After the first time, the minion is discarded and no longer there to wound... therefore, you were not fully capable of performing the action.
After the first time, the minion is discarded and no longer there to wound... therefore, you were not fully capable of performing the action.
The rules go out of their way to emphasize that certain wounds (i.e. archery, threat) are placed one at a time. This seems to imply that, in other cases, wounds may be placed simultaneously.
wound
[snip]
Wounds are always placed on a character one at a time.
If the effect of a card or special ability requires
you to perform an action and you cannot, you
must perform as much as you can and ignore the
rest. (See limit.)
If the effect of an event requires you to discard 2
cards from your hand and you only have 1 card in
hand, just discard the 1 card and ignore the rest.
If the effect of a card or special ability requires
you to choose one of two different actions, you
must choose an action that you are fully capable
of performing (if possible).
You are still choosing between X different minions
you are not choosing one of two different actions. The action is set (wound/exert twice); you are choosing the minion.
Yes I am going to seriously argue that, because that is the correct interpretation of the rules. You can disagree all you want, but that's how it is.
Such a choice is fundamentally no different than the choice offered by DDOTR. Just because Pippin's two choices are similar does not stop them from actually being choices.
Let me ask you this. Is using Athelas a choice? The word "choose" is not printed on the card, but you are still choosing to heal a companion or discard a Shadow condition borne by a companion. If there is no Shadow condition, you have to heal someone if possible. Likewise, if everyone is healthy, you have to discard a Shadow condition if possible.`
| Cost | Action One | or | Action Two |
| Discard this possession to | heal a companion | or | [to] remove a Shadow condition from a companion. |
| Trigger | Action One | or | Action Two |
| Each time bearer is assigned to a skirmish, the Free Peoples player chooses to | discard 3 cards from hand | or | [to] add a burden. |
| Trigger | Action One | or | Action Two |
| Exert an Uruk-Hai to make the opponent choose to either | exert 2 companions | or | make the Ring-bearer put on The One Ring until the regroup phase. |
| Trigger | Action One | or | Action Two |
| While Gimli is the Ring-bearer, at the start of each skirmish involving him, | add 2 burdens | or | [add] 2 threats. |
| Cost | Action | |
| Spot a dwarf companion and discard this event to | exert a minion twice. |
| Cost | Action | |
| If Pippin is not assigned to a skirmish, return him to your hand to | wound a roaming minion twice. |
| Cost | Action | |
| Spot Aragorn to | heal a companion who has the Aragorn signet twice. |
This means that you (the "controller" of the effect) must choose "targets" of the effect that completely fullfill the effect first.
This means that you (the "controller" of the effect) must choose "targets" of the effect that completely fullfill the effect first.
Try to find a section of the rulebook that says this.
That's fair. I find it easily deductucted from:
"If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to perform an action and you cannot, you must perform as much as you can and ignore the rest. (See limit.)"
that you must first try to permorm that action to its fullest. Choosing cards to affect is part of performing the effects of a card.
"6. Perform effects of The Card. This includes
choosing cards to be affected, if necessary. If
initiative is a requirement for an effect, you
cannot count The Card. If an effect takes a card
into your hand from your discard pile, The Card
is not there yet."
Imagine this scenario:
At site two your opponent plays Wulf, Freca and Hides. Can WoBaS be used against Freca? According to Bib's line of reasoning, you cannot target Freca because it is impossible to wound him twice. But on the other hand, what if your opponent uses Hides? You have no way of knowing whether they will or not use Hides in advance. If they were going to use Hides, then Pippin could wound Freca twice (but one wound would be prevented). So you actually can't know if it's legal to target Freca or not. Misapplying the rule creates a logical conundrum.
Furthermore, if we keep misapplying the rule we're going to have to look critically at several more cards and twist them from their original design to do something else. For example: Terrible and Evil. You would not be able to use it to kill an exhausted Nazgul if a non-exhausted Nazgul or a non-Nazgul minion was on the table.
Exert: A character cannot exert 0 times to pay the cost of a card that requires a character to exert X times.
Back to WoBaS and your rules interpretation ("choosing is not directly related to performing as much as you can"), what about minions that can't take wounds (per card affects)? To me it's obvious you can't. If you could, you start opening another can of worms where people can assign archery or threat wounds to characters that can't take wounds.
If there were one unwoundable minion and one woundable one, you'd have to pick the woundable one. But if there were only one minion who couldn't take wounds at all (say, an Easterling w/ a Polearm), then you could still use Pippin for no effect.
The issue brought up with choosing a card that an effect cannot affect is when a player must negatively affect their own cards. IE when a free people card forces the shadow player to wound a minion. A ruling allowing a player to use greenleaf to choose a minion that cannot take wounds (for no effect) would also allow the shadow player to choose minion that cannot take wounds.
As to whether you can use WoBaS to target, say, an unwoundable Easterling with a Easterling Polearm... I don't really care that much. Why would you? Would you exert Greenleaf to do the same? There's no rules question in my mind because it's simply the sort of thing that is of no advantage to the Free Peoples player and so it is irrelevant. I suspect that there is no direct violation of the rules if you pay the cost but cannot perform the effect fully (like Greenleaf above). There have been many cases in Gemp that I've misclicked and paid the cost (a wound or exert) for an effect that I cannot perform. So while I don't really care about this particular side point (since it has little practical application), I'm not willing to concede it if it's going to lead to playing a host of other cards incorrectly.
EDIT: Even so, there's a difference between an effect that cannot be performed and one that can be partially performed.
That's fair. I find it easily deductucted from:
"If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to perform an action and you cannot, you must perform as much as you can and ignore the rest. (See limit.)"
that you must first try to permorm that action to its fullest. Choosing cards to affect is part of performing the effects of a card.
"6. Perform effects of The Card. This includes
choosing cards to be affected, if necessary. If
initiative is a requirement for an effect, you
cannot count The Card. If an effect takes a card
into your hand from your discard pile, The Card
is not there yet."
Elgar, I got it! I was driving and the solution suddenly came to me. :cheers: But could you expand on the Shadow player choosing a minion that cannot take wounds for something? When would that come up? I already covered threats and archery.
Elgar, I got it! I was driving and the solution suddenly came to me. :cheers: But could you expand on the Shadow player choosing a minion that cannot take wounds for something? When would that come up? I already covered threats and archery.
Off the top of my head, the Eowyn that forces you to wound a minion for each wound on a character she is skirmishing. I believe there are others but I can't recall right now. I'll respond to the rest of the post in another post once I figure out how I want to say it.
That's fair. I find it easily deductucted from:
"If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to perform an action and you cannot, you must perform as much as you can and ignore the rest. (See limit.)"
that you must first try to permorm that action to its fullest. Choosing cards to affect is part of performing the effects of a card.
"6. Perform effects of The Card. This includes
choosing cards to be affected, if necessary. If
initiative is a requirement for an effect, you
cannot count The Card. If an effect takes a card
into your hand from your discard pile, The Card
is not there yet."
OK, so let's look at 6 from the CRD. Performing the effects of The Card includes choosing cards to be affected, if necessary. Got it. Part of performing the effect. Now the rulebook section:
"If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to perform an action and you cannot, you must perform as much as you can and ignore the rest. (See limit.)"
I asserted that this doesn't apply to choosing the card. I finally realized why. You've been quoting the second half, "you must perform as much as you can and ignore the rest," without the context of the first half:
If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to perform an action and you cannot
Now look at that conditional statement! The second half is not a blanket statement that applies to EVERY action. It doesn't mean that you always have to choose a character that allows you to perform as much as you can. It assumes that you are already in a situation where you cannot perform the full action.
So therefore I see the ordering with WoBaS as:
- Return WoBaS to hand.
- Choose a roaming minion (from 6. above. You must choose)
- Can you perform both wounds? Then do so.
- You can't perform both wounds? Then the sentence, "If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to perform an action and you cannot, you must perform as much as you can and ignore the rest. (See limit.)" applies.
I'm also not seeing a place in the rulebook that would limit WoBaS from choosing an unwoundable Easterling. You are doing the choosing before the sentence above applies.
Elgar, I got it! I was driving and the solution suddenly came to me. :cheers: But could you expand on the Shadow player choosing a minion that cannot take wounds for something? When would that come up? I already covered threats and archery.
Off the top of my head, the Eowyn that forces you to wound a minion for each wound on a character she is skirmishing. I believe there are others but I can't recall right now. I'll respond to the rest of the post in another post once I figure out how I want to say it.
I see this as the same as the threats and archery wounds. You have a number of wound tokens in your hand. They have to go somewhere! A "for each" situation is not the same as a "choose a single character then do X" situation.
Found one:Elgar, I got it! I was driving and the solution suddenly came to me. :cheers: But could you expand on the Shadow player choosing a minion that cannot take wounds for something? When would that come up? I already covered threats and archery.
Off the top of my head, the Eowyn that forces you to wound a minion for each wound on a character she is skirmishing. I believe there are others but I can't recall right now. I'll respond to the rest of the post in another post once I figure out how I want to say it.
I see this as the same as the threats and archery wounds. You have a number of wound tokens in your hand. They have to go somewhere! A "for each" situation is not the same as a "choose a single character then do X" situation.
I'm wondering if that first rule is actually being a Red Herring (which both of us fell for). The conditional you point out says "If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to perform an action and you cannot,...". Therefore this rule doesn't apply *if you can perform the action*.
Furthermore, being able to perform an action must mean that you can completely perform the action, otherwise this rule doesn't make sense.
Since choosing a card to affect is part of performing an action, and if you can perform the complete action then you choose a card to affect (because it's necessary).
QuoteFurthermore, being able to perform an action must mean that you can completely perform the action, otherwise this rule doesn't make sense.
Not following you here. There are plenty of actions that you can perform (like making your opponent discard 2 cards when they only have 1) that you can't completely perform.
Why would there be a rule about performing actions as much as possible if you could never have partial actions?QuoteFurthermore, being able to perform an action must mean that you can completely perform the action, otherwise this rule doesn't make sense.
Not following you here. There are plenty of actions that you can perform (like making your opponent discard 2 cards when they only have 1) that you can't completely perform.
Let me try to clarify:
What does "perform an action" mean? It must mean "perform all of the action" because if it doesn't (ie if it means perform part of the action) then the rule "If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to perform an action and you cannot..." is redundant.
Couple more thoughts:1. You cannot because the wounds are placed one at a time.After the first wound, the character is not physically on the table.
1) What does cannot mean? Is it true that a character with 1 wound cannot be wounded twice? There's no rule that says that. There is one for exertions though (getting back to your (Kralik)original question)
2) Not to start a sidarguement, but aren't always supposed to do what a card says, everything and nothing more. If, for example, you try wound an exhausted minion twice, are you doiin card says?
2a) (rheorical) What if you can't do what a card says? Oh right, there's a rule that tell us when we cannot, that we should do as much as possible.
I don't know if either of these will derail our arguement but I felt obliged to add them to the conversation
Why would there be a rule about performing actions as much as possible if you could never have partial actions?QuoteFurthermore, being able to perform an action must mean that you can completely perform the action, otherwise this rule doesn't make sense.
Not following you here. There are plenty of actions that you can perform (like making your opponent discard 2 cards when they only have 1) that you can't completely perform.
Let me try to clarify:
What does "perform an action" mean? It must mean "perform all of the action" because if it doesn't (ie if it means perform part of the action) then the rule "If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to perform an action and you cannot..." is redundant.
Couple more thoughts:1. You cannot because the wounds are placed one at a time.After the first wound, the character is not physically on the table.
1) What does cannot mean? Is it true that a character with 1 wound cannot be wounded twice? There's no rule that says that. There is one for exertions though (getting back to your (Kralik)original question)
2) Not to start a sidarguement, but aren't always supposed to do what a card says, everything and nothing more. If, for example, you try wound an exhausted minion twice, are you doiin card says?
2a) (rheorical) What if you can't do what a card says? Oh right, there's a rule that tell us when we cannot, that we should do as much as possible.
I don't know if either of these will derail our arguement but I felt obliged to add them to the conversation
2. Yes, because you did as much as possible - see 2a ;)
Wounds are placed on at a time... however there is no rule saying that a character with 1 vitality can't take 2 wounds.
[snip]
(with WoBaS)...you can't "choose" to wound the roaming minion with 1 vitality because that wouldn't be doing what the card says.
No... the rule would be redundant if you could never choose to perform a partial action. Otherwise why mention partial actions? ;)
Wounds are placed on at a time... however there is no rule saying that a character with 1 vitality can't take 2 wounds.
[snip]
(with WoBaS)...you can't "choose" to wound the roaming minion with 1 vitality because that wouldn't be doing what the card says.
Sure you can. By your own logic you just said there's no rule that says you can't wound a 1 vitality minion twice. Can you point me to the exert X vitality X+ rule? Is there a similar heal X wounds vs. X+ rule as well?
Edit: Found the exert rule. It applies to costs: "If the cost of an action requires a character to exert X times, then that character must have X+1 or more vitality or that action cannot be performed."
Be default you do all of what the card says.
So then we can come to an agreement that unless a card or rule specifically prohibits an action (ie if something says they cannot do something (ring bearers skirmish cannot be cancelled, bearer cannot take wounds, an exhausted character cannot exert, etc)) that action can be performed on that card.
Be default you do all of what the card says.
You do as much of the effect as possible... but you still can choose the initial target of the effect as long as it's not illegal. Are you completely unwilling to agree that even if the rules are somewhat ambiguous, the cards were meant to allow the player a choice?
Looking at Pippin, WoBaS and exhausta-minion yet again...
"6. Perform effects of The Card. This includes choosing cards to be affected, if necessary."
Choosing the roaming minion to be affected obviously has to come before wounding said minion. Is the minion able to be wounded? If so, you may choose it. If not, you may not.
"If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to perform an action and you cannot, you must perform as much as you can and ignore the rest. (See limit.)"
Now the effect of WoBaS may be broken into two actions:
(Spot a roaming minion that can be wounded).
1) Wound the roaming minion.
2) Wound the roaming minion again.
The effect requires you to perform action 1. So you do. The effect now requires you to perform action 2. You cannot, but you've done as much as possible and thus followed the rules.
EDIT: Or maybe you can look at it as:
1) Spot a roaming minion that can be wounded. Wound it.
2) Wound the minion from #1 again.
By the time you reach #2 you can't change your choice even if it's impossible to wound the chosen minion.
However you have to choose a card to affect that you are able to perform the [entire] effect on.
I'm fine saying that you can perform a "wound twice" action on a 1 vitality character, becuase there is no rule prohibiting it.
WRT intent: Just because a card is intended to work one way doesn't mean that it actually does. I agree that T&E was likely meant to kill Nazgul. That doesn't mean that the rules make it function differently than intended.
However you have to choose a card to affect that you are able to perform the [entire] effect on.
You are saying this rule is implied and I'm saying that it is not explicit, therefore I'm not going to take it as a rule.
I'm fine saying that you can perform a "wound twice" action on a 1 vitality character, becuase there is no rule prohibiting it.
There is no rule prohibiting an "exert twice" effect on a 2 vitality character or "heal twice" effect on a 1-wound character. There is only a rule prohibiting extra exertions as a cost.
QuoteWRT intent: Just because a card is intended to work one way doesn't mean that it actually does. I agree that T&E was likely meant to kill Nazgul. That doesn't mean that the rules make it function differently than intended.
Intent most certainly does matter, which is why Decipher issued clarifications when the intent was not clear, and is why we allow RB cancel in Fellowship/Towers/TS even though it's technically against the rules.
Over the years we've !discovered many rules questions that Decipher never addressed. Were they still around, they probably would clarify things,* but as they are not, we must go with what makes the most sense and seems to be closest to the intent of the card designers.
*Well, maybe not, considering what Decipher was like in their later stages.
QuoteThere is no rule prohibiting an "exert twice" effect on a 2 vitality character or "heal twice" effect on a 1-wound character. There is only a rule prohibiting extra exertions as a cost.
Sure, I except that those effects would also fall into the same bucket.
For example, what was the intent for the original Sting? To look and study an opponents hand? Or to remove twillight based on the orcs in hand? I would think the later, but it sure was used for the former moreso.
QuoteThere is no rule prohibiting an "exert twice" effect on a 2 vitality character or "heal twice" effect on a 1-wound character. There is only a rule prohibiting extra exertions as a cost.
Sure, I except that those effects would also fall into the same bucket.
Wait... so what are we arguing over exactly?!
I think what you quoted is something we agree upon, which, as an effect, you *can* wound heal or exert something X times, even if it doesn't have X Vit, X Wounds or X+1 Vit (except exerting when X=0). I have been brought over to thinking this way.
I think what you quoted is something we agree upon, which, as an effect, you *can* wound heal or exert something X times, even if it doesn't have X Vit, X Wounds or X+1 Vit (except exerting when X=0). I have been brought over to thinking this way.
If you *can* do this--i.e. it's not against the rules--then all of the discussed usages of Slaked Thirsts, WoBaS and Hard Choice-style cards are valid. Namely, if it's legal to exert/wound/heal once then it's legal to exert/wound/heal twice, even if the second one fails. I see this as fitting perfectly within the "Performing effects of The Card" rules, as I wrote above (#65, but perhaps you didn't see it in the mess of posts).
Maybe we can find a middle ground:
Kralik: I think you should be able to target anyone with WoBaS whether they can be wounded or not.
Elgar: I think you can only target minions that may be wounded twice.
...discussion/arguments for many posts...
Kralik: 'OK, WoBaS cannot be used on an unwoundable minion'
Elgar: 'I'm fine saying that you can perform a "wound twice" action on a 1 vitality character, becuase there is no rule prohibiting it.'
Proposed middle ground: Above post. ;)
I feel that choosing a card to affect is conditional on the effect (it must match the object and must not be forbidden).
So this all seems fair to me, then. New question: can an exhausted Boromir BOC choose the wounding option and then put on the Ring/ use Sapling or Intimidate?
Regarding Boromir... I used to think that he couldn't use Sapling but somewhere recent I heard that he could?
If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to choose one of two different actions, you must choose an action that you are fully capable of performing (if possible).
If the cost of an action requires a character to exert X times, then that character must have X+1 or more vitality or that action cannot be performed.
Perform effects of The Card. This includes choosing cards to be affected, if necessary. If initiative is a requirement for an effect, you cannot count The Card. If an effect takes a card into your hand from your discard pile, The Card is not there yet.