Horrific Countenance

[LSJ 20091120]

The original ruling stems from the ruling that reaction cards (and action
modifiers, for that matter) can be played only before action resolution by
default. Explicit card text is needed to be played during or after resolution.

If you read thru whole topic you noticed that even that ruling has a reversal in it. Wakes do not have specific text and they are still playable by the very same ruling...

and then again - Pocket Out of Time.

Pocket is released in HttB after this ruling and the card doesn't have any such text.

You are saying that cardtext is clear. And you are obviously wrong, since cardtext is confusing on many levels. All I am saying that this card needs an official look into. Why are you against it so stubbornly?

Megabaja wrote:

Can this card be played after the combat if the action is blocked?

Horrific Countenance
Type: Action Modifier
Requires: Protean
Cost: 4 blood
Only usable when this vampire is blocked.
[pro] Untap the blocking minion. This action is not blocked, and it is now unblockable.

Card text suggests that it's playable when (not "if" or "while") the action is blocked, meaning that you play it immediately when blocked, not before or after.

EDIT: Nevermind, Forced Vigilance suggests that being blocked is a lasting state. I think you're on the right tracks on this.

Megabaja wrote:

Wakes do not have specific text and they are still playable by the very same ruling...

The example given - Waking to cancel a card - is covered by rule 1.6.1. (Between 1.6.1.1 and 1.6.1.2.) Wakes are explicitly allowed in the 'as played' slot, by the rules. There has been an evolution over numerous rulings towards Wakes being 'special'. (Why only Wakes, it's not clear. But it's pretty consistent.)

Megabaja wrote:

And you are obviously wrong, since cardtext is confusing on many levels. All I am saying that this card needs an official look into. Why are you against it so stubbornly?

All I am saying is that 3000 cards need an official look into, because I don't have a clue what the designer intent is on all 3000 cards.

Chop chop, get to it. Right now. I need designer intent on every card in the game, stat. In every conceivable situation. Irrespective of every ruling that's ever been issued. I need you to reformulate every card interaction that's ever been possible, ever, right now.


Why are you against following an explicit ruling - a ruling which you claimed was non-existent! - when it addresses the situation?

Suoli wrote:

Nevermind, Forced Vigilance suggests that being blocked is a lasting state. I think you're on the right tracks on this.

No more than Cats' Guidance does.

These are cards that meet the ruling on action modifiers and reactions - they say they can be played after a successful block and (if there's a combat) it goes after the block combat.

Horrific Countenance doesn't.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Suoli wrote:

Nevermind, Forced Vigilance suggests that being blocked is a lasting state. I think you're on the right tracks on this.

No more than Cats' Guidance does.

These are cards that meet the ruling on action modifiers and reactions - they say they can be played after a successful block and (if there's a combat) it goes after the block combat.

Horrific Countenance doesn't.

I would agree with you if it wasn't for the ruling on Pocket Out of Time. There's no explicit text allowing it to be played after combat but the fact that the effect is triggered after combat was ruled to be an implicit permission.