Inscription and Hunger of Marduk

inm8 wrote:

This ruling is off in my opinion and should be reversed… LSJ ruled that explicitly written requirements in the card text couldn’t be ignored which makes sense, but this ruling is changing how requirements on the attribute bar are handled for cards in play which doesn’t make sense.
For the card to work as ruled here it would need explicit text saying something like “play the card as if from your hand.” which it doesn’t.

I disagree about anything needing to be changed from the card.

Vampire with inscription is not playing the hunger of marduk. They are using an ability on the inscription (which copies the ability from the inscribed card). Since they are not playing the hunger of marduk, the play requirements do not matter.

Putting a card on inscription doesn't have any other requirements than blood sorcery (thaumaturgy), thus hunger of marduk can be put there.

I didn't suggest the card needed changing and highlighted only what it would need to be for the given ruling to be applicable. requirements on the attribute bar to be considered

What I am suggesting is that the ruling regarding the need to fulfill requirements from the attribute bar that Ankha has given here should be reversed

** updated the text as a ruling hasn´t actually been given...don´t know where I got that notion from...

inm8 wrote:

What I am suggesting is that the ruling regarding the need to fulfill requirements from the attribute bar that Ankha has given here should be reversed

The LSJ ruling was provided by Karl.
I am still waiting for Vincent to verify or falsify that ruling. (I guess he is taking a deep rules dive before doing so.)

Hakuron wrote:

inm8 wrote:

What I am suggesting is that the ruling regarding the need to fulfill requirements from the attribute bar that Ankha has given here should be reversed

The LSJ ruling was provided by Karl.
I am still waiting for Vincent to verify or falsify that ruling. (I guess he is taking a deep rules dive before doing so.)

Thanks for highlighting my error... updated my previous posts...don´t know where I got the notion that a ruling had been given from...

Is a ruling in the works for below (it has been a while already)??

Hakuron wrote:

Can "Inscription" be played by a non-Banu Haqim to put this equipment with a copy of "Hunger of Marduk" on a non-Banu Haqim?
And can the latter use this copy?

inm8 wrote:

Is a ruling in the works for below (it has been a while already)??

Hakuron wrote:

Can "Inscription" be played by a non-Banu Haqim to put this equipment with a copy of "Hunger of Marduk" on a non-Banu Haqim?
And can the latter use this copy?

I e-mailed Vincent a few days ago and he confirmed the need of doing a deep rules dive.

Edit: I assume this means we could actually see a reversal of the old ruling. Announcing a reversal means you need to be 100% sure about it, since a reversal of a reversal would not be appreciated.