Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

[miguel]

Is an imprisoned Ringwraith impossible to rescue if once freed he would be violating company composition rules?

So freeing effect is cancelled? What to do?

[marcos]

Note: If two companies end up at a non-Darkhaven sit and combining those companies would violate the limitations on company composition, one of the companies that just moved must return to its site of origin. Similarly, an effect that causes such a violation is cancelled (e.g., We Have Come to Kill).

the freeing effect is cancelled

better use a voices of malice for it haha

[Konrad Klar]

better use a voices of malice for it haha

And if imprisoned is Ringwraith follower as bonus you will end with two Ringwraiths.

[miguel]

I think the imprisoned Ringwraith follower will still be a Ringwraith follower once released. In which case perhaps this could be applied to that situation:

When your revealed Ringwraith leaves play without being eliminated, you have until the end of your next organization phase to bring your Ringwraith back into play and use him to re-control any Ringwraith followers. Otherwise, all Ringwraith followers are discarded.

And by this I mean that the player would have until the end of his next org phase to re-control the released RW follower. Makes sense?

[Konrad Klar]

Rule quoted by you applies to the situation when controller leaves active play, but follower no. Imprisoning FW follower is not such situation.
Rules says that RW follower must always be under control of RW, like ally. For ally it is explicity stated that ally cannot be imprisoned, for RW follower no.
I think that similar rule may be implied from fact that RW follower must be always under control of RW (and from existence of exception, governed by rule quoted by you).

[miguel]

So you think a RW follower cannot be taken prisoner?

[Konrad Klar]

Yes.
He has a limitation similar to limitation of ally. And rule that says that ally cannot be imprisoned did not come along the concept of imprisoning attacks.
It was introduced later, whe ICE realised that there is an issue.
I think that it is the same logic in both situations. Nothing brand new.

[marcos]

I think RW followers indeed can be taken prisoners. They are still characters, why should they be treated different?

[Konrad Klar]

Because it breaks rule:

A Ringwraith follower must always be under the control of your Ringwraith and may move to non-Darkhaven sites with your Ringwraith.

...or it should be rather "may not be under general influence", then I jam out.

[miguel]

I think RW followers never take up any GI, not even during the situation described in the CRF entry I quoted, simply because they have no mind-stat.

[Konrad Klar]

Not having a mind does not prevent them from consuming DI of controlling Ringwraith. He, he..

Imprisoned Ringwraith follower could not be freed (by facing rescue-attack) even by Ringwraith, because:

Following the rescue-attack, an
untapped character in the rescuing company can tap, and all characters taken prisoner
under the hazard host immediately join the company under general influence (which
must be legally reconciled during the player’s next organization phase)—the rescue
attempt is successful.

Returning to main question:
I do not see a way of rescuing (non-follower) Ringwraith by facing rescue-attack.
And it does not break a game, nor create undefined situation.

[Konrad Klar]

Strictly speaking it prevent even Wizard from being rescued.

And now this is a valid reason for revision of this rule.

This render all I said before in this topic useless.

[marcos]

ok that makes some more sense. And I agree that is a valid reason for revisiting.

[miguel]

The CRF entry I quoted proves that RW followers can be in play without the (avatar) RW controlling them. And they would not take up any GI because they have no mind (they take up one DI from controlling RW because of the rules, you might say the avatar RW's will is what keeps the follower momentarily still in play). I don't see why the same approach could not be applied to a RW follower taken prisoner.

RW followers are not allies, I see no support in the rules why they could not be taken prisoner. Allies can't exist without a controlling character, RW followers clearly can (CRF), even if only in a limited manner.

The Dark Minions quote seems weird, but it should be read in the manner it's been read this far. The part about released characters joining the company under general influence applies only to characters that can be controlled with GI.

I feel like this subject is being made more complex than it really needs to be.

[Konrad Klar]

If quoted DM rule will not be revised, then in its current state there is no way for successful rescuing Ringwraith.

Imprisoned RW follower is in state where he is not controlled by RW. Ringwraith or Wizard is not controlled by GI, but if rescued must by placed under GI.

Either: revise/modify rules, or leave it in current state, that force players to break them in some aspects, or prevent from rescuing Wizard, if they want to respect rules strictly.

Players are lawyers. They can (and want to) leverage any nuanse for their advantage, or disadvantage of opponents.