Govern the Storms

The place to ask and debate all rules issues related to MECCG.
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

The fact that some cards of a given type have a requirement or standard process does not mean that all cards of that type have it.
The game is flawed, but this does not mean it cannot be loved.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Bandobras Took wrote: Tue Jan 08, 2019 8:42 pm Whichever one you choose, just like you can choose which Ranger to tap to satisfy River.
Bandobras Took wrote: Tue Jan 08, 2019 4:40 am Govern the Storms requires a corruption check for any Sorceror that makes use of its effect. It cancels bouncing/tapping (and causes a corruption check) so long as its condition (company of a Sorceror) is fulfilled, which sounds an awful lot like a passive condition to me, except that short events that last until the end of the turn are screwy anyway.
So what?
Govern the Storms is causing cc ["It cancels bouncing/tapping (and causes a corruption check)"], or rather sorcery-using character makes cc to activate Govern the Storm's canceling ability?

Ranger taps to satisfy River voluntarily.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

@Theo
Skill cards do not necessarily target a skill character. It does not mean that none of them target skill character.
Marvels Told targets a sage.
Sage is enacting (tapping to) Marvels Told.
Scout is enacting (tapping to) Concealment, or Stealth.
Lidless Eye wrote:Strinker has the scout skill so he can tap to play a Sneakin‘ card.
That is wrong.
Scout does not tap to play Sneakin‘. Scout must be untapped to play Sneakin‘ and taps in result.
Someone mistaken Sneakin‘ with Stealth.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

@ Konrad: And making a corruption check is an action, but one that is not declared when the card is played. That seems similar enough to River, which does not require a Ranger to tap when the card is played, but rather sets up an ongoing effect that allows for a later action. Whichever Sorceror makes the corruption check is established when the effect is used.
The game is flawed, but this does not mean it cannot be loved.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Bandobras Took wrote: Wed Jan 09, 2019 2:40 pm @ Konrad: And making a corruption check is an action, but one that is not declared when the card is played. That seems similar enough to River, which does not require a Ranger to tap when the card is played, but rather sets up an ongoing effect that allows for a later action. Whichever Sorceror makes the corruption check is established when the effect is used.
I have asked about something else.
Greed does not cause a cc at its declaration, River does not tap a ranger at its declaration.
But ccs caused by Greed are enforced (when some condition is met), River does not enforce a ranger to tap.

So how Govern the Storms would work?
If played to cancel all hazard effects that force a sorcery-using character's company to return to its site of origin and such effects is declared (or maybe, when it has to resolve; your choice), players is choosing a sorcery-using character (if more than one is available) to enact the cancel effect (to make cc-4), or cancel effect occurs automatically and then which (and on what basis?) of sorcery-using character is the character that makes cc-4?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

A character facing a corruption check in the diplomat's company may automatically transfer one item he bears to another character in his company. The item must be transferrable, and the new bearer must be able to bear it.
How do you decide which character facing a corruption check transfers an item?
The game is flawed, but this does not mean it cannot be loved.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

By targeting it (playing a card on it) with Pledge of Conduct.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

So you decide which character gets the action by . . . deciding which character gets the action.

A sorceror needs to make a corruption check in a company with multiple sorcerors. You decide which one by . . . deciding which one.
The game is flawed, but this does not mean it cannot be loved.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

You are playing Pledge of Conduct.
You are not playing "all hazard effects for the rest of the turn that:[...]"

So question remains:
- does the cancellation happens automatically along with associated cc -4? (Greed fashion)
- or rather you are choosing sorcery-using character that enacts cc -4? (River fashion)
- other possibility?

I have an objections to both first and second option.

Unlike Greed, that precisely specifies which characters have to make cc, Govern the Storms says "Unless he is a Ringwraith, the sorcery using character makes a corruption check modified by -4." as though it would not be possible for company to have more than one of such characters.

Unlike River, Govern the Storms does not say that you may, or even must perform some action (cc -4) to create some (canceling) effects.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

It's both.

The cancellation happens automatically, at which point you choose which possible valid sorceror makes the cc. There is no way for the cancellation to happen unless there is at least one valid sorceror to make the cc.
The game is flawed, but this does not mean it cannot be loved.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

In line with what Bandobras is saying, I like to think of it as: if the triggering effect weren't canceled, each sorcery-using character would have to make a corruption check. But once the first canceling occurs (resource player's resolution choice), there is no longer a hazard effect to cancel + force additional corruption checks.

---
Konrad Klar wrote: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:21 am @Theo
Skill cards do not necessarily target a skill character. It does not mean that none of them target skill character.
Marvels Told targets a sage.
Sage is enacting (tapping to) Marvels Told.
Scout is enacting (tapping to) Concealment, or Stealth.
Lidless Eye wrote:Strinker has the scout skill so he can tap to play a Sneakin‘ card.
That is wrong.
Scout does not tap to play Sneakin‘. Scout must be untapped to play Sneakin‘ and taps in result.
Someone mistaken Sneakin‘ with Stealth.
A nice catch. It speaks more to Sneakin' tapping intended (but failing) to be an active condition. It doesn't change my point.
METW wrote:Gollum has the scout skill so he can tap to play a Concealment card.
"He can tap to play." Not, "he can tap so you can play."

Maybe you still say the rules are wrong. I'm saying your interpretation is inconsistent with the rules and give an alternative which is consistent. Skill cards are played by (through) a character with that skill, and thus they ALWAYS target a character with that skill (along with possible additional targets as named in the text).
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

I'm afraid that doesn't work.
MELE wrote:Condition, Active: A prerequisite for an action actively made by a player. Typically this involves tapping a character, discarding an item, or having a character of a particular skill in play. Active conditions are declared and resolved with no time for response by an opponent or yourself.
While an entity with a given skill may be a requirement for the card play action, that does not mean that the action plays out through that entity. Rather, the entity enables the action to be performed.

As an example:
Stone of Erech wrote:Unique. Playable at the Vale of Erech and if the Men of Lamedon are already in play.
Stone of Erech does not target Men of Lamedon; they are merely a condition of its play. Likewise, skill requirements do not target the entity bearing the skill. Any effects/actions of the card may do so, however, depending on card text.

As another note, it seems by rule to be impossible for active conditions to target anything.
CRF, Targets wrote:A target is an entity that an action is played out through.
MELE Rules wrote:Meeting active conditions and exhausting a play deck are not actions (. . .)
The game is flawed, but this does not mean it cannot be loved.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Theo wrote: Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:43 am Maybe you still say the rules are wrong.
Maybe, or maybe I'm saying that some examples are wrong.

I think that that following scenario is possible:
Alatar, Bilbo, Frodo are in company. Bilbo bears Beautiful Gold Ring.

Weariness of the Heart is played on Alatar (for 2nd use - cc)
Old Friendship is played on the declared cc.
Call of Home is played in Frodo.
Test of Lore is played on Beautiful Gold Ring.

Test of Lore resolves and Magic Ring of Word is played.
Call of Home resolves and Frodo is returned to hand.
Old Friendship resolves (because still there is a diplomat in company, albeit other diplomat than that at declaration).
Weariness of the Heart resolves .
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

I like this example for illustrating the problem.
CRF wrote:"(Foo) only" cards can only be played by characters with the (foo) skill.
Old Friendship was declared to be played by Frodo. It can't resolve if Frodo is not in play to resolve it (even if it did, there is no longer a company-of-Frodo to be able to choose a character to help a CC). And it can't be played twice; Bilbo can't decide to play it after Frodo already did.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Theo wrote: Thu Jan 10, 2019 8:34 pmOld Friendship was declared to be played by Frodo.
I find no indication anywhere that this happens or is even necessary. Old Friendship was declared to played. The presence of a Diplomat was checked to make certain the card was able to be declared. At resolution, the presence of a Diplomat is checked to make certain the card can resolve.
The game is flawed, but this does not mean it cannot be loved.
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)”