file Clarification needed on Eternals of Sirius rulings

09 Jul 2021 11:39 #102654 by heltonmatiazi
Hello friends! 
there has been some discussion lately on eternals of sirius, specifically about the wording on the ruling.
 
'Pay the cost at the same time you gain pool from it, you do not get ousted in between'.

I asked about this on discord and have been told that you need to have at least 4 pool to play this, because you can't take on 'debt' and because when you play a card you must be able to pay its cost,
but this isnt what the ruling says at all.

Should this particular ruling be clarified so that people don't play this wrong in the future? I ask because I played on a tournament recently and my prey asked if he could play Eternals on 3 pool, we looked at the ruling and decided that he could, because the card specifically says 'you do not get ousted in between'.

Thanks for the help!


The Eternals of Sirius
Type
Master
Cost
4 Pool
Card Text
Gain 5 pool if you control a ready Follower of Set, or add 5 blood to a Follower of Set with capacity 9 or more in your uncontrolled region.
Rulings
- Pay the cost at the same time you gain pool from it, you do not get ousted in between. [LSJ 20020620] [LSJ 20080612]

 

come check out our matches at VTES and other struggles! www.youtube.com/c/VTESandotherstruggles

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

More
09 Jul 2021 11:59 #102655 by Yomyael
From the ruleboook (section requirement for playing cards): Only a Methuselah with enough pool can play a card with a pool cost.

So you in fact can't play a card that costs pool, if you don't have enough pool to pay the costs. Therefore at 3 Pool, you can't play Eternals of Sirius. The ruling applies only to the case in which you have exactly 4 Pool.

Prince of Bonn, Germany

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

More
09 Jul 2021 12:08 - 09 Jul 2021 12:12 #102656 by inm8
The ground rule for being able to play a card/take an action is that you satisfy all requirements and are able to pay its cost in full which isn't overruled by the rulings mentioned. In fact the rulings only clarifies wether or not one is allowed to play a card/event that would take one down to 0 pool when paying its cost (without ousting the player) if it in the same time would gain you pool resulting in one having 1+ pool at the end....and the answer is yes. 

No clarification needed i would say....mistake was to assume this ruling overrules also the ground rule for playing cards/actions.

Yomyael you were faster than me :) I was typing this before i saw your reply
Last edit: 09 Jul 2021 12:12 by inm8. Reason: comment to Yomyael
The following user(s) said Thank You: ruiza97, Yomyael

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

More
10 Jul 2021 04:59 #102660 by beslin igor
Master card is resolved when you play it,so if you have 4 pool you can play it. rule is here: www.vekn.net/forum/rules-questions/78418-resolution-paying-master-cards#98882

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

More
14 Jul 2021 01:07 #102691 by Felipe Nogueira
Hello friends, this is the first time I speak here on the forum I hope you have patience!

This doubt has been present for a few weeks and is giving something to talk about, because two sides are based on LSJ speeches saying it can play and that it applies to Eternal of Sirius and others saying it can't, all this mess in the same rulling!

Rulling:
groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/WoXWzLYaFSY/m/ug3CHnpMCUQJ

LSJ Part 1:
> If a single master card (or, I suppose, other) "event" both
> costs you and gains you pool, will you be ousted if the cost
> would bring you to 0 pool?
Sure. For instance, you could play hypothetical card
Big Ascendance - Master - 35 pool - Gain 40 pool
if you had only 35 pool (and stay in the game).

>eg: You're at one pool. You play Minion Tap for 5 on a
> vampire you control, who has Secure Haven on him. So, it
> costs 1 additional pool (=1) to play the Minion Tap, but
> you'll gain pool in the same "event". Do you live? I'd
> think yes, by analogy to Ancient Influence, which makes
> everyone lose 5 pool as well as gain X pool, but I'm not
> sure.

Sure.

LSJ Part 2:
> What about Huitzilopochtli's ability? If you pay your last
> pool to gain an additional master phase action, do you get
> to play that master card before being ousted (thus allowing
> you to gain pool for a Minion Tap) or will it be too late?
> I think in this case it's too late, since it looks like
> Huitzilopochtli's ability gains you a master phase action
> "to be used later", so it's not all one "event".

Correct, it's "too late".


I would like to ask your help mainly from the current Vtes Rulemaker to give a verdict!

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

More
14 Jul 2021 08:07 #102695 by inm8
I can understand that the answer from LSJ (part 1) isn't very straight forward as he answers "..,will you be ousted if the cost would bring you to 0 pool?" with "Sure." but the ambiguity is clarified by his example provided "For instance, you could play hypothetical card Big Ascendance - Master - 35 pool - Gain 40 pool if you had only 35 pool (and stay in the game)."

In regards of LSJ part 2 it doesn't contradict part 1 as it just clarifies that something that would take you to 0 pool and at the same time would provide an additional master phase would oust you and not delay the oust till the additional master phase has been used. Bottom line is that cards/effects that resolve as they are played (master cards, events...) are ok to play even though they take you to 0 pool (because of cost to play, cost being paid in full) as long as they would increase your pool to 1+ at the end and wouldn't mean you are ousted.

I assume Ankha will answer soon to provide you the official confirmation of the ruling still being relevant.

 

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

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.141 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum