Post your Gemp-LotR bugs here

[MarcinS]

No, because he has 0 vitality. A character with 0 vitality cannot be assigned a wound. In the other example, Boromir has 1 vitality. You can assign 1 wound to him. Wounds are always assigned one at a time. To "wound him twice", I could assign a wound to Boromir, respond with Intimidate, then assign the second wound, then respond with Gondor will see it Done. That should be legal.

So, what condition(S) a character should fulfil for a player to be able to choose a wound option if there was an effect "wound X times or do something else"?
For me, the conditions were "should be able to take X wounds so have at least X vitality" and for you it seems "should be able to take 1 wound". Which comes to another question then. Can I choose to wound the Boromir twice (during Skirmish non the less), if it has Armor on it (can't take more than 1 wound in skirmish), that would be a pretty sweet combo, right?

[tuelean]

Hi, just to report a bug with this card :
Saruman, Servant of the Eye - 3C69 :

You can use is assigment special ability to assign Saruman himself (while he cannot be assigned).

Thanks and follow your great job !

Aurelien

[MarcinS]

Hi, just to report a bug with this card :
Saruman, Servant of the Eye - 3C69 :

You can use is assigment special ability to assign Saruman himself (while he cannot be assigned).

Thanks and follow your great job !

Aurelien

Already mentioned in this thread. Fix is on the way, I just want to do thorough testing before putting it on live server, as the whole assignment code had to be rewritten.

[hsiale]

The difference is that a character bearing Armor cannot take two wounds during a single skirmish. Character having one vitality left can take any number of wounds, it's only possible that it will be killed before all wound tokens are placed on it (it works the same when an exhausted character loses a skirmish to a character with damage bonus - it must take the additional wounds if the first one is somehow prevented.

[MarcinS]

Character having one vitality left can take any number of wounds, it's only possible that it will be killed before all wound tokens are placed on it (it works the same when an exhausted character loses a skirmish to a character with damage bonus - it must take the additional wounds if the first one is somehow prevented.

Now take a look at what you wrote above and now on the following sentence from "Comprehensive Rules":
"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 said yourself, "it will be killed before all wound tokens are placed on it", therefore you won't be able to fully perform the action, right?

[MarcinS]

Ok, I've changed the code. Here is how it works now, and some of the consequences:

This entry can be added to Comprehensive Rules if someone maintains it:
Heal/wound X times (respectively)
If game rules call for a check, if an effect can be fully performed, so at the moment in two cases:
- if an effect makes player to choose one of two different effects (i.e. Boromir, Bearer of Council start of skirmish required trigger),
- if a choice of preventing an effect is possible (i.e. effect worded like "opponent may heal/wound ... X times to prevent it").
This action is considered possible to be fully performed, if the character has least one wound/vitality and there has to be no effects preventing it from being healed/wounded X times (for example Armor).

If the effect to heal/wound X times was a cost of preventing another action, and it was not fully carried out, because the character didn't have enough wounds to heal/vitality to consume the wounds, then the prevention is considered to have failed, and the effect that it was preventing will be carried out.

If a player has to choose a character to heal/wound X times. That player can choose any character (if able) that has at least one wound/vitality.

Consequences:
- at the beginning of skirmish involving an exhausted Boromir, Bearer of Council is exhausted, player may choose to wound him twice instead of adding burdens,
- at the beginning of skirmish involving Boromir, Bearer of Council bearing Armor, player has to add burdens, as Armor prevents Boromir from taking more than 1 wound (and he has to take 2),
- if a character A has 0 vitality and Threat wounds are to be assigned while character A is still in play (this can happen when another character died while resolving "is about to be killed" effect of the A character), character A cannot be assigned any damage, as it has to have at least 1 vitality to receive wounds.

[MarcinS]

Ugh, the more I think about it, the more I want to roll back the change.

If the only argument, why choosing to wound an exhausted Boromir, Bearer of Council twice should be possible, is that it doesn't say in the rules that you can't choose to wound character more times than its vitality. And it says that in case of choosing one of the effects you HAVE to choose one you have to be FULLY CAPABLE OF PERFORMING (are you sure you can wound the Boromir twice if it can take only one wound?).

Then the same argument can be made with Desperate Defense of the Ring - if I have 1 card in hand, I should be able to choose to "discard 3 cards", rather than automatically add a burden. Since it doesn't say in the rules, that I can choose to discard X cards from hand only if I have X or more cards in my hand.

The fact that you can somehow prevent the wounds (Ring or other Responses) do not matter here, since you can't choose to exert an exhausted character, even if you have Strength of Spirit in hand, or choose to exert character with 2 vitality twice, because you have Strength of Spirit in hand and you can prevent the first exertion.

[jcb213]

When you use the ring of rings you aren't preventing the wounds, you are taking burdens instead.  That's why you can choose to wound him twice if exhausted when wearing that ring (you still take two wounds, but the ring changes them to burdens), but if you prevent either of the wounds (armor, sapling, etc) then Boromir has to take 3 burdens as per his text.

[MarcinS]

When you use the ring of rings you aren't preventing the wounds, you are taking burdens instead.  That's why you can choose to wound him twice if exhausted when wearing that ring (you still take two wounds, but the ring changes them to burdens), but if you prevent either of the wounds (armor, sapling, etc) then Boromir has to take 3 burdens as per his text.

I'm afraid you are confusing two different types of effects here (with two different templates).

1. Do [action1] or [action2].
2. Do [action1], [player] may [action2] to prevent it.

The first group of effects has the following rules in Comprehensive Rules:
"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)."

The second group of effects has the following rules in Comprehensive Rules:
"If something happens to prevent one effect which in turn would have prevented a second effect, the second effect is performed."

Boromir, Bearer of Council belongs to the first group, so the clause about prevention does not apply to him. So if you choose to wound Boromir (and you're "fully capable of performing it"), and you prevent the wounds (for example with Sapling of the White Tree), you DO NOT add burdens. You would have to add burdens, if text of the Boromir was following the second template - so... "At the start of skirmish involving him, add 3 burdens, you may wound him twice to prevent it".

And I still think you can't choose to wound exhausted Boromir twice as you resolve his trigger, because you're not "fully capable of performing" it, that is (without help from other cards) to physically put 2 wounds on him (he'll die after receiving the first one). Even if you have a card that allows you to prevent it (or do something instead), I think you should not be able to choose that possibility, because if it was allowed, there would be no clear distinction of what is possible, and what is not.

Lets imagine you have two event cards in hand with text - "Stealth Response: Remove token from your condition to prevent a wound." You might argue - "because I have these cards in hand, I can choose to wound Boromir twice". Then your opponent would have to show you his Relentless card in hand and say - "No, you wouldn't be able to fully perform the action, so you can't choose it" - all this without even playing a single card or effect.

I think a distinction whether you are "fully capable of performing" an action should not take into account any cards or effects (or possible actions), except ones already in effect, which are preventing you from doing something, like: "[classifier] cannot take wounds", "[classifier] cannot exert", etc. If you allow any advocating of "I can choose that, because I can play this card and then this card, followed by this effect" we'll be in trouble (not to mention it's impossible to implement this on a computer, as when figuring out, whether you can do something, it would have to follow all possible lines of play).

The only thing you could argue here, is the part, of whether you should be allowed to wound characters as many times as you wish, or is this choice limited by vitality. I'm not decided yet on this, but if we decide to go this way, it has a following consequence (probably one of many) - it's allowed to choose to wound companions with 0 vitality which are still in play.

[jcb213]

Boromir, Bearer of Council belongs to the first group, so the clause about prevention does not apply to him. So if you choose to wound Boromir (and you're "fully capable of performing it"), and you prevent the wounds (for example with Sapling of the White Tree), you DO NOT add burdens. You would have to add burdens, if text of the Boromir was following the second template - so... "At the start of skirmish involving him, add 3 burdens, you may wound him twice to prevent it".

This has been heavily discussed on the boards over the past few years, and multiple people have argued that if you use Sapling to prevent a wound to Boromir BoC at the start of his skirmish, you still take 3 burdens per his text.

Here's one of the relevant discussions: http://lotrtcgwiki.com/forums/index.php/topic,5811.0.html which also has links to other discussions.

Here's the example given in the rulebook that is used to justify the requirement of adding 3 burdens if you prevent one of the wounds to Boromir BoC when he skirmishes:

"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 ? 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."

I'm not sure whether I agree or disagree, but maybe some of the people who have argued strongly that Boromir BoC adds 3 burdens if sapling prevents one of the wounds can chime in with a better explanation?

[MarcinS]

Here's the example given in the rulebook that is used to justify the requirement of adding 3 burdens if you prevent one of the wounds to Boromir BoC when he skirmishes:

"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 ? 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."

I'm not sure whether I agree or disagree, but maybe some of the people who have argued strongly that Boromir BoC adds 3 burdens if sapling prevents one of the wounds can chime in with a better explanation?

You do agree, that the wording template of Morgul Destroyer (and other similar cards with "[player] may [action] to prevent this" in them) is completely different to the template used by Boromir BoC (and other similar cards with "do [action1] or [action2]", right?

I don't see why a rule that is clearly about an effect that is used to prevent another effect should apply to Boromir BoC, if it doesn't prevent any effect, nor has the "prevent" in its text.

[MarcinS]

And to people who argue, that if you prevent a wound with Boromir BoC - please tell me which effect of his is the main one, and which one is the one used to prevent it?

[Not a Zombie]

Southron Archer Legion isn't quite working right, on a double move he won't add any to the archery total if at the previous site he used up the limit, so basically the limit caries through sites and phases.

[NappyKorn]

Not that this is a big deal but if you want it fixed Uruk Warrior is using his ability to be fierce in the Shadow Phase not the Maneuver Phase.

NK

[MarcinS]

Southron Archer Legion isn't quite working right, on a double move he won't add any to the archery total if at the previous site he used up the limit, so basically the limit caries through sites and phases.

Code looks fine, I'll need a game replay on this one.