Meditative Grove vs Rotschreck

filavander wrote:

"You are trusting a third party site quoting a ruling without checking the original ruling and it's context."

If I would absolutely trust the "vtesdeck stie" I didn't ask the the additional queston regarding "Meditative Grove" here.

I assume that you state that the ruling provided by vtesdeck site is not worth of trust - ok.

So I've got another question, is there a site for casual players which provides ORIGINAL RULES in more friendly format then this google jyhad group?

Or do you have an endpoint (maybe endpoints) which provides ORIGINAL RULES in i.e. JSON format?

You asked what you missed, I pointed out you failed to check the original ruling for it's context. Whether or not a third party site is trustworthy is a complicated matter. People who were not playing at the time cannot outright spot errors at a glance without knowledge, like rulings from 2000 somehow mentioning card not existing until it's 2003 promo printing (Piper) which highlights how important is to check the original rulings context that I quoted with both hotlinked source and full text to save you time. That enables you to see how whoever added that sentence of the ruling to the database was playing very loose that has resulted in multiple confusions over the years, yours being latest.

If you wish to dive deeper to the rulings history, Ankha provided the rec.games database that was LSJ's timeframe, however between it and VEKN.NET timeframe there is also the boardgamegeek time when vtes was dropped by white wolf and before vekn created this site and bcp picked the game up again. Check this topic for what is "official" www.vekn.net/forum/rules-questions/81670-official-rulings#112267

You need to remember that for all good vtesdecks, vdb, rulings.krcg etc are doing, they are third party volunteers and not the original sources. Hence the importance to also check whether or not the original source linked below their rulings actually matches the shortened quote, it's also why they have the hotlink in there (pic1,2). If you do not find match, you need to start doing digging to attempt to find what it might be referring and whether or not it is relevant by cross referencing the card interaction (pic3).

The reason for poorly worded quote lies in rulings.krcg which makes it seem like meditative grove could only target minion cards even when original ruling is on Sudden reversal and direct intervention, targeting master and minion cards and specifically playing them from the hand as opposed to being just restricted to only minion cards. Unfortunately correcting those issues requires jumping more third party hoops and whatnot so it's up to the people maintaining those databases as we have no access (pic 4, 5) You could try contacting them directly but prepare to either get your wish or receive a reply where they see no reason to change it as they see no issue. I have experience on both, one more then the other.

As the rulings are just interpretations of the cards by acting rules director at the time in response to community questions, they are quite free form and varied over time. Which is why sometimes you need to read multiple reply chains to understand why "Yes." or "Correct." reply is a ruling. Sometimes there are mistakes in rulings as card interactions and their timings can get quite complex (we are all human) that change after the years resulting in reversals of previous rulings www.vekn.net/forum/rules-questions/78568-the-capuchin-burns-temporary-control?start=18#99620 . VTES can appear as simple game but as it's based on emphasis on; "The Golden Rule for Cards: Whenever the cards contradict the rules, the cards take precedence." with rewordings and redesigns on the cards and the rules over the decades, it's important to understand the context when, where and why a ruling was given. Some are for effects that no longer exist in said cards but exist in others, some are related to rules that are no longer in rulebook (anarchs were not a sect originally etc) and some have been human errors that are later been corrected (hence the latest ruling/reversal overriding earlier ones). Not to mention there might still be contradictions and unresolved issues that are just waiting for the cards to be added to the print on demand service ( www.blackchantry.com/2026/01/19/84-vampire-the-eternal-struggle-cards-added-to-print-on-demand/ ) with updated text before receiving update to their official card text www.vekn.net/images/stories/downloads/cardlist.txt which means all possible rulings related to those changes now are null and void when it comes to those cards, but the mechanics behind such rulings still can exist if they are found in other cards (as there are rulings just linking to previous rulings saying "card X works like card Y.")

It's why people are encouraged to ask rules questions here as the only current official rulings channel, and why the first answers are usually short and fast. There's no need to understand valve timings to drive a car, but if you wish to understand *why* something is what it is, you'll need to do the work and start peeling the onion. It's matter of hungry person either just getting the fish handed to them or learning to do the fishing themself. I believe we benefit from having more people fishing and being self-sufficient on rules, hence I tend to provide more sources and point out the *why* to encourage people to learn how to interpret rulings to fit current time and their needs. That allows you to make your own choice whether or not you wish to dive to the murky depths of 30+ years of vtes history or just accept asking the current rules director answers that most of the time are "yes." "no." "one sentence clear cut explanation instead Kilrauko wall-o-text."

Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix ruling is. You have to see it for yourself.

I hope that was enough elaborating to explain most of it.