Too Great and Terrible Rules Discussion

[BigRedMF]

First, I'm not sure what you're quoting when you say, "the act of wounding."

I am referring to a post by dmaz where he quoted the phrase.

The rules say that "wound a character" means "place a wound on that character." The section you are referring to is just breaking it down into the procedure for doing that, for purposes of understanding why things like "Consorting with Wizards" may make a character not a legal target for wounding. There is nothing to indicate that Too Great And Terrible is preventing the assignment of wounds, rather than preventing wounds, particularly with all the other similarly-worded cards that deal with things that aren't broken down any further (like exerting or adding burdens).

I quoted the entire section about wounds, but the key part of that section (to me) is that it clearly separates assigning wounds from placing the wounds that result. They are not one in the same. "This prevents wounds as they are assigned to Faramir, not the assignments themselves." This tells me that there are two possible things that could be prevented: the wounds themselves (a la cards like Intimidate), OR the assigning of those wounds. Why else would the rules make such a distinction? Think about what that sentence says and tell me why it is necessary, if preventing wounding (the verb) and preventing wounds (the noun) are one in the same?

Wounding Gandalf is not an action, it's an effect. Playing the event is an action.

My use of the word "action" was really just a way to reference the wounding as a verb rather than a wound as a noun, not as a defined term from the rulebook.

The majority argues that the "this" means the assignment of wounds....though they still haven't showed any proof from the rules that that's what "this" means...nor have they provided enough evidence from the rules to show that the wounds still aren't considered prevented.

I completely agree, there is nowhere concrete that provides a true answer to the question about "this". As much as it may seem funny, I am not 100% convinced of my own argument here. But after finding that statement in the rules distinguishing between wounding and wounds I am definitely on this side of the fence. As with a few other debates I've been a part of, I don't think we will ever truly know what was intended. It is interesting to hear what Ringbearer had to say about his tournament, however.