Canceling attack vs canceling strike (especially in CVCC)

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

Post by miguel » Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:15 pm

*KutM deck done*

Aye.

Wacho
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:51 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA

Post by Wacho » Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:21 am

Since I had been rather inactive during summer and fall and also because I thought this had been resolved 6 months prior to the August posts I had overlooked the revival of this topic until now.

I really don't understand the logic of overturning COE41. It seems the only motivation for doing this is to preserve some options when facing auto-attacks. I think the auto-attack issue is entirely separate and that rule is rather a problem to begin with and this "fix" won't solve it.

You say there is no basis for the COE41 ruling. What is the basis for ruling otherwise? The point of contention seems to come down to what do the rules mean when they say you can play a card that affects the strike. I think it is at least equally reasonable to interpret this as cards that only affect a strike as to interpret this as cards that affect the strike or an attack. Also in every other instance where a card affects the whole attack (cancelling, changing # of strikes or strike assignment) this has to be done before strikes are assigned.

As far as the potential for abuse I think it is huge. Ok I admit that Prowess of Age because of its text does not have this problem, but Black Vapour which has essentially the same options does not have that additional text. There is probably an additional dozen or more hazard cards which boost prowess to an attack that would be able to be used after strikes have been assigned and the option to cancel is no longer there. These include cards like Clouds, Icy Touch, Full of Froth and Fury, Dragon's Desolation, Plague of Wights (with no Doors out), and Worm's Stench. This means that you as the resource player no longer have the chance to see what the final strength of the attack will be before you decide to cancel. Just the potential with Cave-Drake and Dragon's Desolation alone are huge.

Saying that the COE41 ruling makes the text on Prowess of Age redundant is not really a good argument. There are plenty of cards with redundant or unnecessary text. Take Sneakin' for example
Scout only. Playable during the organization phase on an untapped scout in a company with a company size less than 3. Tap the scout. No creature hazards may be played on his company this turn.
There is no need to say playable on an untapped scout, because you have to tap the scout in order to play the card. There are many other examples of this type of overspecification.

As far as cards like Potion of Prowess and Evenstar (with GOM) these cards are specifically allowed by the rules. Page 29 of the MELE rulebook states that the prowess of the target of a strike may be modified by the play of certain resource or hazard cards. I have never been arguing against this, or saying that if a card affects a strike and does something else you can't play it during the strike phase. What I am saying is that for the purposes of Annotation 18 a card does not affect the strike unless it says it affects the strike not the attack.

I think that sticking with the current ruling and this interpretation is logical, and as Mark says intuitive. It will also save us a lot of trouble later with regards to hazard play during strike phases.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Post by Konrad Klar » Fri Mar 14, 2008 2:35 pm

Wacho wrote:As far as cards like Potion of Prowess and Evenstar (with GOM) these cards are specifically allowed by the rules. Page 29 of the MELE rulebook states that the prowess of the target of a strike may be modified by the play of certain resource or hazard cards.
This part is about all factors that modify target's prowess against strike.
There are cards that modify prowess of character playable only in strike sequence and modify prowess only against strike.

It does not mean that all (otherwise legal) effects that modify character's prowess may be played in strike sequence.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

Wacho
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:51 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA

Post by Wacho » Fri Mar 14, 2008 5:57 pm

I see no such limitation that you mention.
MELE rules pg. 29 wrote:The target's prowess may also be modified due to the play of certain resources and hazard cards. Only one resource card requiring skill may be played against a given strike.
Where do you find support for your statement?

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Post by Konrad Klar » Fri Mar 14, 2008 6:53 pm

I don't want to say the there is such limitation.
Cards that modify target's prowess (other than playable only against strike) are not explicitly allowed, and are not precluded.
In other words it is not written that cards that modify defender's prowess may be played in addition to the other cards playable only against strike.

Whole chapter Strike Modifications does not say anything about modifications to the strike prowess ("There are a number of standard modifications to the prowess of each target character facing a strike:").
It does not mean that strike's prowess modifications are not allowed at all.

We are returning to the same point, I think.
There is assumption, that cards that modify target prowess may be played in strike sequence even if they are not playable only against strike. I.e. affecting strike, modifying defender's prowess by card playable also outside strike sequence is OK.
Base for this assumption is Strike Modifications chapter that does not preclude explicitly such possibility.

There is also assumption the prowess of attacker's strike can be only altered by cards playable only against the strike. I.e. affecting strike, modifying attack's prowess by card playable also outside Strike Sequence is not OK.
Base for this assumption is fact, the other possibility is not explicitly allowed by rules.

P.S.
When exactly cards like Block and Dodge can be played? At the stage 3 of Strike Sequence (A target untapped character may take a -3 modification so that he will not automatically tap following the strike sequence.),
or at stage 4 [The defending player may play resource cards that affect the strike (up to one card that requires skill).]?

EDIT:
Removed:
"This chapter is only about stage 4 of Strike Sequence." (line 9).

EDIT2:
Added verses "I.e. ..." for clearness.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

Wacho
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:51 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA

Post by Wacho » Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:02 pm

Konrad Klar wrote:I don't want to say the there is such limitation.
Cards that modify target's prowess (other than playable only against strike) are not explicitly allowed, and are not precluded.
They are explicitly allowed. I quoted the rule that allows them.
Whole chapter Strike Modifications does not say anything about modifications to the strike prowess ("There are a number of standard modifications to the prowess of each target character facing a strike:").
It does not mean that strike's prowess modifications are not allowed at all.
Of course not. Cards that specifically say they affect a strike are clearly ok even if not specifically mentioned. Cards actions often don't fall into the normal rules.

I don't see the strike sequence stages you mention. Where do you find these?
Last edited by Wacho on Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Post by Konrad Klar » Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:16 pm

certain resources and hazard cards.
does not mean
"any resources and hazard cards".

This is still unclear, whether such "certains" are cards playable against/on strike or any cards that makes such effect.

Once again:
Strike Modifications lists only factors that modify defender's prowess.

There are some hazards that modify strike prowess and are unquestionably playable in strike sequence (Dragon's Curse, Memories Stolen). Strike Modifications says nothing about such effects.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

Wacho
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:51 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA

Post by Wacho » Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:35 pm

Konrad I'm not sure why you are arguing this. We agree (as far as I can tell) on these points. Unless you think you can't play cards such as Vilya or Eventstar.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Post by Konrad Klar » Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:38 pm

So let me explain my point of view.

Strike Modifications says about factors that modify prowess of defender.
Because there are no resources that are playable only in strike sequence and that does not require skills (not counting Dodge and Under His Blow), it may be indirectly concluded that cards that modify prowess of defender are generally allowed in strike sequence.

At the same time question of modifications to the prowess of strike is not covered at all.

In my opinion it should not be readed as:
Only cards playable in Strike Sequence are cards that affect strike (including cards that modify defender's prowess). Other cards cannot be played.
(in such variant cards like Dragon's Curse would be allowed because its texts supersedes general rules, similarly as cards that may be revealed on-guard supersedes normal limitations on revealed on-guard).

In my opinion it should be readed as is:
Strike Modifications says only about modifications to the defender's prowess and nothing about strike's prowess.
(in such variant one of possible conclusions is that:
cards that affect strike are not limited to the cards playable specifically in strike sequence - if cards that indirectly affects strike, modifying prowess of defender are allowed, then cards that indirectly affects prowess of strike, modifying prowess of attack are allowed too.)

Please note that:
There are a number of standard modifications to the prowess of each target character facing a strike:

* An unwounded, tapped character must modify his prowess by -1.
* A wounded character must modify his prowess by -2.
* Normally a character that is the target of a strike is tapped after the strike is resolved. However, a character may choose to take a -3 modification to his prowess to avoid being tapped. If so, the character is not tapped after the strike is resolved (he may still be wounded).
* If an attack has more strikes than the company has characters, the attacker may allocate the excess strikes as -1 modifiers to the prowess of whichever target(s) he chooses. See The Strike Sequence.
* The target's prowess may also be modified due to the play of certain resource and hazard cards. Only one resource card requiring skill may be played against a given strike.

Condition Mod. to Target's Prowess
Tapped character* -1
Wounded character* -2
Untapped character decides not to tap* -3
For each unused strike allocated (i.e. each extra strike)* -1
Up to one resource card that requires skill varies
Other resource cards varies
Hazard cards varies

Clarification: The prowess modifications marked with an * above are applied for a given strike and then are removed immediately after the strike is resolved. That is they do not carry over from strike to strike.

Note: Ignore effects that modify the number of strikes for an attack that states that "every character in the target company faces one strike" (unless an effect reduces the number of strikes to a specific number, e.g. Veils of Shadow).
does not say anything about body of defender (nor about body of attacker). Does it mean the actions like using of Miruvor are not possible in Strike Sequence?

EDIT:
How about Night (with Doors of Night in play)?
Effect of this card modify both attack's prowess and defender's prowess.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

Wacho
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:51 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA

Post by Wacho » Mon Mar 17, 2008 8:29 pm

Ok, so you want to say that you can play cards that modify the attack during the strike sequence, but based on what justification? There is nothing in the rules that even suggests you could do this. In fact this contradicts a clear digest ruling. On the other hand I've mentioned a specific rule that allows the target's prowess to be affected. As far as your example that the rulebook doesn't mention that you can modify the prowess of a strike, that's true. However, cards in general are more specific than the rules and furthermore what other time than the strike sequence would these cards be playable? There really isn't any other opportunity. Whereas for cards that modify attacks there is an appropriate and logical time for them to be modified. Also the rules are clear that other attack modifications need to happen before strikes are assigned.

Look, you find something that mentions modifing attacks during the strike phase then great. Otherwise we have a clear ruling which is logical and which fits with how other cards are played. To overturn that would mean we would break the structural symmetry and it would also cause more problems as I've mentioned.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Post by Konrad Klar » Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Wacho wrote:Ok, so you want to say that you can play cards that modify the attack during the strike sequence, but based on what justification?
First, reversing this question, why not?
There is rule that forbids changing number of strikes and cancelling of attack after strike assignation.
Why there is not rule that just forbids altering of attack after this point?
Why only that two particular form of altering attack are forbidden?

Strike Modifications is only about target's prowess. It even does not cover such aspect like target's body. What is clear: cards playable during Strike Sequence does not must be Strike Sequence specific. Why? If not counting Dodge and Under His Blow (that may be considered as removing -3 penalty, thus affecting prowess), there are no cards not requiring skills that modify prowess.

So we have one clear permission - for cards not specific to the strike sequence that indirectly affect strike, modifying target's prowess.
We does not have clear permission nor forbidding for effects that affects attack after strike assignation (besides forbidding of changing number of strikes and cancelling).

I think we all agree that modification of attack would affect strike. Moot point is whether it is legal or not in strike sequence/after strike assignation.

Finally we have Annotation 18.
When a defending player chooses to resolve a strike against a
particular character, the only actions that may be taken by either player until the strike dice-roll is made are the following: playing hazard cards that affect the strike, the attacker may decide to use any or all of his remaining -1 modifications due to strikes in excess of the company's size, a target untapped character may take a -3 modification so that he will not automatically tap, and the defending character may play resource cards that affect the strike. An action that has the condition that a target
character tap, but which otherwise has an effect not outlined here, may not be declared at this point.
This is true even if the recipient of the strike would be the target character tapping and thus receive -1 to his prowess.
Underlines mine.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Post by Jambo » Fri Mar 28, 2008 1:33 pm

Presumably, this has enabled Full of Froth and Rage to be played during the strike sequence? At a time when the attack is no longer able to be cancelled.

Others include: Plague of Wights (sans DoN), Icy Touch, Black Vapour, Dragon's Desolation, Drums, Scimitars of Steel?, Prowess of Might, Worms Stench.

(admittedly most of the latter are unlikely to have massive repercussions)

Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Post by Jambo » Wed Apr 02, 2008 12:32 pm

The more I think about this, the more I agree with David.

The rules are quite specific when they state that players may only play resources or hazards that 'affect the strike'.

Potion of Prowess or Evenstar don't come with the playable against a strike or attack limitations, so one could conceivably play or use them at any time you like. They affect the strike so fair dos. The question remains as to why one would explicitly wait until during a specific character's strike sequence to play The Evenstar or use Potion of Prowess? However, I'm not sure I understand why this is resulting in interpreting cards that state they affect an attack and happen to modify prowess/body being encompassed in cards that now 'affect a strike' and can be played during the strike sequence? A card that imparts a +1 to an 'attack's' prowess is not the same as a card that imparts a +1 to a 'strike's' prowess.

Furthermore, if the recent ruling is correct, wouldn't the reverse then also be true? In that cards that affect a strike could also be considered to affect the attack? If so, then we're right back at square one with Cram and CvCC.

And lastly - as an aside - why would someone ever try to play Wizard's Flame during the strike sequence? Again, I can't imagine a situation where this would be beneficial to do so?! However, the same cannot be said for hazards. The benefit of being able to play hazards that boost the prowess of an attack in the strike sequence, when the attack is no longer able to be cancelled, is obvious!
Last edited by Jambo on Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Wacho
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:51 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA

Post by Wacho » Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:15 pm

The only motivation I see for this, Jamie, is that being able to play Wizard's Flame, Old Thrush, etc. saves the day for King Under the Mountain decks and other cases where you are facing auto attacks. But in my mind the problem is with the language on the auto-attack CRF entry and overruling COE41 doesn't really fix things.

The difference in opinion seems to be how to read the word "strike", you and I read it narrowly, others read it broadly. I suppose there is room for both interpretations but which makes more sense? Which makes for a more logical structure, which causes less problems? I think a narrow reading, which also has the benefit of not needing to overturn a previous digest. Furthermore, I also think that you are correct, if we rule this way we would need to revisit the CvCC rulings, which will cause more trouble and confusion.

Finally, I'd like to ask people who support a broad reading, if one or more strikes of an attack have been faced and then you decide to play Old Thrush or whatever, how can you make sense of that? Some of the strikes have been faced, and can not be modified. Are you supposed to go back and change the outcomes of those strikes? If not how can you say the attack can be modified, when part of the attack is not able to be changed? If the attack has body, how does it make sense for part of the attack to have one body, and part have another? It just does not seem logical.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Post by Konrad Klar » Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:16 pm

Jambo wrote:And lastly - as an aside - why would someone ever try to play Wizard's Flame during the strike sequence? I can't imagine a situation where this would be beneficial to do so?!
Because his wizard has lost item (and its CP) during other character's strike sequence (against Pirates, for example) and now wizard does not fear cc. Of course Wizard's Flame could be played between strike sequences, but the same can be sayed about using of Potion of Prowess, playing Narya and many other cards undisputably playable in SS.

Even if ICE's idea was that only cards playable during SS are cards that affects singular strike and nothing else, then rules are not ambiguous on this.
First - modifications to the target's prowess are effects that lasts outside resolving strike and outside resolving attack, so it affects something else.
Second, Strike Modifications does not say about target's body, so if someone want such interpretation that only resources playable during SS are that which makes effect mentioned in Strike Modifications, then he cannot use Miruvor in SS (for example, it would affect strike and would not affect attack as whole). Third, it is curious why rules forbids changing number of strikes and canceling attack afters strike assignation and does not forbid altering of attack at all.

Even if such idea (only cards playable during SS are cards that affects singular strike and nothing else) is cute, I cannot find enough justification for it.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

Locked

Return to “Rules and Rulings - NetRep Discussion Forum”