Post your Gemp-LotR bugs here

[dmaz]

That's a great point, the cards are worded almost the same. Yet another reason why I stand behind my side of the argument, that TGaT is indeed preventing wounds. A bit ironic that bib is on the other side of the issue this time.

Got a bug to report:

http://www.gempukku.com/gemp-lotr/game.html?replayId=sgtdraino$uej3709fza038j7a

I feel like I remember this being reported before, but if it has, it's still doing it. During Fellowship I was at Site 7, The Great River ("While the Fellowship is at The Great River, cards may not be played from draw decks or discard piles"). Without thinking about it, I played A Wizard is Never Late. The site quite properly prevented the event from working... but somehow this also immediately ended the rest of my Fellowship phase and caused me to move to the next site, before I could heal Boromir or play Sleep, Caradhras.

Trying to figure out why that happened. So far I can't find any triggers.

This has helped me find a way, however, to possibly solve the issue with No Business of Ours. I found the script for global modifiers (things like this site, stewards tomb, or caverns of isengard), which would be possible to add the "no looking or revealing" clause to the list and change cards like NBOO to refer to the global modifier.

[dmaz]

It might be a bug with Bill too. I've never checked to see if he can assign himself to allies in other circumstances.

Thanks sgtdraino and bib!

Just looked at Bill in detail and it looks like he is fine for assigning to anything able to be assigned.

I think the issue lies in the coding for the Dunlending Ravager.

Without going into detail, here is the only effect that gemp runs after spotting and activating the rohan ally in the current coding for Dunlending Ravager:
"new ChooseAndAssignCharacterToMin ionEffect(action, playerId, self, true, CardType.ALLY));"
basically it just spots and assigns itself to the ally.

I checked Horn of Boromir which allows to "participate in .... skirmishes"  similar to what the Ravager does to the ally, and found that Horn has this effect run after exerting and spotting:
"new AllyParticipatesInArcheryFire AndSkirmishesModifier(self, Filters.sameCard(card)), Phase.REGROUP));"

I personally feel, like we don't need to code a brand new modifier for making the ally participate in skirmishes only. Essentially as the archery phase is over, that portion would just get ignored.

I think all I need to do is code these Dunland minions (there's another one in addition to Ravager, but don't remember the name) to have the additional "AllyParticipatesInArcheryFire AndSkirmishesModifier" after Dunland uses it's text.

If you guys think that sounds right, I'll create a PR for this for MarcinS to approve.

ADDED: Keep in mind this modifier only uses the fact that it's participating. The strength bonus in the horn runs off of a different script that isn't used

[dmaz]

I also found the problem with Riders in Black. There's simply no strength modifier present anywhere in the coding. It basically runs the reveal hand function but to no subsequent effect.

For some reason this card is coded quite differently than Inspiration. I will see if I can simply add the modifier to the way it's currently coded. If not, I can mimic Inspiration but with positive integers as the bonus instead of negative.

[Durin's Heir]

I think all I need to do is code these Dunland minions (there's another one in addition to Ravager, but don't remember the name) to have the additional "AllyParticipatesInArcheryFire AndSkirmishesModifier" after Dunland uses it's text.

If you guys think that sounds right, I'll create a PR for this for MarcinS to approve.

It's Dunlending Warrior. And I think it's ok to have the same modifier as Horn of Boromir.

Thank you for this effort Dmaz!

[sgtdraino]

Indeed, you are rockin' it!

[Legion]

Not sure if this is a bug or not.  When Beserk Slayer used his ability, he killed Frodo and Sam simultaneously.  If wounds are placed one at a time, Frodo could have been wounded first and been killed, but then let Sam take the ring and so survive with his new +2 vitality boost.  Should this be allowed to happen?  I'd expect threat rules to activate after the first wound is placed, allowing you to kill off anyone who is exhausted if this is true, as well (even if threats don't exist in Towers Block).

Here's a replay (site 7 for my opponent):

http://www.gempukku.com/gemp-lotr/game.html?replayId=Legion$rf9pddcwdzux151h

[Eukalyptus]

I guess this is correct as PATHS wounds every minion at once, too.

[sgtdraino]

I disagree. Wounds are placed one at a time. Even with PATHS, you can still use a response action to prevent one wound in particular. I don't think it should be possible to kill Sam and Frodo simultaeously via wounding. FP should have the option of killing Frodo first, and then using Sam's response action.

[Eukalyptus]

Lets assume you have 4 goblins on Frodo and one Armory out. PATHS is played and ALL goblins highlight when you choose to use Armory for its wound prevention. Not first this orc, then the second one, the. the third etc. This is not something like archery or threat wounds.

IMO of course.

[BigRedMF]

Lets assume you have 4 goblins on Frodo and one Armory out. PATHS is played and ALL goblins highlight when you choose to use Armory for its wound prevention. Not first this orc, then the second one, the. the third etc. This is not something like archery or threat wounds.

IMO of course.

I second this. Wounding each companion happens at the same time. This brings back up the issue I have with Neekerbreeker's Bog though...

[dmaz]

The rulebook does state that wounds are placed one at a time (under a certain context), but it seems this is more for clarification of placing wounds on characters during the archery phase, etc. You can read about it in the section on applying archery wounds.

Later in the rules, under "wound", there's the quote from the comprehensive rulebook on wounding, where it talks about them being placed one at a time.

"Wounds are always placed on a character one at
a time.
When you "wound a character," you place only
one wound"

What this is actually telling us is really wounds are only placed on a character one at a time.
Since this is the context, the rules are only defining how wounds (whether one, two, or more) are placed on any particular character. Thus, I don't think that it actually means that when a card says "wound every" that you choose the order and place the wounds on those minions or companions one at a time.

It feels like in the context of the rules, and just doing what the card says, that when you "wound every" of anything, all of the wounds happen at once.

Just my take on it....not sure if I'm 100% right....

[sgtdraino]

I don't care how Gemp does it. Gemp does whatever it's been coded to do. If Gemp is having them trigger simultaneously, then Gemp is doing it wrong.

"Wound a character" is synonymous with "place a wound on a character." What would be the point of having the rules say that wounds are placed one at a time, if it were possible to trigger multiple wounds at once?

ETA: Think about it as if you were playing a real game, IRL. If you hit something that says "wound every character" you aren't literally going to throw wound tokens on every character simultaneously. That's not even possible. You place them one at a time. And as soon as the killing wound hits Frodo, he dies, and that keys off any triggered actions related to Frodo dying. Threats, Sam, what have you.

[dmaz]

I wasn't making any reference to GEMP at all, just how I think it should function based on the what the rules say.

All they say on this matter is that wounds are placed on "a character" one at time. I think for the rules to back up that PATHS would wound the minions one a time the rules would have to say, instead, "wounds are placed on characters one at a time".

I kind of hate looking at vernacular, so to speak, but when you "wound every X", even if the FP player chooses the order of the wounding that wounding is a top level action so only wound prevention responses should be usable, until the wounding is over.  The card says to wound them all. So you wound them all, and then after they are all wounded, you make responses based on the result.

I really think that if Sam and Frodo are exhausted and Slayer kicks off wounding every companion you should absolutely not be able to decide that Frodo gets wounded first and then Sam takes the ring before he takes his wound from the Slayer....this is something that doesn't seem to be supported in the rules at all.

I realize it's a weird situation....to me it just makes more sense and seems like it takes less assumption. I'll need to read more in the rules about action order and such. Just seems to me that if every companion is exhausted, and every companion is wounded by an action that must be resolved, and there is no prevention available, every companion is killed.

ADDED:
Found this in the rules:
"If two or more required actions are occurring at
the same time (for example, more than one "start
of turn" action), the Free Peoples player decides
in which order they occur.
All required actions responding to a particular
trigger are performed before any optional actions.
After all such required actions have resolved,
players may perform optional actions responding
to that same trigger using the action procedure.
(See response.)"

OK, if this is telling us that all of the wounds are a top level (required) action, then after all such required actions have resolved, players may perform optional responses. The problem in this particular case is that it was a required action for Sam to get wounded, so he's dead. No taking the ring.

I see it the same as when threat wounds are launched. When threats are triggered those are required actions to resolve. YES you can prevent a threat wound, but if Frodo get's killed and it triggers threats, then all of those threats need to be placed before Sam has the option to take the ring...at least if my memory serves me correctly....

[Eukalyptus]

The last ruling quote clarifies the matter.

[sgtdraino]

I wasn't making any reference to GEMP at all, just how I think it should function based on the what the rules say.

Sorry for the confusion, I was referring to Eukalyptus's post. He was talking about when Goblins highlight in Gemp.

All they say on this matter is that wounds are placed on "a character" one at time. I think for the rules to back up that PATHS would wound the minions one a time the rules would have to say, instead, "wounds are placed on characters one at a time".

So you think that the rules only let you put wounds on a character one at a time, but let you put wounds on several different characters 3 at a time? Or 4 at a time? I think that's twisting the wording a bit. I have a handful of wounds, I place them one at a time. Wounds are placed on a character one at a time. That is how we would all do it IRL, when there's not a machine doing it for us.

I kind of hate looking at vernacular, so to speak, but when you "wound every X", even if the FP player chooses the order of the wounding that wounding is a top level action so only wound prevention responses should be usable, until the wounding is over.  The card says to wound them all. So you wound them all, and then after they are all wounded, you make responses based on the result.

Triggered actions happen whenever the trigger occurs. If the trigger is the death of Frodo, that's when the action happens.

I really think that if Sam and Frodo are exhausted and Slayer kicks off wounding every companion you should absolutely not be able to decide that Frodo gets wounded first and then Sam takes the ring before he takes his wound from the Slayer....this is something that doesn't seem to be supported in the rules at all.

It seems to me that's precisely what your excerpt is saying.

ADDED:
Found this in the rules:
"If two or more required actions are occurring at
the same time (for example, more than one "start
of turn" action), the Free Peoples player decides
in which order they occur.

"Wound everybody" is a perfect example of multiple required actions happening at once. Each wound you place is a required action, and you as the FP player get to determine the order. If the order that you choose to place the wounds results in Frodo getting killed before Sam, that is another trigger for a triggered action that will interrupt the placement of the remaining wounds.

All required actions responding to a particular
trigger are performed before any optional actions.
After all such required actions have resolved,
players may perform optional actions responding
to that same trigger using the action procedure.
(See response.)"

Now, this is interesting for a completely different reason, because it seems to imply that you can only do a Response action after the last wound is placed. So if you accidentally place a wound on a guy that you wanted to prevent, but you still have three wounds left to place, you shouldn't be able to prevent that wound, apparently.

OK, if this is telling us that all of the wounds are a top level (required) action, then after all such required actions have resolved, players may perform optional responses. The problem in this particular case is that it was a required action for Sam to get wounded, so he's dead. No taking the ring.

I disagree, because Sam's response action is not a response to "wound everybody," it's a response to "Frodo was killed." The death of Frodo starts a new action tree in the middle of the "wound everybody" required actions.

I see it the same as when threat wounds are launched. When threats are triggered those are required actions to resolve. YES you can prevent a threat wound, but if Frodo get's killed and it triggers threats, then all of those threats need to be placed before Sam has the option to take the ring...at least if my memory serves me correctly....

This is actually a great example of what I'm talking about. Let's say you hit something that says, "wound everybody," and it forces you to place 5 wounds, one on each character. Let's say that wound #2 kills a guy. You have 3 wounds left to place, BUT let's say you have 5 threats. Wound #2 killing a guy is a trigger that's going to set off the triggered action of dealing out threat wounds, starting a new action tree. You would have to place those 5 threat wounds BEFORE you continue to place the other 3 wounds from the previous action.