Orc Assasin vs. Sam - Proper Poet

[0rien]

Hey everyone,
Playing on GEMP i came upon a scenario that confounded me and I wanted to check if it was a rule based ruling or if it was just a rule coding thing in GEMP.

In the fellowship i have Frodo & Sam Proper Poet, along with 3 other companions (not relevant who). The shadow plays 2 Orc Assassins.  In Maneuver i use Sam's ability exerting him twice to make him Def+1.  Then in Assignment the shadow player uses the first Orc Assassins ability, so i assign him to Sam. He then uses the second Orc Assassins ability and it get's automatically assigned to Frodo without giving me the choice to put him on Sam.

Is this a game rule thing that i have missed or is this a rule coding thing on GEMP?

Thanks in advance,

[Dictionary]

Rulebook quote:
"Many assignment actions assign a minion to a companion. You cannot do this unless both of them are unassigned."

In other words, assignment actions are always one-to-one. This prevents minions like Servant of the Eye from putting 3 minions on one companion. The case is different for cards like Bill Ferny, SSF as this minion is not using an assignment action.

[0rien]

I understand in regards to Servant of the eye where the shadow player picks the companion to be assigned, however in the case of Orc Assassin the text reads "Spot 2 Hobbit companions to make the Free Peoples player assign a Hobbit to skirmish this minion."
Thereby it should allow the Freeps player to utilize a Def+1 ability as they are the one's doing the assignment action, but then having to work within the confine of the Orc Assassin conditions.

[Phallen Cassidy]

The trouble is, Orc Assassin is still using an assignment action to assign a minion to a companion: the Free Peoples simply gets to choose which companion. Assigning a minion to a companion is the same as assigning a companion to a minion, there's no distinction. For example, Alcarin cannot use his Assignment action to become defender +X or to heal multiple times if he's already defender +X. The reason the rule doesn't say "All assignment actions..." is because there are several assignment actions which don't assign anyone at all. Treebeard, Guardian of the Forest and his Ent friends are good examples.

However, even the assignment rule is just to clarify what the rest of the rules say. The assignment phase is actually a two-step (well, three-step) process:

    1) Perform assignment actions
    2) Assign defenders
      a) Free Peoples player may assign defending companions to minions.
      b) Shadow players may assign leftover unassigned minions to any companions.

And under the "Assign defenders" section, there's this:

If your assigned companion has the keyword defender +1, you may assign that character at this time to one additional unassigned minion.

Meaning the Free Peoples player can only assign more than one minion to a companion after all assignment actions have taken place. It might be a little unexpected for the game to work this way, but hopefully you can see why you couldn't assign both Orc Assassins to Sam.

[0rien]

Ok, so i understand the logic you're putting forward, but wouldn't it be a question of language in this case, that Assassin is not forcing an Assignment but instead setting parameters for the Assignment phase.

Although Orc Assassin is using an Assignment action, neither Orc Assassin or the Shadow is doing the assignment itself.  Thereby placing that action on the freep's (during the assign defenders phase).
You have other minions like Dunlending Ravager, Dunlending Warrior or Morgul Vanguard where it is clear that the Shadow is doing the Assignment through the action, but in the case of Orc Assassin it's not.

I would understand your explanation more if the card would read along the lines of "Spot 2 Hobbit Companions to make the Free Peoples player choose one, assign this minion to it".  However, in this case it clearly states to let the Free Peoples Player do the assignment, similarly to The End Comes vs. Between Nazgul and Prey where one the Freep's decides, the other the shadow decides.


PS: Not trying to be a #$&*@!, just intrigued.

[Phallen Cassidy]

Not at all! I believe everyone should ask as many questions as they need to understand the rules. There have been debates on this forum about lesser issues and I have been at the forefront of many of them

Consider if it were an issue of language and interpretation: what if the Shadow Player had and used 3 Orc Assassins and the Fellowship only had Frodo and Merry? Would the Fellowship be totally unable to assign the 3rd Assassin because none of the Hobbits are defender +1, letting the Shadow player put that minion wherever? Or would the Free Peoples player be allowed to assign more than one minion to a companion with no defender bonus? That's what your understanding would have to allow for. And what about other cards that make a player do something (discard a card, exert a minion, etc.), are players allowed to do that later in the phase as long as it's the same phase?

Luckily for everyone, the rules don't leave this up to semantics:

Each phase action must be completely performed before another phase action can be performed.

The wording of Orc Assassin prevents your interpretation. If a player is made to do something as a result of a phase action, they've got to do it right then and there. If the Free Peoples waits until assigning defenders to assign the Orc Assassin, how can that action have been completely performed? Orc Assassin does not reference another point in time for the action to take place, such as "Spot 2 Hobbit companions to make the Free Peoples player assign a Hobbit to skirmish this minion when assigning defenders," so it is not an action creating a future restriction. It must resolve once activated. I think this wording is what you're saying, but what would happen if the Free Peoples player ran out of Hobbits? The Shadow Player gets to assign the minions, or free Defender bonus for Hobbits?

There are other ways to word the card to get the effect you want, but in any case 4x of this minion against a Fellowship with 2 Hobbits would probably mean that 3 of them end up on Frodo without much opportunity to do anything about it. Plus Bill Ferny, Swarthy Sneering Fellow and you have a nice bomb to try to lay on your opponent Tol Brandir would be brutal and extra Hobbits would be a huge liability.

[0rien]

Alright, now i'm with you.
Thanks for the nitty gritty explanation
I appreciate the thoroughness !