[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4772: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4774: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4775: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4776: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
Council of Elrond • View topic - First CoE erratum; ideas

First CoE erratum; ideas

Moderator: Thorsten the Traveller

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby miguel » Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:28 pm

WHCtK and ACM do not directly affect strike assignment. Therefore they do not affect the attack. This might be more of a ruling than a rule type of thing.
meccgnetrep (at) gmail (dot) com
User avatar
miguel
Council Member
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby marcos » Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:30 pm

right, i was missing "that" part :lol:
User avatar
marcos
 
Posts: 2010
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby Thorsten the Traveller » Wed Feb 01, 2012 9:13 pm

Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Chairman
 
Posts: 1499
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby miguel » Thu Feb 02, 2012 10:06 am

meccgnetrep (at) gmail (dot) com
User avatar
miguel
Council Member
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby Bandobras Took » Mon Feb 06, 2012 4:17 pm

As I am not a council member at the moment, I'll not enter into the larger debate, but I would like to explain the reasoning behind my wording. There are two main ideas:

1) I believe that this is what ICE was trying to say; I could be mistaken on that part, but it seems to me as though the intent was that automatic attacks had to be faced, not evaded, and that automatic attacks should be considered a valid threat. The intent of my wording was to reinforce what I have understood to be ICE's general idea, which was "We don't want people using bizarre combos that didn't occur to us to get around automatic attacks."

2) It has been noted that my wording is strict. This was also deliberate. I wanted a wording that would require absolutely no rulings whatsoever, thus making the NetRep's job easier. The purpose of issuing any erratum at all is to ameliorate the playing environment; I did not and do not feel that a wording which will require further rulings on specific cards to be added to the URD ameliorates the play environment; rather, it makes learning the game more sluggish and can lead (though not necessarily will) to a disgruntling inconsistency.

I realize that my wording would change the way some cards are played, including those which were technically legal under the ICE wording, but the whole point of an erratum such as this was, as I understood it, to ameliorate the playing environment by changing the game.

This was my reasoning.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards .
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Non-voting member
 
Posts: 2309
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby miguel » Mon Feb 06, 2012 5:40 pm

But with your wording players can evade automatic-attacks with cards like Ruse (2nd part) and Sojourn in Shadows... Maybe I'm missing something.

I think it's better to have an intuitive, unified approach to facing attacks. I don't see why automatic-attacks would/should be any more of a "valid threat" than any other attacks. My version is basically going back to the way things were prior to the discovery/enforcement of the very restrictive AA-rules, and IMO things worked just fine back then.
meccgnetrep (at) gmail (dot) com
User avatar
miguel
Council Member
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby Thorsten the Traveller » Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:27 pm

it would be useful to have a conclusive list of cards that in either proposal would be in or out.

because to be honest, I do not feel either approach is more intuitive than the other. Yes Mikko's proposal resembles more the general facing of any attack, and Ben's proposal sticks closer to what I assume was the original ICE purpose with creating the aa-ruling, which by now has become engraved in our system so that it feels equally intuitive.

I do agree with Ben's point that any erratum serves to make rulings unnecessary.

Has Hold Rebuilt already been ruled upon? (sry I'm rusty with rulings, there you have it). Cause it is not played on the attack, so I don't see why it had need for a ruling, other than it is the same as Rebuild the Town, and I honestly don't see why it should not follow the Rebuild the Town ruling.

btw. Would it make any difference to state that you may only play cards on an attack or on the company (or entities therein) facing the aa (which affect the attack)? That way Hold Rebuilt is out of the question, but Marvels Told is not, as long as it's a sage in the company that taps...
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Chairman
 
Posts: 1499
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby Bandobras Took » Mon Feb 06, 2012 9:47 pm

Strike assignment cards are meant to be used when facing attacks; I see no problem with a card such as Ruse that is not present in a card such as Halfling Stealth or Concealment. All can, in the right conditions, get you safely past an attack -- but they were intended for such a purpose by ICE. This is as opposed to cards like Rebuild or Hold Rebuilt, which don't even require an attack to be played and so cannot possibly have as their primary purpose dealing with attacks.

Again, I'm not particularly looking to enter into a debate; I just wanted to be sure people understand what I had in mind when I formulated my wording -- if the Council decides to go with other wording, I'm fine with that.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards .
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Non-voting member
 
Posts: 2309
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby miguel » Mon Feb 06, 2012 9:49 pm

I still don't get why you'd need to have different rules when facing different attacks. What is the upside? Learning just one set of rules for facing any attack should be enough and that is what makes dealing with different attacks intuitive (regardless of how you've been playing before).

Hold Rebuilt and Repaired is currently not playable before facing the AA. It used to be playable because it was deemed to affect the AA (back when you could play stuff that affects the AA). Rebuild the Town was deemed to not affect the AA. The differences are subtle, but that was the conclusion the netrep (team) of the time came to. The rules are certainly not clear as to what "affects an attack" or what "otherwise playable during the strike sequence" mean. If one was to define exactly what those phrases mean, rulings on individual cards regarding the matter(s) would probably become unnecessary.

Re: playing cards on an attack or on the company (or entities therein) facing the aa (which affect the attack), I don't see that limitation as a solution. You wouldn't be able to use Cock Crows to remove a boost permanent event. We need to look at the big picture, not try to prevent Hold Rebuilt and Repaired becoming playable again (it's just one card and if it becomes a problem we certainly have ways of dealing with that).

As for a conclusive list of cards playable with the erratum proposals, I don't need one and won't be composing such a list. But if someone wants to do that, go right ahead.
meccgnetrep (at) gmail (dot) com
User avatar
miguel
Council Member
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby Thorsten the Traveller » Wed Feb 08, 2012 10:18 am

Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Chairman
 
Posts: 1499
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby miguel » Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:07 pm

meccgnetrep (at) gmail (dot) com
User avatar
miguel
Council Member
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby miguel » Thu Feb 09, 2012 10:49 am

meccgnetrep (at) gmail (dot) com
User avatar
miguel
Council Member
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby marcos » Thu Feb 09, 2012 1:22 pm

I agree with Mikko, his way of reasoning is nearer to the feel of a CCG, which is in my oppinion where we should be going. Otherwise we shuold be playing some RPG.
User avatar
marcos
 
Posts: 2010
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby Thorsten the Traveller » Thu Feb 09, 2012 10:30 pm

Fine, we'll find out later then, you are leader of this project and can take responsability, I have given you the considerations.

I'm assuming this erratum started for cards like Ruse, Sojourn, or Motionless Amongst the Slain, nor sure if the latter affects an attack or not. So we got that covered now.
But does this still include the clarification part "removing does not constitute affecting, cancelling does?" or is this also deleted, and is this the intention, as you say? Cause you cannot maintain that that would be the ICE idea then. So you cannot Marvel a Nature's Revenge during site phase before/when facing the aa?

Shouldn't it also include a line about "unless mentioned on the card it can't be played on an aa?", it might sound obvious, but you'll get that question.

It would be nice to have the official ICE rule and the erratum in 1 sentence, like the UEP's, or at least in similar fashion if possible, that is easier to present so that everybody understands the change (and the reasons behind it).

@Marcos, aisb this game has a 90 page rulesbook, obviously theme and mechanics matter. mechanics: Why not transfer items during the site phase, or whenever you want? theme: why not play Hobbits at a Haven? theme and mechanics: why not play Tormented-earth on automatic-attacks? So discussing such a thing about Marvels Told does not make it an rpg, as it concerns both theme and mechanics and both are valid concerns.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Chairman
 
Posts: 1499
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: First CoE erratum; ideas

Postby marcos » Fri Feb 10, 2012 12:32 am

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

PreviousNext

Return to CoE Rules & Errata

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron