A couple of questions regarding contest

Hi!

1) I am contesting vampire X, who has an Ivory Bow. Another player's vampire Y equips with an Ivory Bow. Does the Ivory Bow start to contest right away?
My answer would be yes, based on a 2009 ruling by LSJ (groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/7461e657dc9de612).

2) My vampire X, who has an Ivory Bow, gets banished to my uncontrolled region. Another player's vampire Y equips with an Ivory Bow. Does the Ivory Bow start to contest right away?
My answer would be no, based on the RTR from May 2001 (groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/6029edb7384bced4). Also based on that it would be really weird, in my mind.

3) I am contesting vampire X, who is Tremere Justicar. Another player's vampire Y becomes Tremere Justicar. Does the Tremere Justicar title start to contest right away?
Loosely based on the first ruling refered to above, my answer would be yes. I would consider this a bit weirder than situation 1.

4) My vampire X, who is Tremere Justicar, gets banished to my uncontrolled region. Another player's vampire Y becomes Tremere Justicar. Does the Tremere Justicar title start to contest right away?
I'd answer no here, same reasoning as situation 2.

I do find these rulings possibly conflicting though, not sure if they really are (since out of play and uncontrolled is a bit different states).

henrik wrote:

1) I am contesting vampire X, who has an Ivory Bow. Another player's vampire Y equips with an Ivory Bow. Does the Ivory Bow start to contest right away?

Yes, as you cite.

henrik wrote:

2) My vampire X, who has an Ivory Bow, gets banished to my uncontrolled region. Another player's vampire Y equips with an Ivory Bow. Does the Ivory Bow start to contest right away?

No, the ruling you cite and the card text of Banishment - the cards on your vampire are out-of-play.

henrik wrote:

3) I am contesting vampire X, who is Tremere Justicar. Another player's vampire Y becomes Tremere Justicar. Does the Tremere Justicar title start to contest right away?

No. [RTR 980623]

That wrote:

Contesting: All card text on a contested card is ignored - including any
title. Contested vampires do not contest titles.
#
# The vampire will begin contesting his title when he returns to the
# controlled region, if the title is still held by another vampire
# at that time.

(This reversed an earlier position.)

henrik wrote:

4) My vampire X, who is Tremere Justicar, gets banished to my uncontrolled region. Another player's vampire Y becomes Tremere Justicar. Does the Tremere Justicar title start to contest right away?

No, only if he comes back into the controlled region. A vampire in your uncontrolled region via Banishment behaves in the same way as a 'normal' vampire in your control region, for this purpose.

(Note that if you had contested the title in normal play, yielded it and then been Banished, the Banished vampire does remember that he's yielded the title - again, in the Banishment RTR you cite.)

henrik wrote:

Hi!

1) I am contesting vampire X, who has an Ivory Bow. Another player's vampire Y equips with an Ivory Bow. Does the Ivory Bow start to contest right away?
My answer would be yes, based on a 2009 ruling by LSJ (groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/7461e657dc9de612).

This ruling is highly counter-intuitive. The rules don't say anything about cards on a contested card, but they do say that only cards in play can be contested.

Therefore, logically (), if it is decided that cards that are on a contested card are out of play, they should not contest.

Aaron wrote:

Therefore, logically (), if it is decided that cards that are on a contested card are out of play, they should not contest.

It was decided that the cards on a contested card are out of play except for the purposes of themselves being contested.

That's what I'm talking about.

Aaron wrote:

That's what I'm talking about.

No, you're starting with the premise that the cards have been ruled out of play, therefore, logically.

Instead, the actual premise is that the cards are out of play except... Therefore, logically, your argument doesn't hold water, because your basic premise isn't true.