file Vampires entering play: triggered effects and contesting

18 Dec 2018 18:33 - 18 Dec 2018 18:41 #92475 by TwoRazorReign
Replied by TwoRazorReign on topic contested Nana

Pointing out that the Golden Rule for Cards is presented as the most important rule - the Golden Rule! - for V:TES means that anyone saying things don't exist because they're not in the rulebook is fundamentally wrong. V:TES's golden rule is that things that aren't in the rulebook can, do and will exist.


I don't think that's right. The Golden Rule for Cards allows cards to contradict an existing rule. It does not allow cards to make up rules that don't contradict others in the rulebook. Big difference.

The detailed play summary it explains many of the obvious timing windows that occur in the game. It certainly doesn't cover everything that can occur - it is a summary.


Actually, it was originally called the "Complete Rules Reference." So it was meant to be exhaustive by the original author of that document, but was later changed to be a "summary." So there's a little bit of revisionist history you're doing here. It's basically proving the point that not including important aspects to the rules causes problems, hence the decision to "just call the damn thing a summary and be done."

The point about the meaning of "enters play" is difficult to put into that, because crypt cards can "enter play" at a wide variety of times in the game.


Yes, but only by card text, which should clarify the when and how. There is only one situation in which a crypt card enters play normally: at the end of the influence phase. This is where crypt cards entering play should be described by default.
Last edit: 18 Dec 2018 18:41 by TwoRazorReign.

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

More
18 Dec 2018 18:44 #92477 by jamesatzephyr
Replied by jamesatzephyr on topic contested Nana

"When the issue at hands is what "enters play" means, you're answering a different question. Whether Anarch Convert can trigger, or Nana's in-play effect takes effect before being contested etc., isn't about whether something is "considered played" or not. It's about what "enters play" means. You haven't explained what "entering play" means - just that if it enters play, it is considered played."

Read that non-sense wall of text and explain how anyone is supposed to understand the spaghetti rules that LSJ shit out through poor card design and templating.


I'm not sure why you're using something I wrote about the fact that something Mewcat wrote not actually addressing the issue he wants solved is somehow relevant to anything LSJ did?


Things should work a certain way and in a consistent fashion.


Broadly, people try as hard as they can to make that happen.

The fact that you think spewing abuse about things previous designers have done is constructive doesn't really contribute to that, however.

Let's look at Sonja Blue:
"...if Sonja leaves play, remove her from the game."
So she moves to the ready region during my influence I gain 4. Based on your explanation, she definitely "enters play" and would trigger any text during that window that would apply, and then leaves play to become contested.


Not really. The point being expressed is that effects that trigger on entering play (such as Anarch Convert) go off, even if the vampire is immediately contested. But any effects on the vampire that require the vampire to be in play to happen don't take effect - so you don't, with Nana, get a momentary increase in hand size; you don't, with Alexandra, get the ability to untap a vampire in a fraction of a section that she is in-play and then contested.

This would, in my mind, mean that both copies of Sonja blue are removed from the game. BUT WAIT! It turns out that my copy never entered play and only the second copy did so I keep my copy (this is the LSJ ruling).


Yes. The currently-in-play Sonja Blue has text that can trigger, because she is actually in-play. Sonja Blue needs to be in-play for her text to trigger, as is the case with all vampire specials (that don't say otherwise under the Golden Rule for Cards, of course). In the case of the contested Nana, the 'new' Nana's +1 hand size text doesn't apply momentarily. In the case of the contested Sonja Blue, the 'new' Sonja's text doesn't apply momentarily.

This is things working in a certain way and in a consistent fashion. Contested Sonja works the same way as Contested Nana - card text that isn't about entering play doesn't apply.

Nothing on the card would indicate this is the case. No "golden rule" text to override the rules of the game. Just super shitty rulings on poorly created cards and instead of anyone advocating for fixing the game you're here talking down to people who just want the game to make sense.


But you're now asking for the game to be inconsistent. You want Sonja to not work the same way as Nana.

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

More
18 Dec 2018 19:09 #92478 by jamesatzephyr
Replied by jamesatzephyr on topic contested Nana

Pointing out that the Golden Rule for Cards is presented as the most important rule - the Golden Rule! - for V:TES means that anyone saying things don't exist because they're not in the rulebook is fundamentally wrong. V:TES's golden rule is that things that aren't in the rulebook can, do and will exist.


I don't think that's right. The Golden Rule for Cards allows cards to contradict an existing rule. It does not allow cards to make up rules that don't contradict others in the rulebook. Big difference.


Not really. The rulebook says what the timing phases of combat are. The rulebook doesn't provide a timing phase to play Immortal Grapple. Immortal Grapple creates a brand new timing phase. It has made up a 'rule' that doesn't exist in the rulebook. Cards do this all the time - end of round, end of combat etc. The pre-range step we take for granted was not in the Jyhad rulebook, though is mentioned now, of course - presumably text about it was added because it's so common. This happens fairly often for common effects. or effects that are hideous to explain in card text (e.g. allies playing cards as a vampire and gaining/losing life etc., to take a non-timing example), but it can't happen for everything while V:TES still allows cards to potentially do anything, including things that have never been thought of before.

All these things take effect when they do, because card text means that the steps established in the rulebook are supplemented by whatever the card says.


The detailed play summary it explains many of the obvious timing windows that occur in the game. It certainly doesn't cover everything that can occur - it is a summary.


Actually, it was originally called the "Complete Rules Reference." So it was meant to be exhaustive by the original author of that document, but was later changed to be a "summary."


It was clearly never a Complete Rules Reference, however, whatever the name was. It has only ever explained (a lot of) V:TES's timing. There are lots of things that go on in V:TES that aren't really related to timing, because cards do exciting and novel things. A common question, for example, is whether you can activate Temptation with zero counters to untap an empty vampire. (Answer: yes.) It doesn't make sense to include that anywhere on the Complete Rules Reference, so it's a ruling on that specific card.

The new name of "Detailed Play Summary" is much better in terms of accurately representing what it actually does.



So there's a little bit of revisionist history you're doing here.


Not really? The fact that someone else may have intended it to be complete at some point in the past doesn't mean that: a) it was a complete rules reference then (it wasn't) or b) that it's complete now (it isn't).

It's basically proving the point that not including important aspects to the rules causes problems, hence the decision to "just call the damn thing a summary and be done."


The thing is, if you include literally everything on a chart like that, it becomes utterly impenetrable, and hard to use to answer common questions, because you have to include every corner case. There certainly can be uses for things that are utterly exhaustive, but they will generally only be used by the tiny handful of people who understand them.

The - apparent - intent of the Detailed Play Summary is to cover lots of timing aspects that reasonably commonly occur, in a way that means that a broader cross-section of people are likely to be able to understand it if they dig in. Because V:TES is a complicated game, there is a balance to be struck between keeping it understandable and how much detail you go into. Of course, different people can reasonably disagree about what the appropriate level of detail is - but I'm guessing that most people don't want the Detailed Play Summary to be covered with trivia about terrible cards that are barely played but which raise a variety of subtle and awkward issues.



The point about the meaning of "enters play" is difficult to put into that, because crypt cards can "enter play" at a wide variety of times in the game.


Yes, but only by card text, which should clarify the when and how. There is only one situation in which a crypt card enters play normally: at the end of the influence phase. This is where crypt cards entering play should be described by default.


Not really? I mean, you obviously can have that written down somewhere, but V:TES uses English words and expressions in their normal fashion all over the place. Malkavian Game doesn't explain what Rock-Paper-Scissors is, for example, and nor does the rulebook, and nor does the Detailed Play Summary, and nor did the Complete Rules Reference before it. Do we need a full explanation of what Rock-Paper-Scissors is on the card, or in the rulebook, or in the Detailed Play Summary?

If you move a card from being out of play to being in play, it enters play, because that is what "enters play" means. If a card does that by moving a card, or putting a card, or placing a card, or flipping a card, or whatever else, the card enters play.

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

More
18 Dec 2018 19:38 #92480 by Mewcat
Replied by Mewcat on topic contested Nana

It is indeed troubling that the rulebook and the detailed play summary don't put us on firm ground to answer these questions ourselves.


I wouldn't say this, because I don't find this troubling. V:TES cards use the normal meaning of English words to do all sorts of things that aren't defined in the detailed play summary or rulebook. That this can happen is a fundamental norm in V:TES.

The detailed play summary it explains many of the obvious timing windows that occur in the game. It certainly doesn't cover everything that can occur - it is a summary. The point about the meaning of "enters play" is difficult to put into that, because crypt cards can "enter play" at a wide variety of times in the game.

Ideally this would get cleaned up but the resources don't exist, I fear. A card entering play region from hand or uncontrolled region is considered played.


When the issue at hands is what "enters play" means, you're answering a different question. Whether Anarch Convert can trigger, or Nana's in-play effect takes effect before being contested etc., isn't about whether something is "considered played" or not. It's about what "enters play" means. You haven't explained what "entering play" means - just that if it enters play, it is considered played.


Oh boy. So it is ok for the rulebook to not describe how to play the game. It is ok for rulings to be made in binary yes/no fashion. It is ok to ignore my in depth analysis of influence phase and perpetuate guessing.

If you don't see any of these things as problems that are 'obvious', ;), to me I guess we just have to 'agree to disagree'.

A few tips.
1) stating some ones question is irrelevant is flippant
2) using the word obvious in a discussion is demeaning. Is like tacit consent when there is no consent of any type

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

More
18 Dec 2018 19:47 #92481 by DJHedgehog
Replied by DJHedgehog on topic contested Nana

Yes. The currently-in-play Sonja Blue has text that can trigger, because she is actually in-play. Sonja Blue needs to be in-play for her text to trigger, as is the case with all vampire specials (that don't say otherwise under the Golden Rule for Cards, of course). In the case of the contested Nana, the 'new' Nana's +1 hand size text doesn't apply momentarily. In the case of the contested Sonja Blue, the 'new' Sonja's text doesn't apply momentarily.

This is things working in a certain way and in a consistent fashion. Contested Sonja works the same way as Contested Nana - card text that isn't about entering play doesn't apply.

But you're now asking for the game to be inconsistent. You want Sonja to not work the same way as Nana.


How can something enter play and not leave it? If "enter play" effects happen when the card enters the ready region, they have entered play. That seems pretty clear. Then they leave play, which her ability specifically states as a condition of removing her from the game.

That is the least consistent, most backwards understanding of how things should work and isn't supported by anything in the rule book or on the cards.

And again, your demeaning and condescending tone is not appreciated.

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

More
18 Dec 2018 19:53 #92482 by jamesatzephyr
Replied by jamesatzephyr on topic contested Nana

Oh boy. So it is ok for the rulebook to not describe how to play the game.


The rulebook explains how to play the game. It does not explain every single piece of card text that appears on every card, because in V:TES cards are free to create any effect they want.

Do you want a full copy of the rules for Rock-Paper-Scissors in the rulebook? That is necessary to understand Malkavian Game. Are you okay with not having the explanation for that in the rulebook?

It is ok for rulings to be made in binary yes/no fashion.


Well, that depends somewhat on the ruling. Some rulings are going to be yes/no, obviously. Does such-and-such card work with so-and-so's special? That'll be a yes/no answer.

It is ok to ignore my in depth analysis of influence phase and perpetuate guessing.


"Enters play" isn't just about the influence phase, however. Vampires can enter play in several phases, including the untap phase (Web of Knives - and could theoretically be relevant to Revocation of Tyre) and the minion phase in a variety of ways (Chain of Command, Illusions of the Kindred, Undue Influence). They can also enter play in the influence phase via methods that aren't related to being full from transfers, such as Gather.

A few tips.
1) stating some ones question is irrelevant is flippant


If the distinction someone is trying to eke out isn't relevant to the issue at hand, then how would you prefer I tell them it's not relevant to the issue at hand?

2) using the word obvious in a discussion is demeaning. Is like tacit consent when there is no consent of any type


But you use it?

www.vekn.net/forum/card-balance-strategy-discussion/76837-fairyworld-examining-combat-cards-and-strategies-and-how-they-should-work?start=18#89280

This is obvious because I have a birds eye view from my high perch but cant see you in the sewers.



I'm pretty sure that nothing you said there was demeaning, so you may want to consider not establishing hard and fast linguistic rules that don't, you know, work.

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

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.117 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum