Incorrect and non-ratified CoE rulings that contradict the existing ICE rulings and the Rules

[CDavis7M]

So, the minion worthy hills doesnt tap. But info is playable there, and
most info events require the site to be tapped. Does this mean that
such events are not playable at the worthy hills? Or that they are and
that they just dont tap the site?
*** Information cards that require the site to tap are playable at the
minion Worthy Hills. The text of The Worthy Hills overrides the usual rule.

No it does not. Minion Worthy Hills just says "Special: This site never taps.." There is at least one minion resource requiring Information that does not require the site to tap to be played - That Ain't No Secret.

Because The Worthy Hills does not override the rules on active conditions, the designers added a clarification: "(minion) The Worthy Hills effect of not tapping does not interfere with the satisfying of active conditions."

[CDavis7M]

What are "marshalling point cards", for the purposes of revealing them during the End-of-Game?

MELE rulebook p.74:
"At the Audience/Council, you may reveal any unique marshalling point cards in your hand that match unique cards that your opponent has in play. You may also reveal any marshalling point cards in your hand that are manifestations of cards that your opponent has in play. Each such revealed card reduces your opponent's marshalling point total by one."

CRF, Turn Sequence Rulings, End-of-Game:
"Subtract any points that are subtracted from your total, including points from unique resources your opponent has duplicated in his hand."

*** You may reveal any unique cards that add to your opponent's marshalling point total. These cards can be manifestations of one another. Neither your card nor your opponent's card can be hazards for purposes of deck construction or played as hazards. On to the examples:

a) Can I reveal Red Book of Westmarch (Hero) if my opponent has Red Book of Westmarch (Hero) in play?
b) Can I reveal Red Book of Westmarch (Hero) if my opponent has stored Red Book of Westmarch (Hero)?
c) Can I reveal Elwen if I am a Hero player and my opponent is a Minion player and has played her as a character?
d) Can I reveal Elwen if my opponent has played her as an agent (face-up)?
e) Can I reveal Elwen and Baduila if I am a FW player and my opponent is a Minion player and has played them as characters?
f) Can I reveal My Precious if my opponent has Gollum or Stinker in play?
g) Can I reveal Gollum or Stinker if my opponent has played My Precious (face-up)?
h) Can I reveal Smaug Ahunt if my opponent has Smaug Roused in play?
i) Can I reveal Elrond if my opponent has Master of the House in play?
*** b and e are legal. All the others are not due to the ruling above.

A card does not need to "add to your opponent's marshalling point total" (CoE) in order to be considered a "marshalling point card" (the rules). A "marshalling point card" is not the same as a "card that gives marshalling points." Some cards have effects that given marshalling points (Armory, Tribute Garnered, etc) but which are not marshalling point cards themselves. Marshalling points are an attribute of characters and items. An item card may have marshalling points that are not received by the player unless some condition is met, but the card still has marshalling points.
This is a bit confusing because the same card format is used for different types of cards. In some cases, a value is not an attribute but it is merely a reminder: "for emphasis, a value used during play is often provided both in a card's text and in another place on the same card."

Item cards and Character cards have marshalling points. They are marshalling point cards.
Hazard creatures, agents, and events do not have marshalling points. The number is a reminder of the marshalling points received if they are defeated / the event conditions are met.

(MELE p. 7) The winner of the game is the player that has gathered the most marshalling points from:
• Control of resources: characters, allies, items, and factions.
• Defeating certain creatures.
• Carrying out the instructions on resource cards.
Marshalling points are printed on the top left corner of the cards.
(MELE p. 16) Marshalling Points [ upper left]: This is the number of marshalling points you receive when you have the character in play. This value represents the character's importance to Sauron.
(MELE p.90) Marshalling points: The number printed in a card 's upper left corner.

a) Can I reveal Red Book of Westmarch (Hero) if my opponent has Red Book of Westmarch (Hero) in play? Yes. Both are MP cards
b) Can I reveal Red Book of Westmarch (Hero) if my opponent has stored Red Book of Westmarch (Hero)? Yes. Both are MP cards
c) Can I reveal Elwen if I am a Hero player and my opponent is a Minion player and has played her as a character? No. Elwen is not an MP card for the hero, it is a hazard.
d) Can I reveal Elwen if my opponent has played her as an agent (face-up)? No. Elwen is not an MP card for the opponent when played as an agent.
e) Can I reveal Elwen and Baduila if I am a FW player and my opponent is a Minion player and has played them as characters? Yes. FW use minion rules for agents and so they are considered both characters and hazards in hand.
f) Can I reveal My Precious if my opponent has Gollum or Stinker in play? No. My Precious is not an MP card and the Manifestation rules do not apply to this situation.
g) Can I reveal Gollum or Stinker if my opponent has played My Precious (face-up)? No. My Precious is not an MP card and the Manifestation rules do not apply to this situation.
h) Can I reveal Smaug Ahunt if my opponent has Smaug Roused in play? No. Smaug Ahunt is not an MP card.
i) Can I reveal Elrond if my opponent has Master of the House in play? No. Master of the House is not an MP card.

[CDavis7M]

What if you then played a thrall? Or could you, since its not your org
phase?
*** You cannot play Thrall of the Voice outside of your organization
phase, but a Thrall in play that is not on another character can be used
after a successful influence attempt after which you play the character
in question.

This is wrong but was later overturned. The CoE did not read Thrall's card text.

[CDavis7M]

Is the text considered to be ignored *immediately* after the play of
Wizard's Trove, or is it not considered ignored until a Sapling is
stored and the White Tree is played and Wizard's Trove is "placed with"
the The White Tree?
*** It is only ignored after Wizard's Trove is placed with the White Tree.

Travis Took was kind enough to find this:
The "Unique" keyword is not ignored on The White Tree if Wizard's Trove
is used to play it. Ruled By Chad in NetRep Ruling Digest 43
*** Consider this ruling correct and the recent ruling to the contrary
incorrect.

These are both incorrect. "Unique" is found in The White Tree's card text. Wizard's Trove specifically states "Ignore the text of The White Tree." The text includes "Unique." If White Tree is played by Wizard Trove's effect, it is not unique. It's not the same White Tree, it is a counterfeit made in its mockery. The "ignore" effect is already in play when Trove is played.

From: ich...@spamblock.cstone.net (Craig Ichabod O'Brien)
Subject: Re: [MECCG] Questions
Date: 1998/06/19

> Hello Ichabod,
>
> If you store 'The White Tree' with 'Wizard's Trove' (as a FW), the text on
> 'The White Tree' is ignored. Does that mean it isn't unique now and another
> player (FW?) can play a second White Tree?

Yes.

From: ich...@spamblock.cstone.net (Craig Ichabod O'Brien)
Subject: [MECCG] Rules Digest 119
Date: 1998/08/12

>2. Wizard's Trove states: "ignore card text" when refering to The
>White Tree. So, for FW's, The White Tree is not unique, since the
>keyword "unique" is part of the card text. Which of the following
>three examples are legal:
>A. a FW-player has The White Tree in play, another FW-player plays
>one himself
>B. a FW-player has The White Tree in play, a Hero-player plays one
>himself
>C. a Hero-player has The White Tree in play, a FW-player plays one
>himself

All three, assuming the FW is playing the White Tree with Wizard's
Trove in all three cases.

[CDavis7M]

On all RW cards each RW has a section where it states: "As your RW...."
and this I have been assuming is the section which you're not allowed to
use if the RW is a RW follower. However, Khamul's ability to lower the
body of an elf-character is not listed in this manner. In fact the way
Khamul's card is done is very similar to Uvatha's. Therefore, is this
counted as a "special" ability unable to be used when he is a RW follower?
*** Khamul will still lower an elf character's body as listed on his
card when he's a ringwraith follower.

No. Khamul's "-2 to the body of any Elf character" is a "special ability" detailed on his card. "Special abilities" are not just limited to the "as your Ringwraith" effects. A prowess bonus against orcs is a special ability. A body penalty for elves is a special ability. This has been a term of the game since the beginning. There is nothing in the rules that "-2 to body" would suggest that this is not a special ability. There is an exception for Uvatha's non-as-your-ringwraith effect but there is no exception for Khamul's effect in the rules.

Special Abilities: Some characters have special abilities that are detailed on their cards. Special abilities include corruption check modifiers, influence bonuses, and prowess bonuses. For example Shamas has an influence bonus against the Duniending faction.

A Ringwraith follower (see the previous page) may not use any of its special abilities. Uvatha's ability to automatically join another Ringwraith's company is an exception to this.

It's worth noting that ICE considered Magic to not be a special ability as in the Players Guide and rulings.

From: ich...@spamblock.net (Ichabod)
Subject: Re: [MELE] Questions: Lots thereof
Date: 1997/06/18
>* Basically, Ringwraith followers are only useful while on a Black Rider
> or Heralded Lord move, right ? (except they will also prevent them
> being played by another player)

Well, they can still use magic (if they could normally) as followers.
They will only prevent another player playing them as Ringwraith followers
or Nazgul.

[CDavis7M]

Say I have Hall of Fire (or Fortress of the Towers, or whatever) on a tapped haven site. Now, I want to move another company to an untapped
copy of that site, then combine the companies at the untapped version. I know I can do that much. However, if I do this, will I lose the Hall of Fire and cards like it?
*** Yes. Playing a card on a copy of a haven is not the same as
playing the card on all copies of the haven.

There is no possibility of "playing a card on all copies of a haven." This is a made up rule. The ruling is wrong.

CRF - Havens: If two companies join at a Haven, cards played on the discarded version of the Haven transfer to the version of the Haven that stays in play.

Hall of Fire is "Playable on a Haven." The CRF applies.

[CDavis7M]

Now in case I really missed something, can We Have Come to Kill and/or A
Chance Meeting be used to bring in Orcs & Trolls? What about Fram?
*** Yes.
--------
Can We Have Come to Kill bring in hobbits?
*** Given that you're a Fallen-wizard, yes.

No. A Fallen-wizard cannot use A Chance Meeting to play Orcs or Trolls. And We Have Come to Kill cannot be used by a Fallen-wizard to play Hobbits or Fram Framson.

Orcs and Trolls cannot be played using A Chance Meeting because "A hero resource may not target an Orc or Troll character." A Chance Meeting's effect targets the character. "Card play" is an action. "Bringing a character card into play" is an action that targets the character card because the character card in your hand is chosen as the entity for the action of moving the card from your hand to the play area.

These characters state "may only be brought into play at his home site." WHCTK does not overcome this restriction. A Chance Meeting does overcome the restriction for Hobbits because it says "even a hobbit." A Chance Meeting does not overcome Fram's restriction, but he has a separate exception.

From: ich...@spamblock.cstone.net (Craig Ichabod O'Brien)
Subject: [MECCG] Rules Digest 114
Date: 1998/07/30
>Can Fram be played with A Chance Meeting?
Yes.

From: "Van Norton" <vno...@mindspring.com>
Subject: [MECCG] Ruling Digest 585
Date: 1999/07/20
>May I use A Chance Meeting to bring a Minnion or Agent Character
>into play ?
All except Orcs and Trolls. Minion characters are considered heros
for Fallen Wizards.

[CDavis7M]

In a game I was watching recently between Antonio and Jamie, Antonio
tried to play dragon's blood on alatar, who was facing a strike from a
cave drake. Jamie sac'ed it. Does Antonio get a body check vs the
wizard or no? If not, why? If the blood had been against another
character, say, a follower of the wizard who would also be discarded,
would there be a body check? What if the blood were on a non-follower?
*** In all cases above, the body check from Dragon's Blood is rolled.
Sacrifice of Form doesn't get around it.

Wrong. Unfortunately you have to use the Strike Sequence. Sacrifice of Form gets around the Wizard's body check from Dragon's Blood - it is not rolled.

Dragon's Blood is playable during Step (1) of the strike sequence: "Playable on a character facing a Dragon or Drake strike (before the dice are rolled to resolve the strike)." Sacrifice of Form is playable during Step (4) of the strike sequence: "All of the strikes from one attack against your Wizard's company fail."

Once Sacrifice of Form resolves, the strike has resolved - it fails. While a failed strike would trigger Dragon's Blood's effect (If the strike fails, the target character must make a body check") this is a special action of strike, which occurs after the strike dice roll, which is after Step (4). Special actions of a strike would not interrupt resolution of Sacrifice of Form at Step (4) of the strike sequence -- "Discard the Wizard and any non-item cards he controls." So the wizard (and any follower) would already be discarded and cannot make a body check.

If Dragon's Blood were played on a non-follower of the Wizard, then Dragon's Blood would cause a body check for them.

[CDavis7M]

already in play?
Hobgoblins for 4@12 - Marvels Told targeting Minions Stir - Tapping of Power Built by Waiting - Second Minions Stir played to make 4@12.
*** CRF, Rulings by Term, Cannot be Duplicated: Annotation 11 (modified from its original version): Some cards cannot be duplicated in limited cases -- generally on a specific target. Multiple copies of these cards or their effects may be in play normally, so long as each applies to a different target. A card that cannot be duplicated can be played when a copy is already in play only if the copy in play is currently being targeted by an effect that will discard it.

Since the first Minions Stir is in play and targetted to be discarded, another can be played in the same chain. The chain is legal. It would
resolve thusly:
Attack is assumed in play:
Marvels Told targetting Minions Stir
Tap Power Built by Waiting
Minions Stir
Resolves:
Minions Stir comes into play
Power Built by Waiting adds 1 to the hazard limit
Marvels Told discards the first Minions Stir
--------
Doesn't Power Built have to resolve first to get that extra HL?

*** Assuming you have no more unused hazard limit before Minions Stir is played (as above), then yes, the tapping of Power Built by Waiting will have to resolve before Minions Stir is playable.

The CoE ruling misses the point. The answer does not depend on resolution of the hazard limit increase, it depends on how effects are applied to attacks.
There is time for multiple chains of effects before strikes of an attack are assigned. Minions Stir can be played at ANY TIME before strikes are assigned and it's effects will be applied to the attack. There is no need to declare another Minions Stir in response to a Marvels Told. There is time to tap Power Built By Waiting, have its effect resolve, and then play another copy of Minions Stir.

[CDavis7M]

The rule is you can play resources that 'help with corruption checks',
which IIRC led Wim to the statement that a Marvels Told can be played if
it zaps a corruption card, but not to zap a To Get You Away that is
holding Galadriel in order to get those MP's. Even though that Galadriel
could now tap in support for a corruption check, if you happen to have a
company at the rescue site. Now I am not one to doubt Wim's judgement in
this... I just think it is a pretty weird definition
What is correct?
*** CRF, Turn Sequence Rulings, Free Council, etc.:
Only resources that directly affect corruption checks may be played
during the Free Council. This includes cards that reduce a character's
corruption point total or prevent a character from being discarded.
So, To Get You Away cannot, in fact, be zapped.

During the Council, if Marvels Told were played to discard a corruption card then it would directly affect the corruption card. Marvels Told does NOT directly affect a corruption check (like A Friend or Three does) nor does it directly affect a character's corruption point total (like Free to Choose). Nothing in Marvels Told's card text says anything about a corruption check or corruption points.

[CDavis7M]

Can a player voluntarily decide to move characters out of direct
influence during the organization phase so that his general influence is
exceeded? If so, at the end of the organization phase must the player:
a) discard characters until his general is resolved Or b) return
characters to hand until his general is resolved?
*** You may move the character(s) as you describe, but at the end of
the organization phase, you would have to first return any characters
played during that phase to your hand, then, if you are still over your
GI, discard characters until you are legal again.

This is incorrect. There is an entire section in the rules titled "Discarding Characters." The rules only allow you to discard 1 character and this is done instead of playing 1 character. You can't create influence problems to get around these rules. This is clear from the section titled "Direct Influence."

To the original question: you cannot voluntarily decide to move characters out from DI to GI if there is not enough GI to control them by the end of the Organization phase. If this was done, then (C) the character must be put back under DI. If GI was only exceeded because another character was played, then the once-follower is OK but the new character is returned to your hand.

INFLUENCING (CONTROLLING) A CHARACTER
Direct Influence

If you have enough unused general influence points, you may move a follower from direct influence to general influence (or vice versa) during your organization phase.
...
Clarification: During the organization phase, you can move characters from control by general influence to control by direct influence and vice versa so long as your total of mind attributes does not exceed your available influence at the end of the organization phase.
...
Standard Rules - Discarding Characters
Instead of bringing a new character/Wizard into play during your organization phase, you may discard a character that is at a Haven or at his home site. A Wizard may not be discarded.
You must take this action when you are forced to discard a character due to a lack of available influence. In this case, the character(s) need not be at a Haven.

[CDavis7M]

A few questions about when an agent taps to make creatures playable at
his home site:
Does this attack occur during the movement hazard phase or the site phase?
*** Movement/Hazard Phase, unless the creature is placed on guard.

This is incorrect. Tapping an agent to make creatures playable only allows you to play attack the company during the M/H phase, it does not allow those creatures to be revealed on-guard if they could not otherwise be revealed.

If one of your agents and one of your opponent's companies are both at the agent's home site, you may tap the agent and then attack that company with certain hazard creatures (regardless of what they are keyed to) based upon the site type:

[CDavis7M]

Re: Legendary Hoard
If the Dragon is inverted, does that mean it no longer has any effect on play? Its special effect is gone and there's no longer an extra auto-attack at the site?
*** Consider the inverted dragon to be "off to the side." This card was written before putting cards off to the side became a rule. So, yes, the at Home dragon's effects are no longer in play.
I found this answer in the CoE 46 archive. But I'd like a clarification and or justification for this. "was written before putting cards off to the side became a rule", but that off to the side has been around since Wizards because Sacrifice of form has the term. So the current ruling seems a bit off.
*** You are correct, but "off to the side" was formally defined in the ME:DM rules insert, and was used infrequently and somewhat informally before that. This card could be abusive in combonation with some dragon at home effects, so the NetRep team decided to just consider it off to the side.

Nothing in the card text, the rules, or the game as a whole suggests that the inverted At Home Dragon with Legendary Hoard should be considered "off to the side." But the CoE Netrep team just decided to change the game for some reason that they didn't bother to mention?

"Inverting" a card is a record-keeping mechanism. Here, you invert the At Home Dragon instead of discarding/removing it but only until Legendary Hoard is discarded: "If target dragon is required to be discarded or removed from play, invert dragon on table until this card is discarded or removed from play." Inverting is used as a record-keeping mechanism for other later cards in the game as well.

It doesn't make sense for the At Home Dragon to be considered "off to the side" and out of play. Legendary Hoard has one of the most powerful effects in the game, if not the most powerful. Not just my opinion -- ICE's opinion. Accordingly, it presents some of the strongest risk in the game -- facing a Dragon At Home attack that cannot be cancelled.The dragon has still been "defeated" for purposes of King Under the Mountain and Returned Exiles, but the automatic attack does not go away until Legendary Hoard is discarded -- the risk is needed to offset the reward.

[CDavis7M]

*** Go back to the rules for when __________.

Some good advice.

[CDavis7M]

Witnessed a game on GCCG yesterday that had two Hall of Fire on one copy
of Isengard (FW-haven) and a company moving to another copy of Isengard
(last M/H phase). The player used the option to join both companies at
the haven at the end of all M/H phases and claimed he could therefore
untap two characters in said company. Was he right?
*** You correctly answered your own question:
For this we still need to figure out when exactly "the end of all M/H
phases" is. Is this AFTER the final M/H phase has ended completely? I.e.
site has been removed and hand reset (and they could IMHO have just as
well called it "at the start of the site phase" - but they said it is
before that). Or is this the end of the last M/H phase, just BEFORE
hands are being reset - pretty much the same time you'd make the Lure of
Nature / Alone and Unadvised checks for that phase.
As there isn't supposed to be anything between phases (we can't take
actions there, so why would the game rules?), I believe the first option
to be correct: "the end of all M/H phases" = "the end of the last M/H
phase". So this untapping with Hall of Fire by joining the companies is
legal.

This is wrong. The "end of all M/H phases" is NOT the same as the "end of the last M/H phase." Instead, the rules state that companies join AFTER the end of the last M/H phase and before the site phase:
"Once all of your companies have resolved their movement/hazard phases, any two of your companies at the same site combine. Your companies are not considered to be at their site."

All companies must have already resolved their M/H phases BEFORE they can join. So clearly this ruling is incorrect: "I believe the first option
to be correct: "the end of all M/H phases" = "the end of the last M/H phase""

Going back to Hall of Fire, it is a permanent-event that is played on sites, so the following rule applies: "A permanent-event played on a site affects only the copy of the site it is played on, unless otherwise specified. A permanent-event not played on a site affects all versions of affected sites." Unlike some other permanent-events, Hall of Fire does not say "all version of the site." There is nothing in the text of Hall of Fire to indicate that its effect applies to other copies of the Haven. So it's effect only works on a company at the site upon which Hall of Fire is played. So if a company is at a Haven that does not have Hall of Fire played on it, they cannot used the effect of Hall of Fire.

In the example above, the company is at a Haven without Hall of Fire "immediately following its movement/hazard phase". So no, the company cannot untap any characters, and certainly not two. When the two companies join "once all of your companies have resolved their M/H phases" then it is no longer "immediately following its movement/hazard phase" and so Hall of Fire's effect does not apply.