The order of revealing cards of the same type during a check

[Dark Nero]

Imagine having two rings in my hand:
Sihedron Ring (Reveal this card to reduce damage dealt to you by 2. You may play another item on this check.)
Ring of Energy Resistance (Reveal this card to reduce Acid, Cold, Electricity or Fire damage dealt to you by 4).

As a result of failed combat, a monster deals 5 damage. Only 1 of the rings allows to play another item on this check. Does it matter in which order I reveal the rings?
Do I have to reveal the ring allowing using another item first? Or do I have to reveal it second? Or it can be shown in any order?

In any case, a reference to the official source of the answer would be very appreciated.

[Dark Nero]

The question is about the Rise of the Runelords edition of the game (Base Set).

[skizzerz]

Same end result, so why does the ordering matter? Technically you would need to play Sihedron Ring first though.

(In Core, with the introduction of "freely", the order of play no longer matters. If you're playing an older set with Core rules the ring would be mapped to say "freely" instead and the ordering wouldn't matter)

[Dark Nero]

Hm, that might not be the best example to show when this is important (though I still want to know the technical solution).

Okay, here is better example.
Frost Worm monster says "If defeated, each character at this location attempts a Dexterity or Acrobatics 14 check. Characters who succeed are dealt 1 Cold damage; characters who fail are dealt 1 Combat damage and 1 Cold damage."

I fail. For 1 Combat damage I recharge Bracers of Protection for its power: "Recharge this card to reduce Combat damage dealt to you by 1."

For the 1 Cold damage I want to reveal Sihedron Ring for its power: "Reveal this card to reduce damage dealt to you by 2. You may play another item on this check."

I checked how this works in the official digital version of the game, Pathfinder Adventures. It does allow to play multiple items in any order.

But I also found unofficial pdf "A Guide for New Players v1.4.3", which states that the order matters and item that allows additional items to be played cannot be played if the first item has already been played.

[Jenceslav]

Well, timewise you suffer both damage types in any order (there is no "then"). There is some discussion of what it means to suffer two damage types at once (there is one monster in Mummy's Mask that does multiple elemental damage) - do you reveal cards sequentially for them? Does playing armor for 1 Cold damage prevent you from playing armor for the other? Still ambiguous even in Core set rules.
However, you can look at the Core cards for inspiration. In that way, Sihedron Ring would be "freely reveal" so that it does not care about order. It just says "when you play me, do not count me as an item". So I would allow both cards to be played, in any order you choose ;)

[skizzerz]

The wording on the Ring “You may play another Item on this check” is irrelevant and does not apply because you aren’t making a check at the time—you’re taking damage.

That said, see this post. When taking multiple instances of damage, your “played cards” are effectively reset for each of those instances, so you can reveal the same ring for both of them to reduce each instance by 2.

[Luckdragon]

skizzerz wrote:

The wording on the Ring “You may play another Item on this check” is irrelevant and does not apply because you aren’t making a check at the time—you’re taking damage.

That said, see this post. When taking multiple instances of damage, your “played cards” are effectively reset for each of those instances, so you can reveal the same ring for both of them to reduce each instance by 2.

I don't believe that would apply here, as the damage is "and" not "then" - so the 1 Combat and 1 Cold are simultaneous, not one after the other. Having said that, the Sihedron ring reduces all damage by 2 so it would cover the whole thing.

[skizzerz]

Luckdragon wrote:

skizzerz wrote:

The wording on the Ring “You may play another Item on this check” is irrelevant and does not apply because you aren’t making a check at the time—you’re taking damage.

That said, see this post. When taking multiple instances of damage, your “played cards” are effectively reset for each of those instances, so you can reveal the same ring for both of them to reduce each instance by 2.

I don't believe that would apply here, as the damage is "and" not "then" - so the 1 Combat and 1 Cold are simultaneous, not one after the other. Having said that, the Sihedron ring reduces all damage by 2 so it would cover the whole thing.

I’d be willing to chalk that up more to a wording difference that was cleaned up since RotR than anything intentional, and therefore still apply the ruling from the linked post. If the intent is for suffering damage to absolve you of per-step limits for each damage effect, then making it such that certain damage effects are “combined” while others are not runs counter to that intent. RotR furthermore had very unrefined templating due to being the very first set.