question-circle playing cards as a vampire

01 Aug 2018 13:56 - 01 Aug 2018 14:00 #89518 by Bloodartist

jamesatzephyr wrote: That's not the point - the ally is never actually a vampire, they're just playing it "as a" vampire. There's never a point at which they're both things.

LSJ wrote: Allies are never vampires.

Allies that can play cards as vampires may play cards as vampires.
If, as a vampire, the ally plays a card whose resolution has some
effect on him, then that effect treats him as a vampire, since as
a vampire is how he plays it.


Yes, I can see the attempt at making the rulings of this sort coherent and standardized. I could however see this being interpreted either way.

"Allies are never vampires" - ergo, the ally never stops being an ally.

LSJ's ruling doesn't actually forbid the ally from being an ally during the resolution of this card. It says the card treats Nephren-ka as a vampire, but doesn't deny it ALSO being treated as an ally during the resolution. Like I said earlier, I don't see where the exclusion comes from. There can easily be overlap. The card refers to an ally. It is being played by an ally (that according to the first line of LSJ response, never stops being an ally).

My experience comes from Magic the gathering where cards can be multiple card types simultaneously, and almost never is there any problem with it. And in this case, Nephren-ka never even tries to be anything else than an ally.

"Do you believe in the power of the night?
If you want to go with me, refuse the light"
- Blutengel, Soultaker
Last edit: 01 Aug 2018 14:00 by Bloodartist.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
01 Aug 2018 14:45 #89519 by jamesatzephyr

Bloodartist wrote: Yes, I can see the attempt at making the rulings of this sort coherent and standardized. I could however see this being interpreted either way.


It could be interpreted in different ways. But! Via the magic of rulings having already been issued, we know that the ally is treated "as a vampire", and not an ally. Because that's the decision that was made. Consistently, for many years.

Bloodartist wrote: "Allies are never vampires" - ergo, the ally never stops being an ally.


But they're treated "as a vampire" (and not an ally) by the effect that they play "as a vampire".

Bloodartist wrote: LSJ's ruling doesn't actually forbid the ally from being an ally during the resolution of this card. It says the card treats Nephren-ka as a vampire, but doesn't deny it ALSO being treated as an ally during the resolution.


Read the surrounding post if you want more:

LSJ wrote: > there's a simple solution to this... given the discussions i've seen,
> it seems like the decision as to whether or not the ally playing a
> card as a vampire is a vampire or an ally at any given nanosecond of a
> combat becomes an arbitrary one as decided by the lsj/rtr
> consortium... and the essence of your arguements seems to boil down

Not arbitrary - rather, as per card text. For the card he's playing
as a vampire, he's treated as a vampire (for the resolution of that
card play). Period.

> in most cases to "cuz i/we said so..." so it's going to boil down to
> whether or not you guys want this to be able to happen... as opposed
> to a strictly defined guideline you can point to in the rulebook...
> and THAT'S why this set of ruling seems uncool to me...
It's card text and rules text.

If it seems like it's just "I say so", then I'm sorry I haven't
made it clear. Card text: "as a vampire".


The argument is that it can be a vampire and an ally in different nano-seconds, and the answer is that it's treated as a vampire.

Bloodartist wrote: Like I said earlier, I don't see where the exclusion comes from. There can easily be overlap.


The many, consistent rulings going the other way are the source of the exclusion.

Bloodartist wrote: The card refers to an ally. It is being played by an ally (that according to the first line of LSJ response, never stops being an ally).


It is being played by an ally. But that card, by card text, treats the playing minion "as a vampire". Vampires aren't allies, and allies aren't vampires. So it treats it "as a vampire", and not an ally.

Bloodartist wrote: My experience comes from Magic the gathering where cards can be multiple card types simultaneously, and almost never is there any problem with it.


V:TES's experience comes from V:TES, where cards are treated either as vampires or allies, and there's no problem with it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.118 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum