The Last Homely House
Middle-Earth => Archives of Minas Tirith => Topic started by: Crabby Imposter on May 12, 2010, 10:01:34 PM
-
(This topic was also posted at Bag End by accident, please consolidate discussion here)
So a couple rules questions re: Gimli's Armor. Scenario: Gimli, Bearer of Grudges is the Ring-bearer, is wearing Gimli's Armor and Gimli's Helm.
Scenario 1: he loses a skirmish to a minion with Damage +1. I use the text of Gimli's Armor to prevent a wound. Does Gimli's Helm prevent the second wound as well, or do I have to Gimli's Armor a second time?
Scenario 2: opponent plays a Nazgul, followed by Morgul Brute (giving me the choice of wounding Gimli, or adding a burden). Can I choose to wound Gimli (so I don't have to add a burden), and then prevent that wound with Gimli's Armor?
-
Scenario 1 - Gimli's Helm stops him taking more than one wound (thus negating the damage bonus). Then Gimli's Armor triggers as a response preventing the one wound provided you have intiative and discard two cards - So as I see it Gimli takes no wounds.
I can see the other side though - it depends on timing -
Scenario 2 - I would say yes as it is a response to the wound (although then the wound wasn't placed so perhaps you revert back to the burden?)
Arrgghh - i am getting stuck in a loop here. I thought the answer was obvious until i looked deeper into the problem.
I don't know - anyone else?
-
For Scenario 2, if you choose to prevent an effect, then prevent that effect, the original effect will still occur ie Gimli will take a burden.
Scenario 1, one wound, as per Gimli's Helm, preventable by Gimli's Armor.
-
For scenario 1:
You take wounds 1 at a time. Since you prevent the first one with the armor, Gimli still hasnt taken a wound, so Gimli's helm doesnt stop the second. You'd have to use the armor twice for Gimli to not be wounded.
-
I think I agree with TheJord's take on Scenario 2, but I'm still confused about Scenario 1. Can anyone cite anything from the rules that would support one interpretation or another?
-
I think I agree with TheJord's take on Scenario 2, but I'm still confused about Scenario 1. Can anyone cite anything from the rules that would support one interpretation or another?
I answered this in the other thread, right?
TheJord is right. The Helm stops Gimli from taking more than 1 wound, but if you prevent the first wound, he still hasn't taken a wound, so the second one sticks.
-
I think I agree with TheJord's take on Scenario 2, but I'm still confused about Scenario 1. Can anyone cite anything from the rules that would support one interpretation or another?
A "prevent" entry in the Comprehensive Rulebook would be helpful, but I think "response" hits pretty close:
Some responses are performed when a described situation is “about to” happen. Typically, only one such response can be performed in a given situation, because its effect will “prevent” that situation or replace it with another effect “instead.”
Gimli's Armor prevents the situation where Gimli takes a wound, so Gimli's Helm can't stop him from taking wounds yet.
Scenario 2:
If something happens to prevent one effect which in turn would have prevented a second effect, the second effect is performed.
Morgul Destroyer is played.(“When you play this minion, you may spot a Nazgûl to add 2 threats. The Free Peoples player may wound the Ring-bearer to prevent this.”) The Free Peoples player wounds the Ring-bearer to prevent the threats from being added. The Free Peoples player then discards Sapling of the White Tree. (“Response: If a [Gondor] Man is about to take a wound, discard this artifact to prevent that.”) Because Sapling has prevented the effect (a wound) that would have prevented Morgul Destroyer’s effect, the threats are now added.
-
Scenario 1: he loses a skirmish to a minion with Damage +1. I use the text of Gimli's Armor to prevent a wound. Does Gimli's Helm prevent the second wound as well, or do I have to Gimli's Armor a second time?
Gimli's Helm says he can only take 1 wound per skirmish phase. Because you prevented the first wound with the !armor, he hasn't taken a wound yet, and so the second wound sticks.
but you should still be able to prevent the second wound with the armor. The helm doesn't prevent anything, it modifies how much damage a companion can take. I don't understand why you can't use the armor to prevent the single wound your about to take when it clearly says, if your about to take a wound prevent it by discarding 2 cards
You can use Gimli's Armor to prevent the second wound as well. I think Thran's point is that Gimli does have a second wound to deal with if the first is prevented.
-
Thanks guys.
-
There is a difference between prevent wounds and cannot take wounds. Gimli's Helm allows only 1 wound to be assigned to Gimli. If a minion with damage bonus wins a skirmish against Gimli, only 1 wound is assigned to Gimli and that one wound can be prevented with Gimli's Armor. No more wounds can be assigned to him so no more prevention via Gimli's Armor is necessary.
-
but if he can take no more than one, and one hasn't been assigned yet, then he must take another right?
-
Remember there is a distinction between
-Prevent
-Takes no more than 1
Gimli's Helm is negating any damage bonuses. If he was fighting Gollum, and he used Not This Time. Gimli takes a wound, but prevents it with Gimli's Armor. If he then loses, are you saying he would take a wound, because he hasnt taken 1 yet?
-
yes, he still hasn't taken a wound so he hasn't filled the 1 wound only right?
-
Preventing is effectively allowing the costs of an action to be paid without receiving the effects. I cant agree because the action of wounding has happened, without the wound being placed as it was prevented.
-
Wait, where is this going... if the shadow player uses a whirling strike against gimli, and the dwarf prevents it with his armor, then loses the skirmish, does gimli take a wound since he is wearing the helm and can take but one wound during a skirmish? In that case I would be inclined to believe he would take a wound. However, if he loses a skirmish against a dmg +1 uruk his helm would negate the 1 extra damage and then the freeps player could discard 2 cards to prevent the other.
-
Wait, where is this going... if the shadow player uses a whirling strike against gimli, and the dwarf prevents it with his armor, then loses the skirmish, does gimli take a wound since he is wearing the helm and can take but one wound during a skirmish? In that case I would be inclined to believe he would take a wound.
No, Gimli takes no wounds then. 1 wound was assigned to him due to Whirling Strike, that wound was prevented with Gimli's Armor and due to Gimli's Helm, no more wounds can be assigned to him.
-
Have to double check the rules about taking wounds, but here is what i think:
The text of Gimli´s Helm states: Bearer must be Gimli. He takes no more than 1 wound during each skirmish phase. Skirmish: Discard Gimli's Helm to prevent all wounds to him.
If you use Whirling Strike against him and prevent wound from being placed so he didn't take any wound yet, still if he lose skirmish the wounding for losing is placed. In that context i read assigned = taken.
I think This Helm text should be interpreted with good sense, even that you can interpret rules to discard Gimli´s helm
at skirmish phase and assign all threat wounds to him (making them just disapear) i think player should agree that is kinda overpowered. Something close to Lady Redemmed, she was not banned until shadows came out but that doesn't mean that the card is not unbalanced per se.
-
I think a character "takes a wound" when a wound token is placed on that character, and not when a wound is assigned to him (assign wound -> about to take a wound -> takes a wound). In other words, you can keep assigning wounds to Gimli until a wound token is placed, at which point no more wounds can be assigned to him.
-
that makes since. but did we determine if gimli can cancel the wound he reduced from the dmg +1 minion?
-
I think a character "takes a wound" when a wound token is placed on that character, and not when a wound is assigned to him (assign wound -> about to take a wound -> takes a wound). In other words, you can keep assigning wounds to Gimli until a wound token is placed, at which point no more wounds can be assigned to him.
I am 99% sure assigning a wound does not mean token placing. I actually know there was a discussion about Gimli's Helm somewhere and the concept of wound assignment was in the middle of it. I can't find it now, maybe someone else has more luck... come to think of it, it may have been about Armor.
I found this, though:
"If a character cannot take wounds, wounds cannot be assigned to that character. However, if a card prevents wounds, wounds may still be assigned to that character."
This is the situation:
Gimli bearing Gimli's Helm and Gimli's Armor is skirmishing a [Raider] Man who is dmg +3 (WLOG) and plays Whirling Strike during skirmish. Now, here is what happens:
Due to Whirling Strike, a wound is assigned to Gimli and the token for that wound is about be placed, except for Gimli's Armor which prevents that token placing.
Both player pass their actions and the [Raider] Man wins the skirmish.
Now, if it weren't for Gimli's Helm, 4 wounds (dmg +3) would be assigned to Gimli and then the tokens would be placed for each of those assigned wounds. However, the text of Gimli's Helm clearly (well, not that clearly) states that only 1 wound during each skirmish phase can be assigned to him. Considering that 1 wound was already assigned to him, all the other are gone with the wind.
It doesn't matter if that wound was prevented. Wounds can only be prevented if they were previously assigned. And if 1 wound was assigned, then no more can be assigned to Gimli bearing Gimli's Helm. Q.E.D.
-
I think a character "takes a wound" when a wound token is placed on that character, and not when a wound is assigned to him (assign wound -> about to take a wound -> takes a wound). In other words, you can keep assigning wounds to Gimli until a wound token is placed, at which point no more wounds can be assigned to him.
I am 99% sure assigning a wound does not mean token placing.
Well, agreed there, but I don't think any of us are saying that. The issue here seems to be whether a wound is taken when it is assigned, or whether a wound is taken when the token is placed.
If "taking a wound" = assignment, then Gimli's Helm will allow only one wound be assigned to Gimli.
If "taking a wound" = placement, then Gimli's Helm will allow wounds to be assigned until one is actually placed.
Personally I'm leaning toward the latter, but I haven't found something definite in the rules.
-
I am not sure if this helps .. but going back to the Morgul Brute example
Wound the Ringbearer or add a burden Add a burden or wound the RingBearer to prevent this .... I choose to wound the RingBearer. So i presume i assign the wound. I then prevent it. So we revert back to the burden because the wound was never taken. This to me implies that taking a wound occurs when the wound is placed rather than assigned ... otherwise there would be no need to revert back to the burden because the wound was taken when the wound was assigned.
If my argument makes sense .. then taking a wound must equal placement of wound (over assignment of wound) ... or have i missed something?
-
Morgul Brute is different. Its not "add or burden or wound the Ring-bearer". Its "add a burden; wound the Ring-bearer to prevent that". Prevention and cannot are two different things in this game.
What we are saying is, if Gimli cannot take more than 1 wound, has he taken his 1 wound if that wound was prevented?
Prevention is about stopping effects while allowing costs to be paid ie winning a skirmish but not taking the effect.
-
I messed up my argument above by not reading Morgul Brute but i still think it may still be valid? I am not trying to focus on prevent and cannot, but rather the question EA asked regarding when a wound is taken - when it is assigned or placed - and apply it to a different and known situation.
If the wound is taken when it is assigned I assume this order takes place for the Morgul Brute example
I choose to prevent the burden so i wound the ringbearer - i assign the wound - I prevent the wound - wound was taken because wound was assigned - no need to revert to burden.
We know this is not true - therefore a wound must be taken when it is placed and if i am right solves the problem with Gimli's Helm - he must place a wound before he can stop all other wounds affecting him in a skirmish phase.
-
I was thinking of Promise Keeping: "Each time a companion takes a wound during a skirmish that involves a [Gollum] minion, exert a companion." If taking a wound happens upon assignment, you'll get to exert a companion before placing the wound token. I've never heard of PK working like that.
-
If the wound is taken when it is assigned I assume this order takes place for the Morgul Brute example
I choose to prevent the burden so i wound the ringbearer - i assign the wound - I prevent the wound - wound was taken because wound was assigned - no need to revert to burden.
We know this is not true - therefore a wound must be taken when it is placed and if i am right solves the problem with Gimli's Helm - he must place a wound before he can stop all other wounds affecting him in a skirmish phase.
Hmm... very good argument there and compliments on your logic and mathematical way of thinking. You assumed the opposite of what you thought and it led you to a contradiction. Nice work. You should study mathematics ;)
This is proof enough for me and I am convinced. Nice work, chompers.
-
If the wound is taken when it is assigned I assume this order takes place for the Morgul Brute example
I choose to prevent the burden so i wound the ringbearer - i assign the wound - I prevent the wound - wound was taken because wound was assigned - no need to revert to burden.
We know this is not true - therefore a wound must be taken when it is placed and if i am right solves the problem with Gimli's Helm - he must place a wound before he can stop all other wounds affecting him in a skirmish phase.
Hmm... very good argument there and compliments on your logic and mathematical way of thinking. You assumed the opposite of what you thought and it led you to a contradiction. Nice work. You should study mathematics ;)
This is proof enough for me and I am convinced. Nice work, chompers.
Maths / Science teacher :) Not an English teacher - not great at explaining my crazy ideas ...
-
I was thinking of Promise Keeping: "Each time a companion takes a wound during a skirmish that involves a [Gollum] minion, exert a companion." If taking a wound happens upon assignment, you'll get to exert a companion before placing the wound token. I've never heard of PK working like that.
Yes! Exactly. The Helm stops him taking more than 1 wound, but unless the wound is actually placed, he hasn't taken anything because it was prevented.
Thranduil
-
so once a wound has been placed, gimli can use the armor to prevent further damage
-
Once a wound has been taken/placed, Gimli's Helm will stop further wounds from being assigned to him... but Gimli's Armor won't have the opportunity to prevent further wounds, for that reason.
-
sorry, i mistated my comment. Once gimli loses a skirmish against a dmg +1 minion, he only has to use his armor once in order to prevent the only wound he would receive since he is wearing his helm, correct?
-
Gimli's Helm is only useful once the first wound has been placed - in which case every wound after that is ignored.
Erratum .... In the discussed example .... Gimli's Helm doesn't combine well with Gimli's Armor as he will have to prevent every wound as Gimli's Helm only works once a wound is placed in which case Gimli's Armor would not be required anyway.
-
Gimli's Helm and Gimli's Armor work extremely well together. Gimli's Helm protects Gimli from wounds during skirmish phases and Gimli's Armor keeps him safe all the other time especially if combined with card drawing cards like Delving, Mithril Shaft and Out of Darkness. It helps keep initiative. Even Ever my Heart Rises can help a lot with that. Just keep stacking your draw deck on EMHR and take them in hand during fellowship to keep initiative.... so many combinations, so little time ;)