Out-of-play cards and ousted Methuselahs
Jozxyqk
me!) but I can't figure out the search terms to use.
We all know that if my predator plays a Fame on my vampire,
and then my predator gets ousted, the Fame leaves the game
with him.
[9.1] "If you are ousted, all the cards you control are removed
from the game."
But what if:
My predator plays Fame on my vampire.
My Famous vampire gets banished.
My predator gets ousted.
Then I bring the same vampire back out?
The card wasn't controlled by him when he was ousted, so the
rulebook rule doesn't remove it from the game.
Does it leave play immediately when it re-enters play by some
lingering effect from [9.1]? If so, would it trigger a contest
on its way through, if another Fame was in play?
LSJ
> This question might have been asked before (and even maybe by
> me!) but I can't figure out the search terms to use.
>
> We all know that if my predator plays a Fame on my vampire,
> and then my predator gets ousted, the Fame leaves the game
> with him.
> [9.1] "If you are ousted, all the cards you control are removed
> from the game."
>
> But what if:
> My predator plays Fame on my vampire.
> My Famous vampire gets banished.
> My predator gets ousted.
> Then I bring the same vampire back out?
>
> The card wasn't controlled by him when he was ousted, so the
> rulebook rule doesn't remove it from the game.
Yeah, it does. Same as if the ousted Methuselah were contesting a Fame (or
contesting Igo or any other card).
> Does it leave play immediately when it re-enters play by some
> lingering effect from [9.1]?
Sure, this would be equivalent (except in odd cases where cards from other
players' decks are played from hand or where control of a card like Fame is
changed). In cases of discrepancy, though, it is in fact handled as above:
removed from the game when the "controller of record" is ousted.
> If so, would it trigger a contest
> on its way through, if another Fame was in play?
Moot.
Salem
I would have thought it would be burned by this:
# If control of a card is returned to a player who has been ousted, the
card is burned. [RTR 19960221]
which, thinking about the revised rulebook thing where a player's cards
are removed from the game, not burned, when a player is ousted, probably
needs a slight tweak to bring into line.
--
salem
(replace 'hotmail' with 'gmail' to email)
LSJ
> LSJ wrote:
>> Jozxyqk wrote:
>>> The card wasn't controlled by him when he was ousted, so the
>>> rulebook rule doesn't remove it from the game.
>>
>> Yeah, it does. Same as if the ousted Methuselah were contesting a Fame
>> (or contesting Igo or any other card).
>>
>
> # If control of a card is returned to a player who has been ousted, the
> card is burned. [RTR 19960221]
>
> which, thinking about the revised rulebook thing where a player's cards
> are removed from the game, not burned, when a player is ousted, probably
> needs a slight tweak to bring into line.
So if a Methuselah is contesting a Fame and is ousted, that Fame remains
contested until the other Methuselah yields (and when, then, should the
remaining Fame try to return to play to be removed from the game)?
Salem
no no noooo, i was staying clear of the contested situation, since i
could see that road getting awfully convoluted. contested cards should
definitely be removed from the game if their
...umm...controller-to-be...?... is ousted.
I was just thinking of the regular out-of-play situation.
contesting is special. always has been. :)
--
salem
LSJ
> LSJ wrote:
>> Salem wrote:
>>> LSJ wrote:
>>>> Jozxyqk wrote:
>>>>> The card wasn't controlled by him when he was ousted, so the
>>>>> rulebook rule doesn't remove it from the game.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, it does. Same as if the ousted Methuselah were contesting a
>>>> Fame (or contesting Igo or any other card).
>>>>
>>> I would have thought it would be burned by this:
>>>
>>> # If control of a card is returned to a player who has been ousted,
>>> the card is burned. [RTR 19960221]
>>>
>>> which, thinking about the revised rulebook thing where a player's
>>> cards are removed from the game, not burned, when a player is ousted,
>>> probably needs a slight tweak to bring into line.
>>
>> So if a Methuselah is contesting a Fame and is ousted, that Fame
>> remains contested until the other Methuselah yields (and when, then,
>> should the remaining Fame try to return to play to be removed from the
>> game)?
>
> no no noooo, i was staying clear of the contested situation, since i
> could see that road getting awfully convoluted. contested cards should
> definitely be removed from the game if their
>
> I was just thinking of the regular out-of-play situation.
Yes, so was I. They're handled "regularly".
Cards out-of-play in uncontrolled region of ousted Meth (the "controller" of the
uncontrolled card): removed.
Cards out-of-play in hand of ousted Meth (the "controller" of the uncontrolled
card): removed.
Cards out-of-play due to Descent into Darkness: removed.
Cards out-of-play in someone else's uncontrolled region: removed.
> contesting is special. always has been. :)
Only as special as necessary. It isn't special in this case: the contested card,
like the other out-of-play cards, is removed when the "controller" is ousted.
James Coupe
>Yes, so was I. They're handled "regularly".
>
>Cards out-of-play in uncontrolled region of ousted Meth (the
>"controller" of the uncontrolled card): removed.
>Cards out-of-play in hand of ousted Meth (the "controller" of the
>uncontrolled card): removed.
>Cards out-of-play due to Descent into Darkness: removed.
>Cards out-of-play in someone else's uncontrolled region: removed.
>Only as special as necessary. It isn't special in this case: the
>contested card, like the other out-of-play cards, is removed when the
>"controller" is ousted.
I thought the inconsistency being pointed out was:
- I control Ozmo. I get ousted. Ozmo is removed from the game.
- I control Ozmo. You play Malkavian Dementia on Ozmo. You oust me
while you control Ozmo, so you retain control of Ozmo temporarily.
Your control of Ozmo eventually ends. Ozmo is returned to me and
burned, rather than removed from the game.
When pretty much everything else involving ousted Methuselahs deals with
cards by removing them from the game, not burning.
Ditto any other temporary control effects, or similar.
Question: In the instance when you return control of Ozmo to me (except
I'm ousted), does he trigger adding a counter to an in-play Khazar's
Diary?
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
LSJ
> LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
>> Yes, so was I. They're handled "regularly".
>>
>> Cards out-of-play in uncontrolled region of ousted Meth (the
>> "controller" of the uncontrolled card): removed.
>> Cards out-of-play in hand of ousted Meth (the "controller" of the
>> uncontrolled card): removed.
>> Cards out-of-play due to Descent into Darkness: removed.
>> Cards out-of-play in someone else's uncontrolled region: removed.
>
>> Only as special as necessary. It isn't special in this case: the
>> contested card, like the other out-of-play cards, is removed when the
>> "controller" is ousted.
>
> I thought the inconsistency being pointed out was:
>
> - I control Ozmo. I get ousted. Ozmo is removed from the game.
> - I control Ozmo. You play Malkavian Dementia on Ozmo. You oust me
> while you control Ozmo, so you retain control of Ozmo temporarily.
> Your control of Ozmo eventually ends. Ozmo is returned to me and
> burned, rather than removed from the game.
The inconsistency I thought was being offered was that the out-of-play Fame on a
Banished vampire in my prey's uncontrolled region could stick around until that
uncontrolled vampire (and therefore the Fame) would re-enter play.
The ruling is that the out-of-play Fame on the uncontrolled vampire is removed
from the game when the erstwhile controller is ousted, without waiting for the
Fame to attempt to re-enter play (consistent with how a contested Fame would be
handled).
What you describe above is a misreading of the ruling in the absence of the
change which followed the ruling. Ozmo being returned to you is removed from the
game, not burned.
The questioner was pointing out this updated reading of that ruling, as well. I
didn't think he was questioning it.
He's received confirmation of that before
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/fc5813979a3ae6bb
> When pretty much everything else involving ousted Methuselahs deals with
> cards by removing them from the game, not burning.
>
> Ditto any other temporary control effects, or similar.
>
> Question: In the instance when you return control of Ozmo to me (except
> I'm ousted), does he trigger adding a counter to an in-play Khazar's
> Diary?
No, since he isn't burned.
Salem
> James Coupe wrote:
>> I thought the inconsistency being pointed out was:
>>
>> - I control Ozmo. I get ousted. Ozmo is removed from the game.
>> - I control Ozmo. You play Malkavian Dementia on Ozmo. You oust me
>> while you control Ozmo, so you retain control of Ozmo temporarily.
>> Your control of Ozmo eventually ends. Ozmo is returned to me and
>> burned, rather than removed from the game.
>
> The inconsistency I thought was being offered was that the out-of-play
> Fame on a Banished vampire in my prey's uncontrolled region could stick
> around until that uncontrolled vampire (and therefore the Fame) would
> re-enter play.
what scott said is the correct interpretation of my query.
> The ruling is that the out-of-play Fame on the uncontrolled vampire is
> removed from the game when the erstwhile controller is ousted, without
> waiting for the Fame to attempt to re-enter play (consistent with how a
> contested Fame would be handled).
>
> What you describe above is a misreading of the ruling in the absence of
> the change which followed the ruling. Ozmo being returned to you is
> removed from the game, not burned.
that was an adjunct to what i was querying.
> The questioner was pointing out this updated reading of that ruling, as
> well. I didn't think he was questioning it.
>
> He's received confirmation of that before
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/fc5813979a3ae6bb
heh. how quickly i forget!
>> Question: In the instance when you return control of Ozmo to me (except
>> I'm ousted), does he trigger adding a counter to an in-play Khazar's
>> Diary?
>
> No, since he isn't burned.
I was trying to quietly imply that the obsolete ruling should be removed
from the RTR page, though:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=rulings