Messages from the Oracle of the Void #rules Discord channel, copied for Oracle of the Void. Players' names are left out; the rules officials are named. Rulings are as they stood on these dates; later rulings and the rulebooks may differ.
Hey guys, got curious why Black Heart of the Empire is considered an MRP of Daigotsu (wind). They have different titles and their effects (although very similar) have their difference - with the former being able to grant the Shadowlands trait.
Because Daigotsu Wind was first printed in H&E with a dual Diamond/Gold bug, BHotE had to be considered a MRP in order to fully replace/supercede it in Diamond legality, unlike the other, Gold-only bugged named Winds.
Gotcha~ makes sense. Thanks for that! 🙂
Clarification on Togashi Shozo's trait. Do I draw an additional card for each ring or just 1 card?
"Once per turn, before you draw a card: Look at a number of cards from the top of your Fate deck equal to 1 plus the number of Rings you control. Draw any of those instead of only the top card."
Just want to clarify due to the "draw any of those" phrase.
No, still just one. Sorry, I see that the Oracle reword was less clear than intended; will fix.
Does Solar Eclipse from GE "wipe" the effect of Finding the Harmony that says that the rings don't count to ward an Enlightenment victory?
No. Solar Eclipse only affects Spells and abilities on Shugenja.
Thought so. Thank you.
Oooh. 2002 would have been early GE, so that tracks. Interesting.
@saaam Like a number of Jeff Alexander Rulings, that one is completely contrary to the actual words on the card. I stand by what I said above, but if you're looking to play full contemporary simulation, I guess go with that. For Legacy play, please consider it overruled.
I'm pretty sure that in Gold Ed, Kihos created Spell Effects.
Certainly in Jade/Pearl.
Yes, but Eclipse directly refers to Spells capital S and never "Spell effects".
And that in Diamond Ed, they weren't Spell Effects any more
Kiho were not the Spell card type, their effects were.
Ah, good point.
However, JA was the designer at that point, so this ruling could be considered to effectively be errata.
Another issue: Spell actions aren't performed in Ivory etc, so the current Oracle wording doesn't work.
OBH has rule for performing.
Performing is defined in Legacy formats' , but there are other issues with Spells I admit I haven't ironed out yet.
Like cost v conditional effects. Most pre-Ivory cards that involve modifying/ignoring Spell "costs" of bowing the caster I haven't touched since Emperor because the rewording is painfully cumbersome.
But yeah, I can get behind Oracling cards to incorporate Rulings where there's a lack of clarity, but I feel justified in drawing a line when the Ruling is blatantly contradictory to the card wording, in an "oh that's what we meant" way without official errata textual changes.
https://tenor.com/view/eh-meh-jim-jim-halpert-the-office-gif-25317293
You're the boss these days, I'll leave it to you, and get on with painting these here Dwarfs 🙂
I do appreciate your input. 🙂 Enjoy your Dwarves!
Dwarfs. It's Warhammer, not Tolkien...
NERD! 😎
“In English, the only correct plural of ‘dwarf’ is ‘dwarfs’ and the adjective is ‘dwarfish.’ In this story ‘dwarves’ and ‘dwarvish’ are used, but only when speaking of the ancient people to whom Thorin Oakenshield and his companions belonged.”
In America, we do to the English language whatever we want. 🇺🇲
(Also, I totally thought WH/40K used the Tolkien spelling. Guess I got it mixed up in my head with "Dwarven Forge" the Terrain company. Whatever; I was a Tyranid main.)
AFAICT, Warhammer has used "Dwarfs" since the start in 1983.
can you have both Fudo and normal rings in deck/in play at the same time?
my bet is yes, but just want to make sure
No Rule against it. "Unique" only cares about titles.
that was my guess, thank you for confirmation 🙂
Under whose control is the copy created?
The player's who played the egg?
What would the text have to say for it to be any other answer?
Fair question, but in many other CCGs the wording would be more explicit about that 🙂
to be fair, it doesnt specifically under your control. which would be helpful. but yes, your egg your copy.
If you create a thing, you bring it into play. Things you bring into play enter under your control.
Thanks, that's what i expected but i wanted to be sure 100%
I agree, it would be preferred to say "under your control", but since the egg is under your control, the target is under your control, and the effect is under your control, the text required for the duplicate to be under someone else's control is lacking.
Thanks 🙂
This is more than just me being pedantic, it's a good philosophy of card interpretation. If you can't tell if a thing does X or Y, you ask what it should say to do X or to do Y.
just saying it gets muddy when I target your personality with my egg, but I think there were cards where there were effects which brought stuff into play for other players, but then that was specified. my memory was fuzzy
Everything created or brought into play by default was controlled by you. Rulebook rules are much more efficient than stating on every single card "under your control".
They were already pushing the limits to the amount of words they could fit on a card. 3 more words on every card that created a token rather than just using the rulebook would have been redundant and wasteful
nods in Yu-Gi-Oh
I have no idea what that means 😅
YGO has slowly shrunk its font smaller and smaller. Some cards have eight lines of text on them.