Although part of me thinks that perhaps we should all take a breath while cmabr002's official query is still pending, I did want to ask: we are considering "Immune to player card effects" as essentially just text on a card, as opposed to an all-encompassing ban-hammer? It does seem a little against the spirit of the idea of such immunity. Are there other times besides these very specific situations involving them being revealed where we can do anything to these cards? [EDIT: I think Seastan edited the framework while I was writing this, so I retract the question about immunity.]

(I realize that we all like being able to Fortune or Fate hero Beorn and therefore generally accept that particular ruling.)

Also, does Minas Tirith Lampwright really have the status of a "cancellation" effect?

It is not an entire "ban-hammer" as you say. You can Shadow of a Past a card immune to player card effects since they said we can Fortune or Fate Beorn. I do think the cards should be immune as they are being revealed, but I think we need clarification, to be sure. It simply comes down to both interpretations being valid with the information we have.

Minas Tirith Lampwright does not use the word cancellation, but it does say "discard it without resolving its effects". So yeah, not sure what to make of it.

I think the latest update looks pretty good. Here are some concerns:

1. I have sent FFG a question regarding Toughness and Eastern Crows game text being active or not because I feel it has such a major impact on how we play that we need to know the answer. Depending on the answer, I will follow up and ask about Immune to Player Card Effects, and various other effects. I hope the decision will be consistent.

2. In the current guide, we do have Toughness/Peril (keywords) before Don't Be Hasty. I assume the argument here is that Toughness/Peril are not "resolved" so Don't Be Hasty cannot activate before? I only ask, because while currently I do not think it matters, suppose the hero you ready with Don't Be Hasty has a theoretical attachment "When this hero readies, deal 1 damage to an enemy". This might allow you to damage the enemy, bypassing its Toughness. My personal opinion is that Toughness/Peril do not "resolve" so Don't Be Hasty cannot trigger before it, but want to make sure such an argument has no unintended consequences.

Thanks for submitting the question. I sent Caleb 20 or so questions but I have a feeling I overwhelmed him

As for #2, I agree. Immunity, Peril, and Toughness are not keywords that "Resolve"

Right now, both Step 2 and Step 4 descriptions are similar. It seems they both mention "the card is now considered to be in play". I think you intended to delete that from step 4 since you recently added it to Step 2.

Just to note, if cards with "immune to player card effects" are not immune to player card effects during staging, it completely trivializes Fog on the Barrow-downs. For that reason alone, I feel the cards with "immune to player card effects" must be immune as they are being staged. All you have to do is include 3 copies of Warden of Arnor in your deck and you obliterate that quest...that feels really really wrong.

Just to note, if cards with "immune to player card effects" are not immune to player card effects during staging, it completely trivializes Fog on the Barrow-downs. For that reason alone, I feel the cards with "immune to player card effects" must be immune as they are being staged. All you have to do is include 3 copies of Warden of Arnor in your deck and you obliterate that quest...that feels really really wrong.

This is a strong argument. Currently I do have Immunity preventing progress.

Bookmarkable link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18Z-F6r0f2aIlEF8QTuVgHuGQYKsObkxyGwwM4_W978Y/edit?usp=sharing

I like this google docs. Now I don't have to pester you for minor things

I think what caelenvasius is saying is that you could think of Toughness as a response to receiving damage that cancels X points of damage. So Toughness isn't active when Thalin goes to apply the damage, but the damage itself triggers the Toughness response...

Both interpretations are equally valid, in my opinion.

If its game text isn't active, Toughness cannot apply.

If its game text is active, Toughness would apply.

I think it makes more sense for cards game text to be active "as they are being revealed" since they can take damage and such...It really seems odd to me that as an enemy is being revealed its only active parts of the card are the "enemy" card type and its hit points. I assume both these parts are active as Thalin would be unable to damage it otherwise.

To my knowledge, only cards face down in the deck, in the discard pile, and "out of play" have blank text. As soon as a card is revealed, looked at, or put into play, it's text is active.

If "looked at" cards were blank, Murder at the Prancing Pony's "Taken By Surprise" would never trigger.

If cards in that odd interim state between "revealed" and "in play" (which is when "when revealed" effects happen) no cards with "when revealed" effects would ever trigger, since their box is blank.

In the current guide, we do have Toughness/Peril (keywords) before Don't Be Hasty. I assume the argument here is that Toughness/Peril are not "resolved" so Don't Be Hasty cannot activate before?

The full rules text classifies "Peril" as a keyword, with a trigger of "when revealed" and a resolution of "the player must resolve the staging of the card [i.e. the remainder of the card's abilities and text] on his own without conferring with the other players. The other players cannot take any actions or trigger any responses during the resolution of that card's staging." (italics mine) This allows Don't Be Hasty! to trigger it's "interrupt" before Peril resolves and isolates the revealing player.

The full rules text for Toughness is ever so slightly more ambiguous, but it works like this: it's a keyword, same as the rest, which triggers "each time it is assigned any amount of damage." It's resolution is "reduce the amount of damage it takes by X" where X is the value of Toughness. Basically, it should read "When this enemy receives any amount of damage, reduce the damage by X." So, assuming the card text is active when the enemy is revealed from the deck (protip: it is), committed!Thalin deals 1 damage to it. This triggers Toughness, which reduces the damage by X; since Toughness is always ≥1, Thalin's 1 point of damage is negated.

In the current guide, we do have Toughness/Peril (keywords) before Don't Be Hasty. I assume the argument here is that Toughness/Peril are not "resolved" so Don't Be Hasty cannot activate before?

The full rules text classifies "Peril" as a keyword, with a trigger of "when revealed" and a resolution of "the player must resolve the staging of the card [i.e. the remainder of the card's abilities and text] on his own without conferring with the other players. The other players cannot take any actions or trigger any responses during the resolution of that card's staging." (italics mine) This allows Don't Be Hasty! to trigger it's "interrupt" before Peril resolves and isolates the revealing player.

The full rules text for Toughness is ever so slightly more ambiguous, but it works like this: it's a keyword, same as the rest, which triggers "each time it is assigned any amount of damage." It's resolution is "reduce the amount of damage it takes by X" where X is the value of Toughness. Basically, it should read "When this enemy receives any amount of damage, reduce the damage by X." So, assuming the card text is active when the enemy is revealed from the deck (protip: it is), committed!Thalin deals 1 damage to it. This triggers Toughness, which reduces the damage by X; since Toughness is always ≥1, Thalin's 1 point of damage is negated.

I think you're right regarding Peril. I think it definitely resolves. However, for the sake of trying to come up with the correct interpretation, there is one small difference between Peril and the other keywords like Doomed, Prowl, and Hide. Peril uses the present tense of reveal while all three of the others use the past tense. While this may not mean anything, it could mean that Peril comes before the other three immediate keywords in our guide. And if it does, it means it has to push Don't Be Hasty forward too in order to trigger before Peril resolves.

I'm more inclined to believe that the different usage of the word "reveals" versus "revealed" is irrelevant and we should put it with the other keywords.

I agree with Toughness.

My doubt still is: Can Door is close cancel Foe Beyond? Seems so in the seastan's doc. Isnt?

Foe Beyond is a treachery from Flight from Moria, it says: 'this effect cannot be canceled'

That's a good point Mndela...that's pretty awkward.

I think if we take A Test of Will for example, it actually works pretty similarly. We have been told that A Test of Will cancels the "When Revealed" effects of a treachery as if it never happened. By that logic, A Test of Will should be able to cancel Foe Beyond too, right?

I think Foe Beyond, incorrectly has the text "This effect cannot be cancelled" within the "When Revealed" effect, and it should actually be a passive ability. I'm not really sure, though.

I'm not sure how we square away that Thalin can trigger before Surge (in the case of Eastern Crows) but after Toughness without assuming one of the following:

1. Time travel, with Toughness triggering on damage that has already been dealt -- and I thought the whole original point of all this was to avoid time travel -- or

2. "Toughness" isn't really a keyword, but really something like a passive effect like "Immune to player card effects". This is what Seastan's framework currently espouses.

Although perhaps I'm a little hazy on the distinctions between dealing and assigning and placing damage... Or a lot hazy.

I can add in a line in step 2 that says to check the "When revealed" effects for the phrase "cannot be cancelled", and if so treat it as Immune to player card effects...

I'm not sure how we square away that Thalin can trigger before Surge (in the case of Eastern Crows) but after Toughness without assuming one of the following:

1. Time travel, with Toughness triggering on damage that has already been dealt -- and I thought the whole original point of all this was to avoid time travel -- or

2. "Toughness" isn't really a keyword, but really something like a passive effect like "Immune to player card effects". This is what Seastan's framework currently espouses.

Although perhaps I'm a little hazy on the distinctions between dealing and assigning and placing damage... Or a lot hazy.

Keywords have no single operating structure. They all operate differently and how they operate is based on the definition of that particular keyword. In the case of Toughness, there is no formal "activation", it just is a passive effect that whenever it is assigned damage (this is before the damage is placed on the card) it reduces that amount by X. So if we assume the card text on it is active, then its Toughness is allowed to be active and assigned damage should be reduced accordingly.

The main difference between Toughness and other keywords is that no where in the definition of Toughness does it say "When this card is revealed" or "When this card enters play".

I can add in a line in step 2 that says to check the "When revealed" effects for the phrase "cannot be cancelled", and if so treat it as Immune to player card effects...

Seems ridiculous, but sadly necessary. I think it is clearly the intent of the designers that if the card effect says it cannot be cancelled (even if it is within the When Revealed effect text) then it cannot be cancelled...

Perhaps the card can be cancelled, but the When Revealed effect remains floating around, a forlorn phantom haunting us from beyond the grave (or Discard Pile)

For A Foe Beyond vs. cancelation cards, it seems to me that because the card text is active (since it has been revealed), but hasn't been triggered yet, text that states that the effect cannot be canceled (as is the case in A Foe Beyond) quite simply cannot be canceled by cards that state "cancel the effect," such as The Door is Closed and A Test of Will. Even Frodo [TBR] can't stop it, since the text on Frodo states "cancel the effects."

Sorry for double post. This one responds to posts made while I was posting the prior one...just like this thread is discussing, it's all a big timing issue!

I'm not sure how we square away that Thalin can trigger before Surge (in the case of Eastern Crows) but after Toughness without assuming one of the following:

1. Time travel, with Toughness triggering on damage that has already been dealt -- and I thought the whole original point of all this was to avoid time travel -- or
2. "Toughness" isn't really a keyword, but really something like a passive effect like "Immune to player card effects". This is what Seastan's framework currently espouses.

Although perhaps I'm a little hazy on the distinctions between dealing and assigning and placing damage... Or a lot hazy.

Toughness does not trigger when the card is revealed, which makes it unlike Surge, Doomed, and Peril. Instead, it triggers when that card receives damage, as stated in the expanded text. It doesn't time travel, and it technically isn't a passive ability either since it has a trigger (though because it isn't Forced/Reaction/etc. it necessarily slots into the "passive" section of the timing window). In all honesty, Toughness shouldn't even be on Seastan's framework, since its trigger is not dependent on when it is revealed, merely that the card text is active (meaning that the card is not in the discard pile, encounter deck, or out of play--please note that "in the victory display" is not "out of play"). Seastan has placed Toughness in his framework simply to elucidate that it is capable of triggering at that point.

I can add in a line in step 2 that says to check the "When revealed" effects for the phrase "cannot be cancelled", and if so treat it as Immune to player card effects...

This is an oddment that seems to necessitate more thought. FrodoTBR, The Door is Closed, and A Test of Will state "cancel the effects", which A Foe Beyond expressly forbids. However, Quick Ears and Minas Tirith Lamplight do not cancel the effects of a card, they cancel the card itself, thus bypassing the text on A Foe Beyond.

Ugh...

Seastan, don't forget that Surge stacks. (As written, step 13 makes it sound like Surge doesn't stack.)

How is toughness not a passive ability?

Toughness does not trigger when the card is revealed, which makes it unlike Surge, Doomed, and Peril. Instead, it triggers when that card receives damage, as stated in the expanded text. It doesn't time travel, and it technically isn't a passive ability either since it has a trigger (though because it isn't Forced/Reaction/etc. it necessarily slots into the "passive" section of the timing window).

It is a keyword, as defined in the full rules text, which has a specific trigger also outlined in the full rules text, and it has a resolution defined in the full rules text. This by definition makes it not a passive ability, since passive abilities lack triggers.

For example, "immune to player card effects" is not dependent on a card targeting it to activate. Beregond's cost lowering ability is not dependent on an armor or weapon card being played on him. Repeat ad nauseam for all cards with passive abilities.

The true definition of the Toughness keyword is irrelevant to this thread though. If it were a passive ability, it would "turn on" as soon as the card text became active. If it were a keyword, it would also "turn on" as soon as the card text became active, though its effects don't resolve until they are triggered. As I stated later in the above-quoted post, Toughness is in the framework simply because at Step 2 it is capable of being triggered.

I suggest for future posts we stick to relevant things.

You are brutally, epically wrong and the prospect of explaining why already exhausts me because I know you will fruitless argue the point for no reason and with no gain. I can probably list 10 passive abilities that have triggers. By your logic the you could argue that attack and defense statistics on characters are "triggered" abilities (I say this because toughness is very similar to defense). By your logic you can describe "immune to player card effects" as a cancelation effect that triggers whenever you try to use player card effects. Thus, that is not technically a passive ability either.

Printed Cost, printed sphere, printed card type, Willpower, Attack, Defense, and Health are all statistics, which are referenced by framework effects. They are not passive abilities, and they are certainly not triggered abilities.

--------------------------------------------------

By your logic you can describe "immune to player card effects" as a cancelation effect that triggers whenever you try to use player card effects. Thus, that is not technically a passive ability either.

[...] passive abilities lack triggers.

For example, "immune to player card effects" is not dependent on a card targeting it to activate.

I'm not sure how you can reconcile these two quotes. It's like you didn't actually read what I posted. If a card with an "immune to player cards" ability is in play (i.e. not i the encounter deck, discard pile, or "out-of-play"), the ability is on. It certainly does not "trigger" when a player card is played. As per FAQ §1.47, that card does not "cancel the effects" of player cards, it merely ignores them entirely. Additionally, card effects that ask for a target (ex. core set Gandalf's Response) may not target those cards. It is important to note that placing progress tokens on an active location via questing successfully, traveling to a new active location as normal during the Travel Phase, engaging the enemy as normal during the Engagement Phase, and standard attacks made during the Combat Phase (as well as those prompted by an encounter or quest card effect) are not "card effects," they are "framework effects," and thus are not affected by "immune to player card effect" abilities.

--------------------------------------------------

Toughness is unlike Defense, and here's why: When you attack, you compare the attacker's Attack value to the defender's Defense value, the positive difference of which is dealt as damage. Simply put, Defense is not "damage reduction," it is a comparative statistic. Toughness is instead damage reduction, in that whenever a card with Toughness receives damage, regardless of the source, the incoming damage is reduced by its Toughness value. Ranger Bow actions, Poisoned Stakes, Forest Patrol, core set Gandalf response, Anborn (Ld) response, Beechbone Response, Descendant of Thorondor Response, Beorning Beekeeper Response, Dwarrodelf Axe Response, hero Boromir's second action (the discard one), Farmer Maggot's Response, Expecting Mischief, Firefoot's "excess damage" Response, Fresh Tracks, etc...none of these are immune to the damage reduction capabilities of the toughness keyword. None of these can get around it. Thalin cannot either.

--------------------------------------------------

If you want to debate further, be my guest.

Local Trouble [Heirs of Numenor] is a good example of a passive ability with a "trigger".