https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/90/19/90191e4e-a341-4379-b398-5963b7a87ebf/mec01_online_only_rules_reference_for_website.pdf

Time to start coming it for rules clarifications!

One thing I noticed: apparently there's no more action window in the Combat phase after all player attacks have been fully resolved…? That was a very clear window in the old chart, but I can't seem to find it anymore. Not sure if that has any functional effect, though.

35 minutes ago, sappidus said:

One thing I noticed: apparently there's no more action window in the Combat phase after all player attacks have been fully resolved…? That was a very clear window in the old chart, but I can't seem to find it anymore. Not sure if that has any functional effect, though.

No effect that I can discern. The final space for player actions in Combat is when it checks if all players have resolved all attacks, which is functionally the same as the end-of-phase resolution.

Quote

A card ability can only be initiated if its effect has the potential to change the game state. This potential is assessed without taking into account the consequences of the cost payment or any other ability interactions.

I never see it written proper enough. And I alway get in mind the possibility to activate the Glorfindel ally action (discard a card) even if he is already ready. With this rule it is officially not possible since the only change of the board game is made when paying the cost.

Quote

Copy (of a card)

A copy of a card is defined by title: any other card that shares the same title is considered a copy, regardless of cardtype, text, artwork, or any other characteristic(s) of the card(s).

Would have been better to say "same title in english". Otherwise an envoy of pelargir is not longer a copy of an "émissaire de pélargir" (the same as french card). It not only have an effect on some specific cards effects, it also mean I can play 3 of each in my deck. Come here outlands in different language :p.

Of course everyone will understand the intent of the sentence but being exact is even better. Especially since there are mistake in name in other language. For example we have two cards named Demi-tour in french (double back and another card), are they copy of the other? ^^

Quote

When a non-targeting effect attempts to engage a number of entities (such as “draw 3 cards” or “search the top 10 cards of your deck”) that exceeds the number of entities that currently exist in the specified game area, the effect engages as many entities as possible.

So we can search with the mirror of galadriel even if there is less than 10 cards. It is even the example given by the rulebook ^^.

Edit: and we may even don't need to discard anything since:

Quote

If the pre-then aspect of an effect does not successfully resolve in full, the post-then aspect does not attempt to resolve

Depending of what "in full" mean.

Quote

An encounter deck consists of enemy, location, treachery, and objective cards.

If it is true encounter side quest are no longer part of encounter deck :/. It is nonsense so the sentence if false. I'm not sure if this is forget or if it is avoided not to disrupt people who play before cycle 5.

Quote

The first player has timing priority in the following situations”
◊ The first player has the first opportunity to initiate actions or act first in all standard action windows. Action opportunities then proceed among the remaining players in player order.
◊ The first player has the first opportunity to initiate responses at each appropriate game moment. Response opportunities then proceed among the remaining players in player order.

Don't be choked by this like I did, it is not, in fact, relevant thanks to:

Quote

Note that if a player passes his or her opportunity to act, but all other players do not consecutively pass in sequence, the original player may still take an action when the progression of action opportunities comes back around to that player.

Quote

Initial Threat Level
A player’s initial threat level is the combined threat cost of each hero under that player’s control.

It miss an "at the beginning of the game" to be the same as

Each player places their heroes in his or her play area, adds up the threat cost of the heroes he or she controls, and sets his or her threat dial at the same value. This value is that player’s initial threat level for the game.

1 hour ago, Rouxxor said:

If it is true encounter side quest are no longer part of encounter deck :/. It is nonsense so the sentence if false. I'm not sure if this is forget or if it is avoided not to disrupt people who play before cycle 5.

I think this is for the same reason that you cannot cancel a normal quest card effect. Think of encounter side quests as quest cards shuffled into the encounter deck, instead of encounter cards.

Now we know a discarded card with Victory points is not added to the victory display.

3 hours ago, Rouxxor said:

So we can search with the mirror of galadriel even if there is less than 10 cards. It is even the example given by the rulebook ^^.

Edit: and we may even don't need to discard anything since:

Depending of what "in full" mean.

This interpretation of the Mirror is what I always thought, but there have been mixed rulings in the past regarding this issue. I think we should still ask again officially what the deal is—the advantage of an online-only RRG is that the verbiage can be modified "in place" if need be.

One somewhat confusing point is that the timing chart on p. 20 does NOT make 2.2, the planning special action window, a red box of any kind (which denotes action windows in the rest of the chart), which seems to have misled some into thinking there's been a change in how actions can be taken during planning. But reading the actual framework text on p. 22–23 clears it up, I think.

Quote

2.2 Planning action window
This is a special action window in which the active player (in addition to triggering standard action abilities) is permitted to play ally and attachment cards from his or her hand.

…

This action window remains open until all players consecutively pass, so that the active player has the opportunity to play as many ally and attachment cards as he or she desires and can afford at this time.

The implication here is that it is a regular action window, just one where the active player can play allies/attachments too. So, given what @Rouxxor quoted above about action priorities, anally-correct play during Planning might progress like this (3-player game):

Quote

A: I play Daeron's Runes. Passing action opportunity to B.
B: No action. Passing to C.
C: No action. Passing to A.
A: Now I play To the Sea! To the Sea! on my Arwen. Could use some more cards… Passing opportunity to B.
B: Nothing; passing to C.
C: I play Deep Knowledge. Passing opportunity to A.
A: 'k, thanks. Now I exhaust To the Sea and discard 4 cards. Pass opportunity.
B: No action. Pass to C.
C: Nope; pass to A.
A: OK, I play Glorfindel for 1.

Overall, we don't need to be so crazy about it, we can just freely take actions as we always have. I think the chart should've made it a striped-red box or something to be a little less confusing.

(I have assumed in the above that each time a player gains an opportunity to perform an action, they can perform only a single action, but I am unclear from the p. 20 wording whether the player can actually perform multiple actions in a row without passing the opportunity along. It should not matter in a cooperative game, of course.)

Wow that’s actually kind of a big deal. I need to look more closely at it. Previously if the second player wants to play Steward of Gondor on the first player, he can do so, but the first player’s window to play attachments and allies with those new resources will have passed by the time he gets Steward. This is saying that the first player could use those resources to play an ally right away?

No. Only the active player can play attachment and allies. To me nothing changed, it is only clarified

5 hours ago, GrandSpleen said:

Wow that’s actually kind of a big deal. I need to look more closely at it. Previously if the second player wants to play Steward of Gondor on the first player, he can do so, but the first player’s window to play attachments and allies with those new resources will have passed by the time he gets Steward. This is saying that the first player could use those resources to play an ally right away?

To elaborate slightly… The Steward can only be played by player 2 when he is the active player (which I am italicizing to emphasize that it is terminology defined in the RR). By definition, that is past the point when player 1 has been active that phase. So player 1 will no longer have the special privilege of playing an ally/attachment—this is the whole reason that the active state affects gameplay in the Planning phase. This is functionally the same as it was before.

In the entire exchange I posited above with players A/B/C, A is active . Merely passing the opportunity to perform an action does not by itself change who is active ; that only happens when all players have passed consecutively. In real-world terms, this happens when a player has finished playing all their allies/attachments that they're going to.

54 minutes ago, sappidus said:

In the entire exchange I posited above with players A/B/C, A is active . Merely passing the opportunity to perform an action does not by itself change who is active ; that only happens when all players have passed consecutively. In real-world terms, this happens when a player has finished playing all their allies/attachments that they're going to.

This.

Ah I see, thanks.

Thanks for clarifying @GrandSpleen , I was confused too.