Whisper in the Dark

[MR. Lurtzy]

Played a game a few hours ago (IRL ), and on the third site, my opponent played Whisper in the Dark. I told him it was not legal to play, ever. He disagreed. I have seen many different takes on this ruling, so I'm not completely sure. Opinions?

[legolas3333]

if a card directly contradicts the rules of the game, the card wins.
so yes

[sharkey]

I fail to see how this card is problematic, unless I am missing some rule that followers cannot bear anything.

[legolas3333]

yeah, that is a rule

followers can't bear other cards, including possessions and conditions.

[Elessar's Socks]

If my recollection serves me right, Decipher said on their forums that LotR doesn't have golden rules, so I think the best we can do is come up with a model ourselves. O Elbereth! Gilthoniel! and Whisper in the Dark have been problematic personally. With the former, I think we'd normally handle things so that OE!G! works but Hobbit Stealth doesn't, but here the rule still takes precedence. With the latter, I think that calls into question what exactly counts as a contradiction. IMO a direct contradiction would be "Followers can bear cards." and not "Bearer must be a follower."

But... in an actual game, IMO Decipher intended for WitD to be played on a follower without any kind of support, so I wouldn't take issue with this.

[Sam, Great Elf Warrior]

Generally, the later rule takes precedence over the earlier rule, which is why I've heard that O Elbereth! Gilthoniel! doesn't work (the rule against canceling the Ring-bearer's skirmish postdates OEG). Also, the specific rule takes precedence over the general rule (which is an argument for making OEG work).

Thus cards can override the rules if they have an action that would be invalid otherwise. For example, Sent Back lets you play a unique companion when there's a copy of him in your dead pile, in direct contradiction to the rule that says you can't. For that matter, even cards like Gollum, PD override the rules inasmuch as its text is apparently active when it's in your discard pile and not in play.

The only clear exception I've heard to the principle that cards override the rules is OEG (presumably because the new rule came after OEG). Some might argue that another exception is playing events out of phase with Pass of Caradhras or Bilbo, BoTB, although this is better explained by saying that because those actions do things other than play out-of-phase events, they aren't clearly intended to override the rules (which is why, in contrast, Diversion can be played out of phase).

I would argue that WitD falls into the same category as Sent Back and Diversion and overrides the general rule saying followers can't bear cards. You should note the errata, of course.

[Kralik]

Follow the link to O Elbereth! Gilthoniel! and you'll see Decipher's notes on it.

[legolas3333]

ok off topic but my reasoning behind the Bilbo, BotB and Pass Of Caradhras is that neither card says that it allows events to be played out of phase but diversion for example has a disclaimer, per se, that allows you to play it in a different phase.

And I also think that samwise has a good point when he says that the latter rule takes precedence over earlier rules.

[MR. Lurtzy]

if a card directly contradicts the rules of the game, the card wins.
so yes

This is not true. O Elbereth! Gilthoniel! cannot use its ability, despite contradicting the rules, so I think that Whisper in the Dark should be treated the same way.

[Sam, Great Elf Warrior]

This is not true. O Elbereth! Gilthoniel! cannot use its ability, despite contradicting the rules, so I think that Whisper in the Dark should be treated the same way.

O Elbereth! Gilthoniel! is a special case because the rule was made after the card.

Think of what would happen if cards didn't override the rules. Sent Back wouldn't work (the rules say you can't play unique characters when copies of them are in your dead pile). Cards that play themselves from your discard pile or have effects from your discard pile wouldn't work (the rules say a card's game text is only active when it is in play, not when it's in your discard pile). Cards that mess with play order like Anduin Wilderland, The Balrog, DB, or Caverns of Isengard wouldn't work (the rules say that you have an archery phase and that the Free Peoples player wins at the start of the regroup phase at site 9). Not even Lightfootedness would work (the rules say the minion archery total is equal to the number of minion archers; they do mention that cards can add to your archery total, but they never say they can subtract from it). The only way most of the mechanics in this game work is because the cards override the rules.

Also note that Decipher took the time to errata WitD, but never did they bother to rule it illegal. And why would they bother to errata a card you could never play in the first place?

[ket_the_jet]

It is worth noting that you can use O Elbereth! Gilthoniel! to take off the One Ring.
-wtk

Edit: Which...Kralik mentioned a few posts ago!
-wtk

[MR. Lurtzy]

So, where does it say that cards override the rules?

[Sam, Great Elf Warrior]

Again, a general principle of interpreting rules is that the specific (cards) overrides the general (rulebook) and that the later (cards) overrides the earlier (rulebook, except in the case of OEG where the rule came later).

Not to mention the fact that so many of the cards contradict the rules (Sent Back, The Balrog, DB, Gollum, PD, etc.), so holding that the rules override the cards would make a great many commonly-used cards worthless, and thus cannot possibly have been Decipher's intent.

[Elessar's Socks]

O Elbereth! Gilthoniel! is a special case because the rule was made after the card.

The CRD entry as written doesn't seem to treat OEG as a special case. The entry simply gives the no-cancel rule as the reason, which presumably means no card (even one created in the future) can ever contradict this rule.

IMO it'd be similarly shaky if Sent Back was curbed by noting "As a unique companion cannot be played if a copy is in your dead pile, the fellowship or regroup action of this card cannot be used."

Maybe the bottom line is the same, though--not worry about fitting this example into any golden rules.

[Sam, Great Elf Warrior]

The CRD entry as written doesn't seem to treat OEG as a special case. The entry simply gives the no-cancel rule as the reason, which presumably means no card (even one created in the future) can ever contradict this rule.

Yes but the reason the no-cancel rule applies to OEG (and other rules don't override the cards) logically seems to be because the no-cancel rule came later. Again, Decipher didn't say this was their reason for treating OEG differently from, say, Sent Back, but it's a better explanation of their motivations than to say that the no-cancel rule is somehow different from all other rules, especially when the principle that later rules override earlier rules is such a fundamental assumption of rulemaking (if Congress passes one law saying the speed limit is 50mph, then later passes a law saying it's 60mph, we all know that the latter rule overrides the former; if it didn't, no rule could ever be changed).