Theo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:58 am
CDavis7M wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 6:57 pm
Cards are only ever playable on/by/at one entity.
there is ample evidence for cards that are "played by" one entity and "played on" another. A great example: Focus Palantir.
I'm not saying it's not weird, but it is possible. Spies Feared is another that even says "Scout or Ranger only."
One might argue that Padding Feet can be played on two characters at once... but I won't argue that.
Let's read the cards: Focus Palantir is "
Playable on a Palantír." Meaning, it targets the Palantir. It also has the condition that the Palantir is (borne by a character) in a company with a sage. Still, it only targets the Palantir.
Spies Feared says "
Scout or Ranger only.
Playable on a shadow-hold if one of your scouts is there or on a Ruins & Lairs if one of your rangers is there." Therefore, it is played on a site. BUT it also has the condition that the site be a particular site-type and that a character of a particular skill be there. Spies Feared is "
Scout or Ranger only" because of the playability conditions that require a Scout in one case, or a Ranger in another case. But Spies Feared it is definitely not targeting the Scout/Ranger character.
And Padding Feet literally says that it is playable "
on a lone scout minion."
None of these are examples of a card being played on 2 different entities. The closest example I can see is Align Palantir, which is played on the Sage but then kept with the Palantir. Even then, it is only played on 1 entity and then later kept with a 2nd entity.
--------------
Theo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:58 am
MELE wrote:Bróin, a scout, taps and plays A Nice Place to Hide to cancel the attack
MELE wrote:For example, Last Child of Ungoliant has the sage skill, so she can tap to play a Secrets of Their Forging card.
MELE wrote:Ciryaher taps and plays A Nice Place to Hide to cancel the automatic-attack.
Curious how the examples of characters playing events coincide with events with the "[skill] only." qualifier... precisely in line with the CRF.
A Nice Place to Hide has the "
Scout only" keyword, no playability conditions, and a single action (attack-cancelling) with the active condition that a Scout taps. Since there is only 1 action, the active condition of that action effectively prevents the card from being played if the action's active condition cannot be met (the cancelling action's active conditions are different from the card-play action's active conditions). Therefore, by the active conditions of the actions in the card (not by the "Scout only" keyword) does the card have the requirement that it "can only be played by characters with the scout skill."
With
Secrets of Their Forging, the card actually says "
Playable on a sage." This is clearly an active condition for playing the card.
The only examples of "playable by" a character in all of the cards that I've seen involve conditions for characters playing allies or factions. But sure, I'm OK with the informal statement "Baby Ungoliant plays Secrets." But I'm OK if a player wants to informally say that a character "played" it as it makes no difference to the game mechanics. The METW and MELE examples are informal as you pointed out.
What are other examples of "Skill only" keyword cards to consider whether their effects already require a character of the skill or not.
Test of Fire is a "Sage only" card with no playability conditions but it has 1 single ring-test action and that action has the active condition of targeting "a gold ring in a sage's company." So yes, it can only be "played by" a Sage, even though its not actually played "on" the sage, or the ring.
Voices of Malice is also a "Sage only" card with no playability conditions. And it actually has 2 actions! But... yeah, both the discard-action and the corruption-check-action have active conditions requiring a sage. So yes, it's also "Sage only" and has no need of requirements from the "foo only" statement.
-------------
Theo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:58 am
If the character
playing Focus Palantir was Call of Home'd after Focus Palantir is declared, you would say any other sage would serve just as well for the active condition? I disagree; the play of the "Sage only" card is play by a particular sage, which establishes an additional active condition on the sage actuallly playing the card.
Only "actions" have "targets." The action of playing Focus Palantir targets the Palantir. The sage in the company is just a condition of the targeting. The target of an action doesn't have its own targets
Only the Palantir is targeted. This Palantir is targeted upon declaration of Focus Palantir and must still be in play at resolution. If Call of Home gets rid of the Palantir, then a different palantir cannot be targeted at resolution because the first palantir was already the target of the active conditions. But if the same Palantir is transferred and there is another Sage, then it's all OK. The sage and the company are not the targets. They are not active conditions, merely conditions. Targets are active conditions by definition in the CRF rulings by term.
----------------
Theo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:58 am
I do not understand the format/meaning of your list.
It's just a list of everything that is in the card
Ruse when you actually break it down according to the mechanics of the rules. If the statement "
(Foo) only" cards can only be played by characters with the (foo) skill." is going to have any effect on the game, it needs to fit in there somewhere.
Theo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:58 am
Or the evidence for a card being played by more than one character is right in front of you, but you cyclic-logic dismiss it as impossible.
Well, I tried to explain why I think "foo only" doesn't apply to ruse in that way with my best understanding of the rules.
To achieve the requested effect of Ruse requiring a company with both a Diplomat and a Scout, the active conditions of Ruse (1st option) would need to be altered to say (addition in underline): "Playable on an untapped diplomat in a covert company
, facing an attack
, that also includes a scout."
I just don't see how the "foo only" statement can get us there: "
(Foo) only" cards can only be played by characters with the (foo) skill."
The "foo only" statement says nothing about a company. And it is literally an accurate
description of every single card that uses the phrase "Foo only." EVERY card that says "<foo skill> only" as a keyword (vs METW use as active condition) already has playability conditions requiring a character with the skill or a set of actions with active conditions targeting a single character with the skill. There is literally no card out there that needs the "foo only" statement to create additional requirements.
The "foo only" statement only fits with the early METW cards that use "<Skill only>" as the active condition for playing the card. Also, Many Turns and Doublings.
Lordly Presence wrote:Diplomat only. +5 to an influence check against a faction.
If the influence check is successful, draw a card.
There is no Diplomat referenced when the actions are described in the card text. We have the +5 action to a check and the draw card action if the check succeeds, but not Diplomat. But these older cards did not consider "Diplomat only" to be a keyword, they considered them to be the active condition. It is clear that "Diplomat only" is an active condition because it is not an action and no action in the card requires a Diplomat. In this case, the "Foo only" statement helps the reader understand that "Diplomat only" is an active condition.
"(Foo) only" cards can only be played by characters with the (foo) skill. Yup. Diplomat only is an active condition for Lordly Presence.
But in Ruse, "
Diplomat only. Scout only." are keywords, not active conditions. Ruse already has other alternative active conditions that involve a Diplomat or a Scout. "
Diplomat only. Scout only." is not an active condition and its not an action, so then it's a keyword.