Responding to On-Guard Heedless

The place where the NetRep and the rules wizards discuss upcoming rulings
Locked
zarathustra
Posts: 669
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 9:26 pm

Responding to On-Guard Heedless

Post by zarathustra » Fri Sep 19, 2008 3:33 pm

Discussion here.

The basic question is this: can you respond to the declaration of heedless revelry (for its second effect)? Here are the relevant texts:

Heedless Revelry wrote:Alternatively, may be revealed as an on-guard card on a company after the successful play of an item, ally, or faction. Tap all untapped non-Ringwraith, non-Wizard characters in the company.
CRF wrote:A revealed on-guard card retroactively takes effect as though it were both declared and resolved immediately prior to the chain of effects during which it was revealed.



In my view, you generally have the option to respond to an action if it's your turn. Therefore, you should have the option to respond to Heedless, all things being equal. But things aren't equal: the only problem is that CRF rule, which says the card "retroactively takes effect as though it were both declared and resolved immediately prior to the chain of effects during which it was revealed." Without the CRF entry, the story would then run as follows:

Heedless is on guard.
(1) The company successfully plays an item. (this is actually the end of a chain)
Response:
(2) Heedless is revealed.
(3) Response to heedless.
------------------------------
(3`) The response to heedless resolves.
(2`) Heedless resolves, tapping all untapped characters.



With the CRF entry taken into account, we have the following:

Heedless is on guard.
(a) Heedless is declared.
(a`) Heedless resolves, tapping all untapped characters.
(b) The company successfully plays an item.


Make sense?
http://www.alfanos.org

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 1971
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Post by Konrad Klar » Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:25 pm

Hazards that contains phrase "(alternatively) may be revealed as on-guard" does not follow normal rules of revealing and acting of on guards.
They need such phrase because otherwise they would not work at all (or would not at all as on guard).

If Searching Eye or Half an Eye Open would be declared and resolved retroactively it would resolve even before declaration of its target!
Additionally its target was not existing during M/H phase (that is normally required for on-guards).
They need be declared in the same coe as its target (card requirng scout skills or burglary attempt) to be working properly.

Heedless Revelry is one of such cases. It is not revealed in response to playing resource (like normal on-guard), but after playing resource, so in new chain of effects.

So if it is not declared/resolved retroactively and immediately it may be responded like any plain card
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: Responding to On-Guard Heedless

Post by miguel » Mon Oct 20, 2008 10:44 am

zarathustra wrote:With the CRF entry taken into account, we have the following:

Heedless is on guard.
(a) Heedless is declared.
(a`) Heedless resolves, tapping all untapped characters.
(b) The company successfully plays an item.


Make sense?
Yes.

You can't do stuff in response to an on-guard Heedless tapping the untapped characters. Tapping the characters has become a side-product of succesfully playing an item.

Manuel
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:31 am

Post by Manuel » Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:52 pm

This has been discussed in the spanish forum too. I personally agree with what Mikko says.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 1971
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Post by Konrad Klar » Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:44 pm

Addendum:
According to my previous statement Heedless cannot prevent company from playing in response resources that requires tapping of character (or untapped character).
I think that it does not make this card useless.
Heedless may be revealed after successful play of an item, ally, or faction. But "after" does not mean "immediatelly after". This card may have useful (even disrupting) effects if revealed in response to cards like Rescue Prisoners, Smoke At Wind etc.
If resource player will not be able to untap characters before strike assignment (or between strikes, or during strike sequence) such resources will be discarded (not giving its MPs). Additionally hazard player will have freedom of assigning strikes.
And (last but not a least) hazard player can wait for appropriate moment for revealing Heedless. If cards like Smoke At Wind will not be played, he can save Heedless for better occasion (maybe next turn).
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 1971
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Post by Konrad Klar » Fri Oct 09, 2009 8:30 pm

CRF Card Erratum strikes again...
Searching through CRF for occurances of "in response" (for purposes other thread) I have encountered entry for Heedless Revelry.
CRF, Errata (Cards), Heedless Revelry wrote:The "playable on ..." conditions of the first paragraph do not apply to the second
paragraph. Card Erratum: Change "after the successful play" to "in response to the
play." [Effective 8/27/98] Does not interfere with the playing of the card it is revealed
in response to.
This errata makes the Heedless Revelry quite plain on-guard card that should be governed by standard rules for on-guards.
Only exception (and also reason for placing references to the on-guard in text) is fact the HR directly taps characters in company. Which is normally not allowed for on-guards.

Therefore anything I said about the Heedless Revelry in its original version is not applicable to the errated version.
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: Responding to On-Guard Heedless

Post by miguel » Wed Mar 09, 2011 11:11 am

After pondering about the playability of Black Bird, I think how on-guard Heedless works can be broken down as follows.

(i) character taps to play item, and item is placed with character
(ii) Heedless is revealed and is considered declared and resolved prior to the play of the item
(iii) you tap the site and all untapped non-Ringwraith, non-Wizard characters in the company as the result of succesfully playing the item

Right?

Do we need to make a ruling for the original question in this thread?

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

Re: Responding to On-Guard Heedless

Post by marcos » Wed Mar 09, 2011 12:58 pm

meaning that declared and resolved takes place immediatly leaving no time to response, right?

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

Re: Responding to On-Guard Heedless

Post by miguel » Wed Mar 09, 2011 6:08 pm

Meaning the declaration and resolution of Heedless happened before (i) as per on-guard rules. But yes, no time for any shenanigans. :lol:

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

Re: Responding to On-Guard Heedless

Post by miguel » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:07 am

Hmm let's have another crack at this...
Heedless Revelry with Errata wrote:...Alternatively, may be revealed as an on-guard card on a company in response to the play of an item, ally, or faction. Tap all untapped non-Ringwraith, non-Wizard characters in the company.
<start chain>
(i) character taps to play item, item is placed with character
(ii) Heedless is revealed and considered to have been declared and resolved prior to start of chain, and taps all untapped non-Ringwraith, non-Wizard characters in the company now :!:
<nothing more is declared, chain begins to resolve>
(iii) item is succesfully played: site taps
<end chain>

Yes?

Sauron
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:27 pm

Re: Responding to On-Guard Heedless

Post by Sauron » Thu Mar 17, 2011 6:41 pm

miguel wrote:Hmm let's have another crack at this...
Heedless Revelry with Errata wrote:...Alternatively, may be revealed as an on-guard card on a company in response to the play of an item, ally, or faction. Tap all untapped non-Ringwraith, non-Wizard characters in the company.
<start chain>
(i) character taps to play item, item is placed with character
(ii) Heedless is revealed and considered to have been declared and resolved prior to start of chain, and taps all untapped non-Ringwraith, non-Wizard characters in the company now :!:
<nothing more is declared, chain begins to resolve>
(iii) item is succesfully played: site taps
<end chain>

Yes?
Do we want to state successful play? Otherwise you'll get into things where a player attempts to play a faction and heedless would then trigger, kind of mess.

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

Re: Responding to On-Guard Heedless

Post by marcos » Thu Mar 17, 2011 6:47 pm

Brian has a point, we do want to state succeful, in my oppinion

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

Re: Responding to On-Guard Heedless

Post by Wacho » Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:34 am

miguel wrote:Hmm let's have another crack at this...
Heedless Revelry with Errata wrote:...Alternatively, may be revealed as an on-guard card on a company in response to the play of an item, ally, or faction. Tap all untapped non-Ringwraith, non-Wizard characters in the company.
<start chain>
(i) character taps to play item, item is placed with character
(ii) Heedless is revealed and considered to have been declared and resolved prior to start of chain, and taps all untapped non-Ringwraith, non-Wizard characters in the company now :!:
<nothing more is declared, chain begins to resolve>
(iii) item is succesfully played: site taps
<end chain>

Yes?
Agree

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

Re: Responding to On-Guard Heedless

Post by miguel » Wed Mar 30, 2011 7:12 pm

Oops, I should have posted this here earlier: I think we need to resolve this chain, er, thread first http://www.councilofelrond.org/forum/vi ... =12&t=1699 :)

Locked

Return to “Rules and Rulings - NetRep Discussion Forum”