Rules for 18 October 2004

Your Rules for Monday, October 18, 2004

Rat Raider "coming into play"

The Ratling Raider makes a pair of buddies when he comes into play. He doesn't say who gets to control those little guys, though.

"Creating a card or token counts as bringing it into play. [JA, 5 October 2000]" (Accumulated Rulings, "Entering Play")

You bring those two cards into play. There are no special instructions involved in the creating effect that dictate who gains control of them, so you use the general rule - you control cards you bring into play unless otherwise specified on a card or in the Rulebook.

Tower of the Ningyo

The ruling I made on September 23rd stands, after confirming it with Jeff:

It should be bow it and pay 1 Gold for Dragon players. It's a matter of not watching for ambiguity closely enough.

- Marty Lund Deputy Rules Monkey

Some questions.

If you reduce the chi of a personality under 3 Chi, but the reduction is not permanently and you take control of that personality with Yajinden. In the next turn when the personality regains all his chi above 3, the owner takes control another time of his personality or it continues under yajinden control while it remains bowed ?

You don't give the Personality back until the duration of the effect expires or any other effect altering control comes along. Yajinden's effect has a duration based exclusively on his remaining bowed, "while Yajinden remains bowed and in play," not the Personality's Chi remaining at a certain level. The chi requirement is a targeting restriction to legally play and resolve the Action in the first place.

You don't lose the +3/+3 from Strength of Purity if you become dishonored later during the battle either.

When on a card says "once per turn", you can play that reaction on every player turn or only once in the whole turn.

No. You only play the action "once per turn." If it says, "once per turn, per player," then that's a whole different ballgame.

Tower of the Ningyo

Comments Below:

I was mostly asking because Jeff's "ruling" isn't extra clear on what we should do, but it does seem to admit that the text, as written, implies the "stronger than intended" sense.

[MARTY] I'm sorry. I thought I made myself clear when I said that after conferring with Jeff, my Ruling stands. My ruling was that the "discounted" cost is bow the Tower and pay 1 Gold.

"This costs 1 Gold instead," can be interpreted to replace the entire cost phrase of the action, or merely the 3 Gold cost clause of the action. That phrasing isn't cool and I have every reason to believe that Design will template around the problem as it is now recognized.

- Marty Lund Deputy Rules Monkey

That should take care of everything for Monday. If I missed your question unrelated to Dawn of the Empire, please repost it with the flag [RULES] as part of your Clear and Distinct subject line. I'll get back to you at the first opportunity.