Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Errata issued by the CoE, open discussion of candidate rules for errata, and submissions for the Annual Rules Vote.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 868
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Theo » Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:50 am

This post challenges current CoE rulings bases.

From discussion on Bow of Alatar:
Konrad Klar wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 10:31 am
What Many Foes He Fought does in your opinion?
I think that if you choose a warrior to be assigned a strike from an attack, then you can assign him any number of the strikes from that attack.
Does your belief allow the warrior to reassign strikes already assigned?

I think it is a terribly ambiguous card. Independent of "face", there are questions of scope and timing. While a short event, the "If" conditional implies that there is a persistent effect from playing the card. I suppose it had to be implemented this way, because players cannot normally play cards in the midst of characters being assigned strikes. However, this leaves lots of room for ambiguity:
1) Can only one warrior be effected, or can any number of warriors chosen to be the targets of strikes leverage the effect? It depends on whether we think the persistent effect lasts until end of turn or only until it has been used. Or perhaps the leading "a warrior" is meant to be an active condition target?
2) Must a warrior so chosen decide the number of strikes they will face immediately when they are chosen, or can they delay each strike choice up until the strike is faced by another?
The CoE has supplied its opinions. Ignoring those, my current state of understanding would interpret the card text itself as literally saying something like (verbosely):

"Playable during an attack before strikes are assigned. For the rest of the attack, for each strike, the defending player may choose for any defending character to become the character that will face that strike (regardless of strike assignment), provided the character was assigned as the target of a strike from the attack by the defending player and was a warrior when so assigned. A character so chosen suffers a cumulative -1 prowess/-1 body (until end of turn) at the start of the strike's strike sequence."

It was requested that I include the original card text, I think:
Many Foes He Fought wrote:Resource: Short-event

If defender chooses a warrior to be the target of a strike from an attack, that character may choose to face any number of the strikes from that attack. The character suffers a cumulative -1 prowess/-1 body for each additional strike faced. The character faces a separate strike sequence for each strike.
Last edited by Theo on Tue Feb 11, 2020 6:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 1150
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by CDavis7M » Tue Feb 11, 2020 6:34 am

Looks like you forgot the card text.


Also, it helps to go back to the basics.
Screenshot_20200210-225847-01.jpeg
Screenshot_20200210-225847-01.jpeg (208.88 KiB) Viewed 372 times
This rule is for Many Foes He Fought and Skin-Changer. The warrior/Beorn are assigned the strike. Being the target of the strike is inherent to "Facing" the strike.

So much for all that discussion.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3162
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Konrad Klar » Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:31 am

Theo wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:50 am
Does your belief allow the warrior to reassign strikes already assigned?
My belief is agnostic to the concept of reassigning already assigned strikes.
Theo wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:50 am
because players cannot normally play cards in the midst of characters being assigned strikes.
Why?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3162
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Konrad Klar » Wed Feb 12, 2020 11:10 am

CDavis7M wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 6:34 am
This rule is for Many Foes He Fought and Skin-Changer. The warrior/Beorn are assigned the strike. Being the target of the strike is inherent to "Facing" the strike.

So much for all that discussion.
...and for Deftness of Agility and is applicable also for other cards introduced later.
CRF, Errata (Rules) wrote:Dragons Rules, Characters Facing Multiple Strikes: Change "are then considered to
be canceled" to "are then considered to be successful."
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 868
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Theo » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:35 am

Konrad Klar wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:31 am
Theo wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:50 am
because players cannot normally play cards in the midst of characters being assigned strikes.
Why?
Good question. Not finding as concrete a reference as I vaguely thought existed. But in general rulings about cards that can be played during combat use language such as "before assigning strikes" and "between strike sequences" and "during a strike sequence." What would be the purpose of not mentioning being able to play cards in the midst of assigning strikes when presenting something as a comprehensive list? E.g.:
Netrep Digest 123 wrote: >Shouldn't cards that affect the attack be played before we get this far? These cards (Morgul Knife and Icy Touch for example) raise the prowess of the attack as well as cause corruption. When are these cards supposed to be played to raise the prowess of the attack?

Between the resolution of the card causing the attack, and the assigning of strikes. Some can be done after strikes are assigned, since they don't change the number of strikes.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3162
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Konrad Klar » Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:04 am

Theo wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:35 am
What would be the purpose of not mentioning being able to play cards in the midst of assigning strikes when presenting something as a comprehensive list?
A choosing of a black list approach instead a white list approach.
Mentioning the situations when a sequence of activities cannot be (normally) interrupted by other activities.
I think that in the game a black list is shorter than a white list.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 868
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Theo » Sat Feb 15, 2020 8:38 pm

But my example above is a white list.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3162
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Konrad Klar » Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:37 am

Statement that is a negative result of check for presence on black list is not white listing.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 868
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Theo » Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:09 am

I'm not seeing your black list.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3162
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Konrad Klar » Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:06 am

List of situations when a player cannot normally play a resource short-event.

Revealing a new site and drawing cards for movement.
Concluding M/H phase.
Middle of resolving a chain of effects.
Reconciling a hand size.
Opponent's turn.
Some stages of Strike Sequence.
Time between declaration and resolution of body check.
Time between declaration and resolution of special actions resulting from successful strike.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3162
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Konrad Klar » Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:39 am

Theo wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:50 am
1) Can only one warrior be effected, or can any number of warriors chosen to be the targets of strikes leverage the effect? It depends on whether we think the persistent effect lasts until end of turn or only until it has been used. Or perhaps the leading "a warrior" is meant to be an active condition target?
The Dragons: Deftness of Agility
Hazard: Short-event

A Dragon can assign a strike (with a -3 modification to its prowess) to a character already assigned to receive one of its strikes. Alternatively, a manifestation of Bairanax can direct such a strike with no prowess modification. "Not Gollum himself could have twisted more quickly or more fiercely."-LotRIV
Many Foes He Fought does not say explicitly when it may be played.
The same may be said about Deftness of Agility.

If this would mean that Many Foes He Fought may be played at any time of player's turn and its effect may be leveraged later (when applicable), then also Deftness of Agility may be played at any time of M/H phase and its effect may be leveraged later (when applicable), in this case not by players but by Dragon (that is ridiculous).
Theo wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:50 am
2) Must a warrior so chosen decide the number of strikes they will face immediately when they are chosen, or can they delay each strike choice up until the strike is faced by another?
The CoE has supplied its opinions. Ignoring those, my current state of understanding would interpret the card text itself as literally saying something like (verbosely):
CRF, Turn Sequence, Combat, General wrote:All strikes of an attack must be assigned before any are resolved.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 1150
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by CDavis7M » Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:52 pm

You should be playing Hazards affecting the attack's prowess during the Strike Sequence. Though hazards affecting the strikes have to be played before.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3162
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Konrad Klar » Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:30 pm

CDavis7M wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:52 pm
You should be playing Hazards affecting the attack's prowess during the Strike Sequence. Though hazards affecting the strikes have to be played before.
An attack may be targeted as soon it is in play.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 1150
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by CDavis7M » Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:33 pm

Konrad Klar wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:30 pm
CDavis7M wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:52 pm
You should be playing Hazards affecting the attack's prowess during the Strike Sequence. Though hazards affecting the strikes have to be played before.
An attack may be targeted as soon it is in play.
A beginner's mistake.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 868
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Many Foes He Fought - revisited

Post by Theo » Wed Feb 19, 2020 10:02 pm

Konrad Klar wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:06 am
Middle of resolving a chain of effects.
An attack is typically an effect of a card that is being resolved in a chain of effects (exceptions have their own restrictions). Were it not for the special allowances given by the rules, players could not actively declare effects.
Konrad Klar wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:39 am
then also Deftness of Agility may be played at any time of M/H phase and its effect may be leveraged later (when applicable), in this case not by players but by Dragon (that is ridiculous).
The Dragon must be available as a target for Deftness of Agility. The rules often use wording of non-player entities taking actions, but I agree that it is a bit ridiculous. Special effect is not leveraged "when" applicable, but "if" applicable; the assigning itself happens when assigning normally happens.
Konrad Klar wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:39 am
CRF, Turn Sequence, Combat, General wrote:All strikes of an attack must be assigned before any are resolved.
Not sure what this was meant to communicate. Assigning all strikes per normal combat rules would satisfy the CRF requirement, and then before a strike is resolved the character facing that strike may be changed.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules & Errata”