Steward's Tomb

[fineltour]

I was playing a game this afternoon with a friend and he pulled out the Gondorian Wraiths.  I thought I had the perfect cure with the Steward's Tomb site (Wounds cannot be prevented).  However, he claims that it wouldn't matter because the Wraiths cannot take wounds.  These wounds are not being "prevented", they just cannot take them.  That sounds like simply another wording to me for prevention, but he disagrees. 

Anyone know what the ruling on this is?

-f

[DáinIronfoot]

The wording IS tricky, but I am 99.9% sure that "cannot take wounds" is the same as "preventing wounds". Thus Steward's Tomb negates Swept Away's wound prevention.

I would side with you on that one.

[Pepin The Breve]

    I fear your friend is right...

  From the Rulebook: "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."

   So the wraiths don´t need to prevent anything cause the wounds can´t even be assigned to them. 

   Hope this helps! 

   PS: If you are having problems with wraiths just run some condition discard or initiative engine and you should do the trick (or run mass archery and kill his/her RB) 

[leokula]

    I fear your friend is right...

  From the Rulebook: "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."

   So the wraiths don´t need to prevent anything cause the wounds can´t even be assigned to them. 

   Hope this helps! 

   PS: If you are having problems with wraiths just run some condition discard or initiative engine and you should do the trick (or run mass archery and kill his/her RB) 

Agreed 100% 

[Elf_Lvr]

It's weird that it's worded like that for two very similar abilities. But it makes a whole lot of difference.

[lem0nhead]

I wouldnt even bother arguing semantics on this one your mate is clearly wrong. The wraiths would ordinarily take wounds without that condition thus they are being stopped or prevented when they should have been placed. Hence stewards tomb wrecks that completely. Everyone takes wounds at that site. There is no way (well not immediately obvious) of getting round the wording.

[leokula]

Hmmm... sorry Steve, but I don't agree with you here. For me it seems that the Wraiths cannot take wounds, so wounds don't have to be prevented.

If you wound the wraiths, then you're ignoring Swept Away's text. If Swept Away was worded like "Response: if a wraith is about to take a wound, prevent it." or even "Prevent all wounds to wraith companions" then it'd be ok, but it states that they cannot take wounds and therefore wounds to wraiths are not prevented, they just don't happen. No matter what, they cannot take wounds. You should be arrested if you wound a wraith with swept away in play LMAO

I think D has just been a victim or their own wording here :hey: I know that the idea of the card is that everybody takes wounds and stuff, but what the hey... it's worded like "wounds cannot be prevented" and none of the wraith cards prevents wounds.

[Elessar's Socks]

It's all about semanti--*gets conked by a lemon thrown by lem0n*

The game sees a difference between "cannot take wounds" and "prevents wounds," as noted by Pepin. Steward's Tomb translates to "Wounds assigned to a character must be placed." Swept Away translates to "Wounds cannot be assigned to exhausted Wraiths." Steward's Tomb doesn't lift the restrictions on the actual assignment, so the Wraiths are still safe.

[leokula]

It's all about semanti--*gets conked by a lemon thrown by lem0n*

LMAO HAHAHAH!!!! Man, this was hilarious!!! Take some gold!!

[lem0nhead]

*Throws another lemon at socks*

If i attempt to wound an exhausted wraith with swept away in play the wound cannot be assigned and is thus prevented from happening by the text of Swept Away. So the wound doesnt happen when it ordinarily does. Stewards tomb overwrites any card. Regardless of response or flat statements. Wounds cannot be prevented so any attempt at wounding someone goes ahead. Site overwrites card.

EDIT: I actually like my reasoning in this post and i reckon ive argued on the side of logic and common sense, however i completely failed to see pepins extract from the rulebook in which case i have to concede.

[leokula]

You're using the same argument as last time, but preventing wounds in game text is not literally preventing wounds in any fashion, is the action of preventing wounds when it's written "prevent a wound".

EDIT: niiiice

[Pepin The Breve]

EDIT: I actually like my reasoning in this post and i reckon ive argued on the side of logic and common sense, however i completely failed to see pepins extract from the rulebook in which case i have to concede.

    You can find the rulling at page 18 from the CRB 4.0 at the topic "Wound" (just before the X-list).

[lem0nhead]

You can find the rulling at page 18 from the CRB 4.0 at the topic "Wound" (just before the X-list).

Id rather not 

[Thranduil]

To make a completely unnecessary post, I am also 100% certain that Pepin, ES and LK are right about this one.

Thranduil

[DáinIronfoot]

Stupid...frickin'...grammar....

Lem0n may throw fruit, but I throw axes! Don't make me start!

[Gate Troll]

Hold on a second... The definition of prevent is: "To stop, to keep from happening." The word 'cannot' in Swept Away stops, or keeps wounds from happening, thus, Steward's Tomb negates the effect of Swept Away.
 

[Thranduil]

Hold on a second... The definition of prevent is: "To stop, to keep from happening." The word 'cannot' in Swept Away stops, or keeps wounds from happening, thus, Steward's Tomb negates the effect of Swept Away.
 

There's a difference between dictionary definitions and game definitions. The game (I've just lost, by the way! ) defines "prevent" and "cannot" exactly as Pepin describes. Therefore Steward's Tomb has no affect on Swept Away.

Thranduil

[Gate Troll]

I see. So there's a difference between wound prevention and wound negation? 

[Thranduil]

The point is the prevention that arises from the word "prevent" and the prevention that arises from "cannot" happens at different times. If you're about to assign a wound to your Wraith, you would follow this abstract process:

1) Check whether your Wraith can take wounds or not. If it cannot, then this wound is not placed. If it can, go to step 2.
2) Check to see if anything prevents the wound you're about to place. If so, then Steward's Tomb specifically forbids this action and so it does not take place.

Thranduil

[Kralik]

Cannot represents an impossibility. To be absurd, I'd look at it this way:

Exhausted Wraiths cannot take wounds in the same way that possessions cannot take wounds.

Simply does not--*ahem* cannot--happen.

[FM]

I don't see why it's so hard to get the difference on this one. You see, the expression "cannot take wounds" basically removes from the game altogether the possibility of assigning wounds to the Wraiths. It's WAY different from preventing wounds. If the wounds WERE simply prevented, then you'd be immune to archery fire, because you could assign all the archery wounds to the wraiths, when they'd then be prevented. However, since the possibility of wounding them is not present anymore, the archery fire will end up turning your Ring-bearer into a pincushion, since he'll most likely be your only character (or one of the few) that CAN have wounds assigned, so you WILL have to assign them to him. Since the text on the Tomb says that "wounds can't be prevented", it means that, once assigned, no effect may prevent them from being placed, ONCE ASSIGNED being the key part. Since you CAN'T assign them, the Tomb's text never actually takes place.