarded by MP (Come At Need).


If a defeated attack is a hazard creature, the card is placed in the defender’s marshalling point pile.

It just does not preclude of possibility defeating of other attacks.
zarathustra wrote:"What if a defeated attack is something other than a hazard creature??
If you are searching for other effects of deteating attacks then, for instance:
CRF, Rulings by Term, Dragons wrote:If a manifestation of a unique Dragon is defeated, then the automatic- attack at the
associated site is removed, and that site therefore loses its hoard status.
If you defeat the attack from a Dragon manifestation, you get kill marshalling points
from the manifestation as if you had defeated a creature.
Balrog, Clarifications, Defeating a Permanent-event wrote:Certain hazard permanent-events indicate that they give “kill” marshalling points
(e.g., Dragon “At Hunt” and “At Home” cards, the “Spawn” hazards from ME: The
Balrog, etc.). Each of these cards has an attack associated with it. If such an attack is
defeated, treat the associated card as a defeated creature
.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

It's definitely possible to defeat non-creature attacks, just read the text on Balrog of Moria.

On a second note regarding this card, I presume a minion player also would receive the 5 marshalling points for defeating the Balrog of Moria?
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Jambo wrote:On a second note regarding this card, I presume a minion player also would receive the 5 marshalling points for defeating the Balrog of Moria?
Lidless Eye, Standard Rules, Combat, Marshalling Points wrote:You only receive kill marshalling points for defeating a creature with an "*" next to its marshalling points. You may use the creature's card as a trophy card (see below) or you may place the card in your marshalling point pile.

Note: A Wizard player does not receive marshalling points for defeating such a creature with an "*" next to its marshalling points.

If you defeat a creature that does not have an "*" next to its marshalling points, you may use the creature's card as a trophy card (see below) or you may place the card in your out-of-play pile. You do not receive marshalling points for defeating it.

Note: You do not receive marshalling points if the creature you defeat is one of your own cards.
Balrog, Clarifications, Defeating a Permanent-event wrote:If such an attack is defeated, treat the associated card as a defeated creature
So no.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Rulings Digest #119 wrote:4) The question has arisen whether a player can use initiate actions that affect the entire attack after strikes have been assigned.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Both the resource player and the hazard player may take actions during the strike sequence that directly affect the prowess of the strike -- even if such actions also have other effects, except those otherwise forbidden (e.g. changing the number of strikes, altering strike assignment).
Does this mean I could play Full of Froth and Rage during a character's strike sequence? (i.e. at a stage where my opponent could no longer cancel the attack) :?:
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

zarathustra wrote: ↑Mon Mar 24, 2008 10:01 pm 8) Ben pointed out that the text of the minion site Carn Dum specifies "Special: Unless this site is a character's home site, a non-Orc, non-Troll character may not be brought into play at this site." He asked: "Do abilities (e.g. Witch-King, Khamul, They Ride Together, Black Horse, Uvatha) which allow the play of RW followers override Carn Dum, or is my most recent Bag End mission deck completely stuffed?"

These abilities do override Carn Dum, but since the Bag End mission is so slow, your deck is probably stuffed anyway.
A Ringwraith follower cannot be played at Carn Dum. These abilities do not override the explicit restrictions on Carn Dum. The restriction applies to all ways of playing characters.
Carn Dum wrote:Unless this site is a character's home site, a non-Orc, non-Troll character may not be brought into play at this site
This is a restriction. It can only be overcome by card text specifically referencing the restriction. This is how all of the cards and rulings work. None of the listed effects specifically override Carn Dum's restriction. Instead, they modify how characters are played according to the normal allowances for playing a character.

Witch-king: "You may bring these followers into play during separate organization phases"
Khamul: "You may bring this follower into play during your organization phase"
They Ride Together: "You may bring any Ringwraith followers into play"
Black Horse: "allows you to play one Ringwraith follower"
Uvatha: "He may join another Ringwraith's company"

It should be obvious that this is how the game works because otherwise a Fallen-wizard could play The Mouth with We Have Come to Kill.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

zarathustra wrote: ↑Mon Mar 24, 2008 10:01 pm 5) The question has arisen whether a player may use resources during his opponent's turn when facing an attack from Traitor or Hounds of Sauron.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A player may use resources that affect attacks/strikes during his opponent's turn if he is facing an attack from Hounds of Sauron or Traitor. Note that this overturns CoE 15 but extends CoE 110.
There is no basis for this in the rules. The rules are clear: "You may only play resource cards during your own turn."
Hounds of Sauron is not CvCC. The allowances for playing resources during CvCC do not apply.
ICE Digest:
>If Traitor is activated due to a corruption check made during your
>OPPONENT's turn (Ren Unleashed) can the target of the traitor tap to face
>the strike and use combat resources (Lucky Strike, Risky Blow) in a strike
>sequence like CvCC?

No.


>Regardless of whose turn it is can the attack due to Traitor be cancelled ?

Resources can only be played on your turn. Traitor does not currently
give an exception to that rule.
ICE Digest 565:
Hounds of Sauron does not create a company vs. company combat. You
may use Hounds of Sauron instead of company vs. company combat.
Since it isn't CvC, it doesn't follow the rules of CvC.
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)”