LSJ: Allies....
James Coupe
then tried to use a card to affect it. Since the ally is in the
inactive region, could it be targetted by a card?
In a more "real world" sense, what would happen if I brought out an ally
and then my prey tried to rush it using an out of turn madness network
action at the end of my minion phase? Since the ally doesn't go into my
active region until the end of my turn (rules outline), can it be
targetted on that turn by a (D) action? I suspect not although the
reason it goes into the inactive region is to mark it as unable to
act... but by being there, does it become an illegal target?
--
James Coupe (Prince of Mercia) Change nospam to obeah to reply
Vampire: Elder Kindred Network
madnessnetwork.hexagon.net
Justin Fang
James Coupe <ve...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In a playtest game I'm in, we've just had someone bring out an ally and
>then tried to use a card to affect it. Since the ally is in the
>inactive region, could it be targetted by a card?
Playtest10, right?
>In a more "real world" sense, what would happen if I brought out an ally
>and then my prey tried to rush it using an out of turn madness network
>action at the end of my minion phase? Since the ally doesn't go into my
>active region until the end of my turn (rules outline), can it be
>targetted on that turn by a (D) action? I suspect not although the
>reason it goes into the inactive region is to mark it as unable to
>act... but by being there, does it become an illegal target?
I think the key question here is whether or not the ally is controlled.
From the rulings:
* "Controlled" is synonymous with "in the Active
Region". [RTR 960124]
* "Uncontrolled" is synonymous with "in the Inactive
Region". [RTR 960124]
Suggesting that the ally *isn't* controlled, which seems odd to me. This
means, that for instance, if you recruit an ally and then call Autarkis
Persecution or Ancilla Empowerement, the ally doesn't count.
--
Justin Fang (jus...@ugcs.caltech.edu)
This space intentionally left blank.
LSJ
> In a playtest game I'm in, we've just had someone bring out an ally and
> then tried to use a card to affect it. Since the ally is in the
> inactive region, could it be targetted by a card?
>
> and then my prey tried to rush it using an out of turn madness network
> action at the end of my minion phase? Since the ally doesn't go into my
> active region until the end of my turn (rules outline), can it be
> targetted on that turn by a (D) action? I suspect not although the
> reason it goes into the inactive region is to mark it as unable to
> act... but by being there, does it become an illegal target?
Good questions.
The short answer (ruling/correction): The Ally is controlled (and thus a
legal target for most effects), but is not ready while it is in the inactive
region. This could be better shown if the Ally were placed in the Torpor
region, but doing so would lead to its own set of questions and confusion.
The Ally is placed face-up in the inactive region when it is recruited,
which can serve as a helpful reminder that the Ally is controlled.
(Face-up cards in play are controlled, as a general rule. Face-down cards
in play are not.)
--
Another slant on this is "Can my Rom Gypsies tap to give one of my
Ravnos +1 stealth on the turn they are brought into play?"
Or "Does the Ally I just brought out count for an Autarkis Persecution
I call later on the same turn?"
The answer to both is "Yes".
--
The long-winded explanation/justification:
Uncontrolled cards cannot be targetted without explicit card text, while
controlled cards (torpor or not) can be unless explicit card text disallows
that.
The rulebook had a hard time with "inactive" "active" "ready" "controlled"
etc., and this is no exception.
Consider:
"A vampire in the inactive region is said to be uncontrolled." [4.1]
No mention that an ally in the inactive region is not controlled.
While the glossary says:
"Inactive Region: The region containing minions that are not yet fully under
a player's control."
But the rules have a hard time with "minion" vs. "vampire" as well, see the
entry for "Hunt" in the Glossary:
"Hunt: An action that a minion can take to restore lost, spent, or burned
blood counters."
Also, the distinction of being placed into the inactive area may just have
been intended to show that the Ally is not Ready instead of attempting to
show that the Ally is not controlled (as you noted). Again the Glossary:
"Ready: A ready minion is a minion in any player's active area."
--
At any rate, the Ally is a legal target (and would be counted for Autarkis
Persecution or tap to use its special ability) if it is controlled, but
not if it is uncontrolled (I think we can all agree on that).
Since the rules are ambiguous as to the state of the Ally between the
time he is recruited and the end of your turn, the ruling attempts to
follow the apparent intent to the mechanism. Since the rules are kind
enough to explain why the Ally is being placed in the inactive region,
I think that this is the way to go.
--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
Searchable database of official card text, errata, and rulings:
http://deckserver.net/cgi-deckserver/rulemonger.cgi/powersearch
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
James Coupe
<jus...@ugcs.caltech.edu> writes
>In article <UWU29MAM...@obeah.demon.co.uk>,
>James Coupe <ve...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>In a playtest game I'm in, we've just had someone bring out an ally and
>>then tried to use a card to affect it. Since the ally is in the
>>inactive region, could it be targetted by a card?
>
>
Yup. He's being "double jimmied" as he puts it. Ryan is trying to
bring out the unspellable Tzimisce ally (The Doctor, might be easier for
me to remember). He then wants to alter it aesthetically. Being as the
ally MIGHT not be targettable, I'm not sure what to do about it.....
> I suspect not although the
>>reason it goes into the inactive region is to mark it as unable to
>>act... but by being there, does it become an illegal target?
>
>I think the key question here is whether or not the ally is controlled.
>
>From the rulings:
> * "Controlled" is synonymous with "in the Active
> Region". [RTR 960124]
> * "Uncontrolled" is synonymous with "in the Inactive
> Region". [RTR 960124]
>
>Suggesting that the ally *isn't* controlled, which seems odd to me.
I know. The things is, the rules qualify it being in the inactive
region - it's to show that it can't act. Does that mean that that's the
ONLY reason it's in the inactive region? And does it not inherit the
other properties of being in that region? Or does it?