First CoE erratum; ideas

Errata issued by the CoE, open discussion of candidate rules for errata, and submissions for the Annual Rules Vote.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Mon Jan 09, 2012 7:53 pm

Taking an option on the new charter being approved by the CoE, which should be the first CoE issued erratum? The way I see it, we got 2 options.
a) start off slow not to upset anyone ("hey, I didn't know CoE was doing that").
b) start with a bang so as to generate interest ("hey, what do I care about such minor change").

Perhaps the any Resource on Auto-attack is an intermediate option:
http://www.councilofelrond.org/forum/vi ... 5&start=15

I would start with this one then, but feel free to suggest other proposals.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

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

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by miguel » Tue Jan 10, 2012 9:18 am

That would be the best place to start IMO.

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

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by marcos » Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:26 pm

yes, i agree

User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:47 pm

Ok, well I'm not hearing any other ideas, so let's start here then. 1 more vote on the new Charter and we'll get it going.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

thorondor
Council Member
Posts: 624
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:53 pm
Location: salzburg, austria
Contact:

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by thorondor » Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:17 pm

if another opinion is needed: good starting point imo:

User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Sat Jan 28, 2012 5:05 pm

Ok, the CoE project-team responsible to keep a track on all things Errata is now formed.
isn't it nice when management courses finally pay off? :lol:

well, Mikko and/or Marcos, would you please formulate precisely what this erratum proposal must look like?
to avoid loopholes, exceptions, exclusions, confusions etc.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

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

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by marcos » Sat Jan 28, 2012 10:58 pm

it has been nicely formulated by b_took before. Maybe we can start from there?
When facing an automatic attack, you may only play resources that state they are playable on an attack or strike or a character/company facing such. You may not play such a resource if it specifies it may not be played on automatic attacks. When facing an attack created by a card with multiple effects, you may only play resources that state they are playable on an attack or strike or a character/company facing such.

User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Sun Jan 29, 2012 4:46 pm

It looks ok, let's hear Mikko's opinion on the formulation. Also we need the passage in the original rules which it would replace/modify.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

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

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by marcos » Mon Jan 30, 2012 1:30 pm

this is the original:
CRF, Automatic Attacks wrote:The only resources you may play against automatic-attacks are ones that cancel the attack, cancel a strike, or would be otherwise playable during the strike sequence.

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

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by miguel » Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:56 pm

Here's a quick rewording, a first draft if you will:

**********

When facing an automatic-attack, you may play resources that affect the attack or would otherwise be playable during the strike sequence. Same applies for facing an attack created by a card with multiple actions. This modifies the following rules:
CRF: Turn Sequence Rulings: Site Phase: Automatic-attacks wrote:The only resources you may play against automatic-attacks are ones that cancel the attack, cancel a strike, or would be otherwise playable during the strike sequence.
CRF: Rulings by Term: Timing wrote:# Annotation 24 wrote:If a card specifies that more than one action occurs when the card itself is resolved in a chain of effects, all of these actions are to be resolved in the card's chain of effects uninterrupted and in the order listed on the card. No actions may be declared to occur between these multiple actions. The actions listed on the card are considered to have been declared in the reverse order as they are printed.

# (amendment to original version of Annotation 24): As an exception, if one of the effects of a card is an attack, cards may be played that cancel the attack, cancel one of its strikes, or that otherwise are playable during the strike sequence--see Annotation 18 (Turn Sequence, Movement/ Hazard Phase, Combat, Strike Sequence).
Balrog Rules: Specific Rules for MEBA: Cards with Multiple Actions (Clarification) wrote:...As an exception, if one of the effects of a card is an attack, cards may be played that cancel the attack, cancel one of the strikes, or that otherwise are playable during the strike sequence.
**********

I don't think it's necessary to state that cards playable on non-automatic-attacks are not playable on automatic-attacks. I am a little unclear on what Ben had in mind regarding playing resources on companies/characters facing attacks/strikes... :?:
Last edited by miguel on Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.

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

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by marcos » Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:01 pm

I don't think it's necessary to state that cards playable on non-automatic-attacks are not playable on automatic-attacks. I am a little unclear on what Ben had in mind regarding playing resources on companies/characters facing attacks/strikes...
we have come to kill/ a chance meeting, just to name some that came to my mind right now.

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

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by miguel » Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:12 pm

Um, those two should certainly not be playable until the automatic-attack(s) have been faced.

I think Ben was thinking of cards like Ruse. They're not directly playable on an attack, but they do affect it (strike assingment) so I think we're covered?

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

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by miguel » Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:20 pm

Btw, I believe the current CvCC rulings are a reflection of the old rules. I think the netrep should revise those rulings when this errata becomes official.
Last edited by miguel on Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by marcos » Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:21 pm

Hold rebuilt and repared/ Rebuild the town. These are played during the site phase and auto-attacks happen during the site phase, right? I think this cards might be playable with the new errata?
Um, those two should certainly not be playable until the automatic-attack(s) have been faced.
they shouldn't, but with the current errata, they could be played. Or am i missing something?

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

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Post by miguel » Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:24 pm

Hold Rebuilt and Repaired is legal to play before facing the AA (edit: or rather was legal, and will be legal again lol). Rebuild the Town is not (removing AA is not considered affecting).
Last edited by miguel on Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules & Errata”