[LSJ] Legacy of Power malfunction ! :)
Reyda
it's again a trivial post to ask for a good interpretation of Legacy of
Power.
I have 2 vamps, Korah and Fleur du mal.
Korah is rushed by Karsh. I don't block, but rather play Legacy of power
with Fleur du mal and tap her instead. The player controlling Karsh invokes
the incomprehensible ruling on Legacy of Power to start the combat again
with Psyche.
But the rulebook directly contradicts this : "the only minion cards that can
be played in combat are combat cards".
So at the time the LoP is played, combat has not yet started. So no combat
cards can be played to prevent the "go to torpor" clause on Legacy of power.
If no combat started, there is also no window to play "ruled to be playd
after combat cards" like Psyche. Karsh and Korah should go together in
torpor no matter the cards Karsh's controller have in hand.
In other words Legacy of Power should not be beaten by psyche, Telepathic
Tracking or other combat cards.
Minor boon played by another player, however, should do the trick.
Either that, or Legacy of Power shoud probably not played at all since (and
maybe banned) because again, the rulebook says : "the only minion cards that
can be played in combat are combat cards".
I am not ranting, just pointing out logical things.
We need either an errata, either a clarification, either a ban issue for
this card.
____________________________________
(reminder :
reyda wrote:
>
> LSJ wrote:
> :: reyda wrote:
> :::
> ::: LSJ wrote:
> :::
> :::::: #3. Does a Psyche! played in response to a Legacy of Power
> :::::: prevent both vampires from going to torpor?
> :::::
> ::::: Yes. It should probably not (LoP "should" just send the two to
> ::::: torpor and let that event end the combat), but as it written,
> ::::: yeah. Not a problem, though, so I don't foresee any errata for
> ::::: this one any time soon.
> :::
> ::: I doubt so : when Legacy of power is played, the combat is not
> ::: entered. You can't play a combat card when there is no combat at
> ::: all.
> ::
> :: Card text:
> :: Only usable when a vampire you control enters combat. ... Combat
> :: ends.
>
> card icon : Reaction card.
> the wording "combat does not occur" would be better.
Again, it is not a problem, so I don't foresee any errata for this one
any time soon.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
LSJ
> [Legacy of Power interupted by Psyche! superior]
> But the rulebook directly contradicts this : "the only minion cards that can
> be played in combat are combat cards".
Card text in opposition to rulebook text? See [1.4].
> So at the time the LoP is played, combat has not yet started. So no combat
False.
LoP: "Only usable when a vampire you control enters combat. A second vampire
you control may play this card to end combat."
LoP cannot be played when combat has not yet started.
> cards can be played to prevent the "go to torpor" clause on Legacy of power.
False.
LoP ends combat (card text). Psyche! can be played when combat ends (card text).
> If no combat started, there is also no window to play "ruled to be playd
> after combat cards" like Psyche. Karsh and Korah should go together in
> torpor no matter the cards Karsh's controller have in hand.
The supposition is false.
Combat started.
> In other words Legacy of Power should not be beaten by psyche, Telepathic
> Tracking or other combat cards.
> Minor boon played by another player, however, should do the trick.
>
> Either that, or Legacy of Power shoud probably not played at all since (and
> maybe banned) because again, the rulebook says : "the only minion cards that
> can be played in combat are combat cards".
>
> I am not ranting, just pointing out logical things.
Yes. It "should" have been written to be played before combat and preclude
combat from starting.
But it wasn't. It is played during combat and ends combat.
> We need either an errata, either a clarification, either a ban issue for
> this card.
And you attached the clarification below, so there you go.
Reminder:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3DE4BF69.2346D8A0%40white-wolf.com
Reyda
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3F718AE3...@white-wolf.com...
> Reyda wrote:
> > [Legacy of Power interupted by Psyche! superior]
>
> > But the rulebook directly contradicts this : "the only minion cards that
can
> > be played in combat are combat cards".
>
> Card text in opposition to rulebook text? See [1.4].
>
> > So at the time the LoP is played, combat has not yet started. So no
combat
>
> False.
agreed, then.
> LoP: "Only usable when a vampire you control enters combat. A second
vampire
> you control may play this card to end combat."
>
> LoP cannot be played when combat has not yet started.
Then , for consistency, why not change the wording to "unly usable before
range is determined on the first round of combat ?'
(snip)
> > I am not ranting, just pointing out logical things.
>
> Yes. It "should" have been written to be played before combat and preclude
> combat from starting.
>
> But it wasn't. It is played during combat and ends combat.
So why no errata ? Why errata "Purity of the Beast" and not Legacy of Power
?
the "it should probably not" and "should have been written differently" are
no good reasons enough to change something ? so what is a 'good reason' ?
LSJ
>
> Then , for consistency, why not change the wording to "unly usable before
> range is determined on the first round of combat ?'
Because it's not a problem that warrants errata. [LSJ 27-NOV-2002]
> So why no errata ? Why errata "Purity of the Beast" and not Legacy of Power
> ?
Purity of the Beast never rated errata. It has always followed the most
recent printing at the time in question (even if that meant that the
"superior" version was inaccessible due to the lack of a discipline
requirement).
It had been listed in the spoiler list as costing a pool instead of
a blood at one point back before it was reprinted to cost nothing, but
that was an error in the spoiler list, not errata.
> the "it should probably not" and "should have been written differently" are
> no good reasons enough to change something ? so what is a 'good reason' ?
Toning down overpowered cards springs to mind.
Reyda
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote
> > the "it should probably not" and "should have been written differently"
are
> > no good reasons enough to change something ? so what is a 'good reason'
?
>
> Toning down overpowered cards springs to mind.
okay now we have at least a reason :)
Suggested new card text :
Legacy of Power
Cardtype: Master
Cost: 3 Pool
MASTER OUT OF TURN
Requires ready prince, justicar, or Inner Circle Member. Only usable when a
titled vampire you control is about to enter combat.
Choose an untapped Prince, Justicar or Inner circle you control, not
involved in the incoming combat. Tap the chosen vampire to cancel the
combat. Both vampires about to enter combat go into torpor.
MAster OOT, and 3 pool makes it expensive. Once a turn.
it's only usable when you are about to fight with a titled vampire (thus
hampering the "block with a weenie and send Theo bell to torpor" stuff) and
it negates the effect of psyche and all since the combat does not start in
the first place.
LSJ
>>
> ?
>
>>Toning down overpowered cards springs to mind.
>
> okay now we have at least a reason :)
>
> Suggested new card text :
>
> Legacy of Power
You feel that LoP is overpowered as it is?
Previously, you we on the "Psyche! shouldn't thwart it" side.
Reyda
> Reyda wrote:
> > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote
> >>>no good reasons enough to change something ? so what is a 'good reason'
> >>
> > ?
> >
> >>Toning down overpowered cards springs to mind.
> >
> > okay now we have at least a reason :)
> >
> > Suggested new card text :
> >
> > Legacy of Power
>
> You feel that LoP is overpowered as it is?
> Previously, you we on the "Psyche! shouldn't thwart it" side.
no, i think it's great as it is.
If it were so overpowered, it would be in all tournament decks featuring
princes.
LSJ think it's overpowered. I'm just trying to suggest something costly that
would tone it down.
the new suggestion makes it not thwarted by psyche, as you may notice.
the thing which bugs me is : why does the combat have ot start ?
LSJ
> "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
>>Reyda wrote:
>>>"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote
>>>>>no good reasons enough to change something ? so what is a 'good reason'
>>>
>>>okay now we have at least a reason :)
>>>
>>>Suggested new card text :
>>>Legacy of Power
>>
>>You feel that LoP is overpowered as it is?
>
Then why so many requests to change it?
> LSJ think it's overpowered.
Incorrect.
> the thing which bugs me is : why does the combat have ot start ?
Card text.
Timlagor
> Reyda wrote:
> > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
> >>Reyda wrote:
> >>>"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote
> >>>>>no good reasons enough to change something ? so what is a 'good reason'
> >>>>Toning down overpowered cards springs to mind.
> >>>
> >>>okay now we have at least a reason :)
> >>>
> >>>Suggested new card text :
> >>>Legacy of Power
> >>
> >>You feel that LoP is overpowered as it is?
> >
> > no, i think it's great as it is.
>
> Then why so many requests to change it?
>
> > LSJ think it's overpowered.
>
> Incorrect.
LSJ thinks being overpowered would be a good reason to change cards in
general -not that 'being overpowered' applies in this case.
> > the thing which bugs me is : why does the combat have ot start ?
>
> Card text.
Why does the card text have to allow combat to start?
"Because it's not worth changeing"?
Snapcase
Timlagor...@yahoo.co.uk says...
> > >>You feel that LoP is overpowered as it is?
> > >
> > > no, i think it's great as it is.
> >
> > Then why so many requests to change it?
> >
> > > LSJ think it's overpowered.
> >
> > Incorrect.
>
> LSJ thinks being overpowered would be a good reason to change cards in
> general -not that 'being overpowered' applies in this case.
Then why bother suggesting a change?
> > > the thing which bugs me is : why does the combat have ot start ?
> >
> > Card text.
>
> Why does the card text have to allow combat to start?
> "Because it's not worth changeing"?
That'd be my hope. The card functions as it seems to be intended; the
timing of it is slightly different than other cards that do similar
stuff, but it doesn't cause any headaches. There's no need to reword a
card to make it work exactly the same as it did before, unless the
previous wording was cryptic and the card's being reprinted anyway (see:
Blood to Water, for example).
--
-Snapcase
hawk_the_demon
Legacy of Power [DS:U]
Cardtype: Reaction
Cost: 3 blood
Requires ready prince, justicar, or Inner Circle Member. Only usable
when a vampire you control enters combat.
A second vampire you control may play this card to end combat. Tap the
second vampire. Combat ends. Both vampires engaged in combat go into
torpor.
if the 'combat ends' was removed entirely from the cardtext, we would
no longer have this 'problem' because then the combat would end as a
result of the combatants going to torpor and then it would be to late
to play psyche!... correct? just proposing that as a future card text
change if a change is desired.
and about only combat cards being playable during combat... the rules
do state that a card text overrides the rules when the two conflict.
LoP definetly does conflict and thus overrides the rules.