Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Any rule erratum or clarification submission for the upcoming 2018 ARV should be posted here.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3340
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Konrad Klar »

I agree that a checking for presence of Doors of Night in play is not the same as a checking whether Doors of Night leaves play.

However if there is an agreement that Doors of Night effect satisfies playability condition of WoS (even if a card Doors of Night is not in play) and there is agreement that disappearing of the effect satisfies a condition of discarding WoS, I cannot agree that discarding a card Doors of Night while Doors of Night effect remains in play satisfies a condition of discarding WoS.

In other words: if a discarding of Doors of Night card (while Doors of Night effect remains in play) is a condition of discarding WoS, then disappearing a Doors of Night effect (without discarding a Doors of Night card) is not such condition.
In such situation it is possible that The Will of Sauron and Gates of Morning are in play at the same time.

Either it is checked whether a Doors of Night card leaves a play, or it is checked whether an effect of presence a Doors of Night in play disappears.

EDIT:
Changed "Leaves a play" to "disappears" in last sentence.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2995
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Bandobras Took »

Just to be clear: I believe that Gates of Morning will not cause a discard of Will of Sauron if all it does is change Peril Returned's effect.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly. This prompted the backlash erratum that I will link to as soon as I notice it is officially posted. :)

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3340
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Konrad Klar »

Bandobras Took wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 3:42 pm
Just to be clear: I believe that Gates of Morning will not cause a discard of Will of Sauron if all it does is change Peril Returned's effect.
Nor Marvels Told if it only removes only copy of Peril Returned from play, right?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2995
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Bandobras Took »

Correct. This doesn't cause Doors of Night to leave play; it just causes Doors to no longer be considered to be in play.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly. This prompted the backlash erratum that I will link to as soon as I notice it is officially posted. :)

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1052
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Theo »

the Jabberwock wrote:
Wed May 02, 2018 4:31 pm
If Peril Returned is stating that the Doors of Night card is considered to be in play (rather than simply the DoN effect), as you suggest, then it would not be possible to actually play a copy of the Doors of Night card while Peril Returned is in play. This is because it would create the "hologram effect" which rezwits mentions in the reference thread linked in my original post above.

In that thread, Bandobras said the following:
Bandobras Took wrote:
Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:10 am
I think he's saying that if Doors of Night is considered to be in play, that is sufficient for " Cannot be duplicated."

However, (and this is weird) Peril Returned merely states that Doors of Night is considered to be in play. The text of Doors of Night is not in play through Peril Returned (i.e. when Peril Returned is played, it does not copy the actual card text of Doors of Night).

Therefore, there is no "Cannot be duplicated" to worry about.
I believe you cannot really make both this Bandobras argument and the argument that Peril refers only to the DoN card rather than effect. What would be the point?

So I ask this question: IF Peril Returned is suggesting that the DoN card is considered to be in play (rather than simply the DoN effect), then how can you argue that the full text of DoN card is also not in play, including the "cannot be duplicated" statement (ie. hologram effect). IF the argument is made that Peril Returned is referring to the DoN card rather than the effect, and you are also suggesting the entire card and text of DoN is not duplicated, then what is the point? So you are only getting the effect of DoN with Peril and not the entire card? Then why bother interpreting it as referring to the card at all?

(To reiterate my opinion from an earlier post, I do indeed believe you are only getting the effect of DoN with Peril and not the card, which means there is no "cannot be duplicated" to worry about. However, I feel it is a contradiction to argue that Peril refers to the card but doesn't duplicate the card in its entirety.)
I read your above statements as only considering two possibilities and leaving out the third (which is the one I'm speaking to):
Yours:
1) Peril Returned creates an exact copy of the Doors of Night card to be considered to be in play.
2) Peril Returned creates the effects of a Doors of Night card without actually creating the card.
Alternative
3) Peril Returned creates a (card? sure, *shrug*) entity named Doors of Night to be considered to be in play, without creating any inherent effects of that card being in play.

So yes, I'm right on board with the quoted Bandobras argument, since I see Peril Returned as merely creating the consideration of a Doors of Night card without creating the actual Doors of Night card as printed.

You ask, What is the point if the created consideration does not have the Doors of Night effects? Why, all of the other cards/effects that require Doors of Night being in play, the play of Will of Sauron being one such example.

Is Will of Sauron checking whether the Doors of Night considered to be in play leaves play? Yes. But the consideration is not "played" nor can it "leave play," Doors of Night is simply made to be considered in play and then no longer considered in play without the Peril Returned effect.
Last edited by Theo on Fri May 04, 2018 6:34 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!

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1052
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Theo »

Konrad Klar wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 2:11 pm
if... there is agreement that disappearing of the effect satisfies a condition of discarding WoS,
I dissent from this.
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!

User avatar
the JabberwocK
Council Chairman
Posts: 1154
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by the JabberwocK »

Ok, taking a break from the linguistic and theoretical debate for a moment, I would ask this:

Why do you play MECCG? Why do you enjoy it?

Personally, I play MECCG for a number of reasons, but a large part of it is my love for Tolkien and his universe. So MECCG allows me to go take an adventure in his world. This is a big part of the attraction to the game for me.

If my priority was to play a technically precise and exceptionally well designed game, MECCG would be far down my list of choices.

SO.... when a rule debate presents itself and there are more than 1 interpretation of said rule that are reasonable, I will always favor the interpretation which favors Tolkien's world and the adventure that is supposed to be taking place when we sit down to play this great game.

Doors of Night flavor text from The Wizards:
... already the fire in the night was burning out, and the smoldering hills were fading, while ash-grey evening crept over the fields."
Will of Sauron is only playable if Doors of Night is in play (from a thematic sense) because it is supposed to represent that Sauron's forces and willpower are manifest more greatly at night.

With that in mind, I present 2 scenarios:

First scenario: If you are in favor of Will of Sauron checking for the Doors of Night card to leave play, then you support this:

Will of Sauron is in play and having full effect despite the fact that neither Doors of Night card or effect are currently in play. (This is because WoS was played with Peril Returned and then Peril Returned was later discarded. However, since the card Doors of Night never left play, WoS continues). So... birds are chirping, the sun is brightly shining, hobbits are singing, Gandalf is smiling, some type of weed is being smoked....and all the while The Will of Sauron is in full effect with all of its devastating combinations.

Does this make any sense at all? No, it does not.

Second scenario: If you are in favor of Will of Sauron checking for the Doors of Night effect/environment leaving play, (ie. it is no longer night time in the land), then you support this:

At night, Sauron's forces are more easily able to travel, attack and wreak havoc throughout the land. Thus, if Doors of Night effect leaves play (meaning it is no longer night time), then Will of Sauron is discarded. If Doors of Night card leaves play but it is still night time (Doors of Night effect still present), then Will of Sauron naturally can remain in play.

Both interpretations are reasonable from a game mechanics perspective, but only one interpretation is reasonable from a thematic "We are in Tolkien's world" perspective.

Nevertheless, it will be up to the community to decide which interpretation is used. The decision for me is easy.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3340
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Konrad Klar »

I am for not ignoring a subtle differences in texts.
But first thing to figure out is whether a two different texts say about two different things, or whether they say about the same thing using different wording.

Saruman the Wise is discarded "if Saruman comes into play".
The White Wizard is discarded "if Saruman is in play as an opposing Wizard".
Maybe it is my limitation that I cannot imagine a situation where Saruman suddenly appears in play as an opposing Wizard not coming into play.
But I think that a moment in which Saruman appears in play is exactly the same moment in which Saruman comes into play.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2995
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Bandobras Took »

Because Ioreth sitting in Rivendell telling stories it totally sufficient to counter the Will of Sauron . . .

I'm sorry, but consistency can't be used as an argument with too many of the cards as they currently stand. River can stop a flying Radagast. It can stop a company moving from the Isle of the Ulond to the Isles of the Dead that Live. Saruman the White can't take two steps out of Isengard without Beorning Skin-changers forbidding his next step.

Peril Returned is a unique card that creates a weird situation, but the same can be said about many cards.

I have no problem with changing Will of Sauron to say "Discard if Doors of Night is not in play."

But considering something to be in play and then not considering it to be in play is not the same thing as something actually leaving play.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly. This prompted the backlash erratum that I will link to as soon as I notice it is officially posted. :)

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1052
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Theo »

Bandobras Took wrote:
Sat May 05, 2018 3:03 am
I have no problem with changing Will of Sauron to say "Discard if Doors of Night is not in play."
I'd support a proposal of this form. Quite clean.
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!

Vastor Peredhil
Council Member
Posts: 1197
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:46 am
Location: Kempen (Niederrhein) Germany

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Vastor Peredhil »

Honestly I cannot concur on this change, I know the wording makes no sense, but making it twice as hard to get rid of Will of Sauron is pretty bad as I can tell my my 25 year tourney experiance,

the WoS tourney deck did not got out of style because it was less efficiant, but because players were bored by the options it left one self as a player: only squatting, rohan, Gondor, or Mordor and balrog decks, (Coastal not since there will be a Storms of Osse if WoS is played seriously)

competitive players will always bring it out once in while when not all decks run 2x Promptings of Wisdom straight in to deal with these fuckers; the lateness of PoW in the WH set shows that these decks were still really popular to the game 3 years in but slowly got played less I say the last 10 years (again players were more bored by it and many competitive players left the game for one reason or another)

so WoS is worded crappy and yes Peril Returned can be voted on to be worded better, but I am not in favor of pushing a WoS deck which is quite frankly still awesome if played correctly, since in the tourney game wasting 2 of your opponent's turn is plenty to win a game

yours Nicolai

User avatar
the JabberwocK
Council Chairman
Posts: 1154
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by the JabberwocK »

@ Vastor -

Thanks for the insightful and thoughtful contribution. It's always nice to have more insight on how rule changes and clarifications might help or hurt the game, and the possible effects on the tournament scene is one very important aspect to consider.

I would add that there are 3 possible scenarios with this submission:

1) It is not forwarded to the ballot for a vote, and the situation continues to remain unclear... meaning each playgroup and tournament organizer must decide for themselves how to interpret "when Doors of Night leaves play" - whether they interpret this as the card DoN leaving play or the effect of DoN leaving play. I am against this option for my part as I am a strong advocate for clarity and making MECCG easily accessible to newcomers (ie. eliminate rule ambiguities).

2) It is forwarded to the ballot for a vote and the final result is essentially that WoS (and other applicable cards) look only for the Doors of Night card to leave play to trigger their response. (Vastor, it sounds based on your comments that this is the current interpretation upheld in most tournaments).

3) It is forwarded to the ballot for a vote and the final result is essentially that WoS (and other applicable cards) look only for the Doors of Night effect to leave play to trigger their response.

I would also mention that this statement:
Vastor Peredhil wrote:
Mon May 07, 2018 7:41 am
making it twice as hard to get rid of Will of Sauron
I don't feel is completely accurate, as it is hard to say how much more or less difficult it will be to get rid of Will of Sauron.

I say this because: if the Doors of Night card discard interpretation is voted in, what is to prevent someone from building a Will of Sauron deck using Peril Returned as their primary combination card (rather than Doors of Night), and only use DoN as a support card as necessary? In other words... if your plan is to bring in WoS using Peril Returned because WoS only checks for the Doors of Night card to leave play, then I would argue that it may actually be more difficult to get rid of WoS under this scenario, as the ability to Twilight a copy of Doors of Night card in play in order to clear the board is removed.

On the other hand, if the Doors of Night effect leaving play interpretation is voted in, then you may have more options for removal depending on which card created said effect and how many cards creating the effect are in play. Each card creating the Doors of Night effect must be removed in order to remove WoS, rather than a specific card being removed (which may not even be in play).
I'm not saying this scenario will make it easier or harder to remove WoS from play. I'm just saying I feel the situation is unclear because there are many different contributing factors.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1052
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Theo »

the Jabberwock wrote:
Mon May 07, 2018 5:05 pm
On the other hand, if any effect causing Doors of Night to be considered in-play ceases to exist interpretation is voted in, then ...
This would make it easiest to get rid of WoS, although it seems the most senseless conceptually. Sauron loses his will when the first of his backup Night generators fails. O_o
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!

User avatar
Shapeshifter
Posts: 570
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by Shapeshifter »

the Jabberwock wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 6:39 am
It is unclear whether the discard clause triggers when the Doors of Night card leaves play or when the Doors of Night effect leaves play.
According to Rulings Digest #37 it is quite clear that the discard clause triggers even when the Doors of Night effect leaves play:
Rulings Digest #37 wrote:Peril Returned and Will Of Sauron. Do they support each other ?
Does "Peril.." become permanent event when Will Of Sauron
comes to play ?
In such a situation of course twilight can't cancel it because
Peril.. isn't an enviroment card.
Is it correct ?
*** Assuming Gates of Morning is not in play, The Will of Sauron can be
played if Peril Returned is in play and Doors of Night is not. Will of
Sauron will keep Peril Returned in play as a permanent event. The
subsequent play of Gates of Morning will, by the text of Peril Returned,
remove Doors of Night from play, discarding The Will of Sauron and Peril
Returned, since it is a long-event. Twilight will not, however, affect
this combo.

User avatar
the JabberwocK
Council Chairman
Posts: 1154
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: Doors of Night - Effect vs Card

Post by the JabberwocK »

Shapeshifter wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 7:57 pm
the Jabberwock wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 6:39 am
It is unclear whether the discard clause triggers when the Doors of Night card leaves play or when the Doors of Night effect leaves play.
According to Rulings Digest #37 it is quite clear that the discard clause triggers even when the Doors of Night effect leaves play:
Rulings Digest #37 wrote:Peril Returned and Will Of Sauron. Do they support each other ?
Does "Peril.." become permanent event when Will Of Sauron
comes to play ?
In such a situation of course twilight can't cancel it because
Peril.. isn't an enviroment card.
Is it correct ?
*** Assuming Gates of Morning is not in play, The Will of Sauron can be
played if Peril Returned is in play and Doors of Night is not. Will of
Sauron will keep Peril Returned in play as a permanent event. The
subsequent play of Gates of Morning will, by the text of Peril Returned,
remove Doors of Night from play, discarding The Will of Sauron and Peril
Returned, since it is a long-event. Twilight will not, however, affect
this combo.
Thanks for this contribution.

The acting Netrep issuing that digest is clearly interpreting The Will of Sauron discard clause to trigger when the effect leaves play. I personally agree with his interpretation and ruling. However, I also feel that official erratum/clarification on contested topics are preferred over a NetRep ruling (ie. allowing the democratic process to decide rather than having a single judge make the decision). Not to get off-topic, but I think NetRep rulings should be used as the interim law (Judicial system), until the actual law can be made (Legislative system).

Finally, I don't think you can interpret Will of Sauron both ways (discard on effect leaving play AND/OR on card leaving play) - I believe you have to pick which of these the discard clause is tied to.

Post Reply

Return to “2018 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions”