The Last Homely House
Middle-Earth => Archives of Minas Tirith => Topic started by: hrcho on May 11, 2010, 03:20:13 PM
-
Can Gimli, Feared Axeman prevent condition discarding if the source of discard is Pelennor Prairie?
My guess is he can't, because the Free Peoples player discards the condition even if Shadow Player made him and even if he could in that case, the source of discard is a site which is not a shadow card, so it's not really shadow player that discards.
In any case, it's not Gimli's opponent who discards the condition.
-
Gimli's text CAN prevent the discarding. His text says "about to be discarded by an opponent". The ability on the site is a Shadow action, so your opponent is the one doing the discarding (using the ability on the site as his own). In that case, Gimli can prevent it. Make sense?
-
yep. so long as the source of the discard is your opponent, gimli can block it
-
I'm almost certain that he can't. "By an opponent" means "by an opponent's Shadow card". Because the source of the ability is the site, it does not fall in this category.
Thranduil
-
I think it is worded in such a way so as to prevent you discarding something like Loyalty Unshaken, but be able to use the ability over and over again.
-
No, because it is the Free peoples player who is discarding the condition.
Quote from the prarie: "...the Free peoples player discard one of his or her conditions."
-
The source of a discard is always the card doing the discard.
-
a similar question, A fools hope and deceit
-
The source of a discard is always the card doing the discard.
Rather the source of anything is always the card on which it is printed. For example, Trapped and Alone does nothing against Dagger Strike because the source of the damage bonus is the event not the possession.
I think you can also use Deceit to save each of your conditions in turn. But this is slightly different as it's a wrath-type effect and so there may be other rules going on here (I don't know whether you would have to keep removing [1] until there are only 2 conditions remaining).
Thranduil
-
I'm almost certain that he can't. "By an opponent" means "by an opponent's Shadow card". Because the source of the ability is the site, it does not fall in this category.
What would be your rationale for Siege Engine not working against BRC?
-
If Siege Engine works against BRC it doesn't mean that Gimli, FA will work against Pelennor Prairie.
In the Siege Engine case, BRC is the source of discard and that is a Free Peoples card; in Pelennor Prairie case, however, the source of discard is a site, which is neutral.
-
I'm almost certain that he can't. "By an opponent" means "by an opponent's Shadow card". Because the source of the ability is the site, it does not fall in this category.
What would be your rationale for Siege Engine not working against BRC?
Are you saying there's a known ruling that makes Siege Engine not work against BRC? In which case, my answer is totally wrong!
Thranduil
-
I have come to a conclusion, although I am still open to being proved wrong.
Case 1: Siege Engine vs. BRC
BRC is a Free Peoples card -> Free Peoples player is doing the discarding -> Free Peoples player is Shadow Players opponent -> Siege Engine prevents machine discarding by an opponent -> Siege Engine will indeed work against BRC
Case 2: Gimli, FA vs. Pelennor Prairie
Pelennor Prairie is a site -> sites are nor Shadow nor Free Peoples cards -> sites are not Free Peoples players opponent -> Gimli, FA prevents [Dwarf] condition discarding by an opponent -> Gimli, FA cannot prevent condition discarding by a site.
So even though it's the shadow player using the site's text, the source of discard is still that site and not a Shadow card.
-
Are you saying there's a known ruling that makes Siege Engine not work against BRC?
This might look familiar:
Siege Engine can’t prevent a Shadow player from discarding cards.
Siege Engine can’t prevent the effect of Blood Runs Chill. Even though Blood Runs Chill is a Free Peoples card, it makes a Shadow player discard.
Same reasoning seems to imply Feared Axeman won't work against Pelennor Prairie, since it makes the Free Peoples player discard.
-
Are you saying there's a known ruling that makes Siege Engine not work against BRC?
This might look familiar:
Siege Engine can’t prevent a Shadow player from discarding cards.
Siege Engine can’t prevent the effect of Blood Runs Chill. Even though Blood Runs Chill is a Free Peoples card, it makes a Shadow player discard.
Same reasoning seems to imply Feared Axeman won't work against Pelennor Prairie, since it makes the Free Peoples player discard.
Exactly.
BRC is a free peoples card that makes the shadow player discard conditions. Seige engine references the player, so it doesn't work against BRC.
If Seige engine instead said "If one or more machines are about to be discarded by a Free peoples card, discard this condition to prevent that. " it would work against BRC.
Using the same logic, the prarie is causing the free peoples to discard so Gimli's text cant stop it because it is the FP and not an opponent discarding the condition.
-
a similar question, A fools hope and deceit
Since deciet references a free peoples card, it can be used to prevent discard.
Theres another ambiguity with a fools hope I havent wrapped my head around yet. Does the discard of conditions happen all at once (ie choose 2 conditions discard the rest) or one at a time? I assume one at a time. If this is true, when you use deciet to prevent the third last condition, would you still need to continue to discarding? What if you had 3 gollum conditions, and "protected" each with deciet, could you keep all three in play?
I'm certain there's precedence somewhere, but I don't remember it.
-
Are you saying there's a known ruling that makes Siege Engine not work against BRC?
This might look familiar:
Siege Engine can’t prevent a Shadow player from discarding cards.
Siege Engine can’t prevent the effect of Blood Runs Chill. Even though Blood Runs Chill is a Free Peoples card, it makes a Shadow player discard.
Same reasoning seems to imply Feared Axeman won't work against Pelennor Prairie, since it makes the Free Peoples player discard.
Finally, Deus Ex Machina! ;) Thank you EA! :gp:
-
Fair enough! I think I've lost this argument before. I thought it was a bit silly then, and I still do now! It sort of violates the principle that the source of any effect is the card on which it was printed. But never mind.
Thranduil
-
@hrcho: Haha, well, it was ket who remembered there was a ruling. :P
Theres another ambiguity with a fools hope I havent wrapped my head around yet. Does the discard of conditions happen all at once (ie choose 2 conditions discard the rest) or one at a time? I assume one at a time. If this is true, when you use deciet to prevent the third last condition, would you still need to continue to discarding? What if you had 3 gollum conditions, and "protected" each with deciet, could you keep all three in play?
I'm certain there's precedence somewhere, but I don't remember it.
From precedence (reference Fortress Never Fallen, 1/29/04 CRD; and Plundered Armories, CR) it seems that when multiple or "all" cards are discarded from play, they are discarded simultaneously. I wonder if this is a case of choosing two conditions to save, and then the "about to be discarded" stage kicks in for the rest at the same time.
-
From precedence (reference Fortress Never Fallen, 1/29/04 CRD; and Plundered Armories, CR) it seems that when multiple or "all" cards are discarded from play, they are discarded simultaneously. I wonder if this is a case of choosing two conditions to save, and then the "about to be discarded" stage kicks in for the rest at the same time.
Thanks, I knew it was somewhere (FNF clarification).
-
I'm digging up this old one because I'm not yet convinced. Or at least I don't think it's as clear as it should be. :)
Case: Frodo, Courteous Halfling vs. Tower of Barad-dur
Frodo clearly prevents ToBD. However, I found Decipher's BRC example lacking as it notes that Siege Engine doesn't work because the Shadow player chooses what to discard. But it is (apparently) different when the Freeps is "choosing" what to discard from hand? :-S
-
It might have something to do with the fact that Siege Engine and Gimli, FA text are both Response actions, while Frodo, CH outright forbids card discarding.
-
IMO the problem is on CH's end for fiddling with the source rule. The glossary entry basically makes him read like Old Noakes (i.e. "Shadow cards may not make you discard cards...").
Not sure if that answered your question?
-
Think of it this way...
For each action, there are two things to consider.
1st) The "card" causes the action.
2nd) The "player" that must carry out that action.
The way a card is worded determines precisely what it can prevent:
(Example 1)
Frodo, Courteous Halfling can prevent an opponent's "card" from causing the action.
(Example 2)
Gimli, Feared Axeman and Siege Engine, can only prevent an opponent "player" from carrying out the action of discarding a condition; if the Free Peoples player must carry out the action, it is not prevented.
-
Ah, but the difficulty I see is that cards like Tower of Barad-dur and even Orc Inquisitor are worded such that the Free Peoples player does carry out the action.
-
Ah, but the difficulty I see is that cards like Tower of Barad-dur and even Orc Inquisitor are worded such that the Free Peoples player does carry out the action.
That is correct. For Tower of Barad-dur and Orc Inquisitor, the "cards" cause the action, and the Free Peoples player carries out the action.
That is why Frodo, Courteous Halfling can prevent them, since it prevents the Shadow card from causing the action. If instead, he was worded "...a Shadow player may not discard cards from your hand or from the top of the draw deck." Then he wound not prevent cards like Tower of Barad-dur and Orc Inquisitor.
Hope that clears it up.
-
For Tower of Barad-dur:
(1) The source is a Shadow card.
(2) The source is forcing the discard.
(3) The player who carries out the action is the FP player.
Courteous Halfling can prevent Tower of Barad-dur because he checks for (1) and (2), and they both pass. He doesn't check for (3).
For Blood Runs Chill:
(1) The source is a Free Peoples card.
(2) The source is forcing the discard.
(3) The player who carries out the action is the Shadow player.
Siege Engine can't prevent BRC because it checks for (3), and that fails. It doesn't check for (1) and (2).
-
@hrcho: Haha, well, it was ket who remembered there was a ruling. :P
I'm not denying that I am probably awesome, but when was I involved in this conversation?
-wtk
-
Maybe someone can post a clear and definitive explanation of the situations encountered in this thread?
I'm too lazy
-
For Tower of Barad-dur:
(1) The source is a Shadow card.
(2) The source is forcing the discard.
(3) The player who carries out the action is the FP player.
Courteous Halfling can prevent Tower of Barad-dur because he checks for (1) and (2), and they both pass. He doesn't check for (3).
For Blood Runs Chill:
(1) The source is a Free Peoples card.
(2) The source is forcing the discard.
(3) The player who carries out the action is the Shadow player.
Siege Engine can't prevent BRC because it checks for (3), and that fails. It doesn't check for (1) and (2).
This.
Its a case of wording. Its very subtle but there is a difference between CH and Siege Engine.
Siege Engine checks who does the discarding. CH checks for the source.