Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

The place where the NetRep and the rules wizards discuss upcoming rulings
miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by miguel » Mon May 14, 2012 10:31 am

That's why we have rulings. There is no reason to change the rule (make an erratum) when I can clarify it (in the manner I just did) with a ruling.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by Konrad Klar » Mon May 14, 2012 1:35 pm

If ruling would say:

"Read
all characters taken prisoner under the hazard host immediately join the company under general influence
as
all characters taken prisoner under the hazard host immediately join the company under general influence (if aplicable)"

it would be used as precedence by someone that want to play Fallen Wizard with We Have Come To Kill.
Besides requirement of playing character under GI or DI nothing prevent player from playing avatar with this card (playability of RW follower with WHCtK is under discussion AFIK).
Of course this may be arbitrary forbiddiden.

This is what I consider as good reason for errata - situation where ruling cannot be consistently applied to whole class of situations (including identical phrases).

Maybe topic becomes more complicated than it was initially espected, but rules are more buggy than it was initially espected.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by miguel » Mon May 14, 2012 3:21 pm

Unfortunately for most rulings to consistenly apply to a whole class of situations, we'd need a near complete rewrite of the rules and card texts first. MeCCG is an imperfect game and we do what we can with it.

This is why the netrep team doesn't strive for rulings that cover everything, and most rulings are indeed very specific though of course trying to fit the big picture. My ruling on this matter would be worded so that it's clear when it applies, anyone using WHCtK to play an avatar based on that ruling would be laughed at (by me at least). :lol:

When we can handle something with a ruling, we should do that rather than ask/wait for an erratum.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by Konrad Klar » Mon May 14, 2012 4:27 pm

With such loose conditions many possible rulings would by OK.

I see them as creative work.
I'm trying to avoid creation so much as possible. This time I have ended with conclusion that in current state rules does not allow to rescue Wizard, without breaking them.
I do not have a right to tell someone which rules should be respected, which ignored. Because it is in fact making errata to the former.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by miguel » Tue May 15, 2012 9:45 am

So it seems we disagree where the fine line between rulings and errata goes. If I was to change the text in the DM rules, that would be errata. If I was to clarify that rescuing Wizards is also possible, that would be a ruling. As the netrep I do have the right to tell people which rules should be respected and which ignored, if those people wish to play under the CoE rules.

Often many possible rulings would be ok. It is our job to pick the best one. So far I haven't seen anything that actually disproves my view on RW followers taken prisoner or even shows why it would suck, so I'm inclined to go with it.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by Konrad Klar » Tue May 15, 2012 11:25 am

Imprisoning and later rescuing RW follower is in such relation to the rule:
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.
like rescuing Ringwraith to the special ability of minion Urlurtsu Nurn
Nearest Darkhaven: Minas Morgul Special: If your Ringwraith is at this site, he may tap during the organization phase to bring one Orc or Troll character from your discard pile into play at this site (as another company). The character must move to a different site from that of your Ringwraith this turn or he is discarded at the end of the movement/hazard phase.
Both applies to the reverse situations. LE rule says about situation when controller leaves play and comes back, imprisoning/rescuing RW follower is situation when follower leaves active play and later comes back. Rescuing a Ringwraith is situation where Ringwraith appears at the site of occupied by other company of the same player, Urlurtsu Nurn says about situation where other character appears at Ringwraith company's site.

If the LE rule is sufficient to provide solution to the problem of rescuing RW follower,
maybe Urlurtsu Nurn case would be sufficient to provide solution to the problem of rescuing Ringwraith.
Of course as non-rule a text of Urlurtsu Nurn is on weaker position.
However it is only one documented example of ICE's solution to the problem of temporary coexistence Ringwraith's and non-Ringwraith's companies of the same player at the same non-haven site.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by miguel » Tue May 15, 2012 12:23 pm

But the rules on company composition limitations don't say that a RW company cannot be at the same site as a non-RW company. Only that the RW cannot be in the same company with non-RW characters outside a haven. During the org phase you may have multiple companies at a non-haven site anyway, Urlurtsu's ability is only good for bringing into play orcs/trolls that would not be normally playable there (home site). Rescuing happens in site phase, when you may not have multiple companies at a non-haven site. Or am I missing something?

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by Konrad Klar » Tue May 15, 2012 12:30 pm

No.
My trace is bad.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by miguel » Mon May 28, 2012 9:02 am

Proposed ruling wrote:Is an imprisoned Ringwraith impossible to rescue if once freed he would be violating company composition rules?
---------------------------------------------------
Yes, the freeing effect would be cancelled and the Ringwraith would remain imprisoned. On a related note, a released Ringwraith follower must be controlled by your Ringwraith by the end of your next organization phase or that Ringwraith follower is discarded.

marcos
Posts: 2010
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by marcos » Mon May 28, 2012 12:59 pm

sounds fine

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by Konrad Klar » Mon May 28, 2012 1:11 pm

Yes.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Imprisoned RW vs. Rescuers

Post by miguel » Wed Jun 12, 2013 9:54 am

Published in digest #125. Locked.

Locked

Return to “Rules and Rulings - NetRep Discussion Forum”