Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Once you've registered and completed email validation, you'll need to reply to the thread in The Welcome mat before you gain full access to the site.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
X-Gene Decoded
Topic Started: Jun 5 2009, 09:36 AM (2,004 Views)
FHR-X
Member Avatar
Regular
[ *  *  * ]
LOL....

Oh man, this is just too amusing.

Sorry HomerJ, there is just no point in me repeating myself for a 6th or 7th time. Play the card anyway you want it. :-)
Edited by FHR-X, Jun 6 2009, 03:43 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
scottkthompson
Member Avatar
That other moderator guy
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
It is worded in a way that allows you to remove all copies of all three cards. If your group wants to choose to only pick one of the three, we aren't going to stop you! Many groups have errated Blink and/or Panoptitron because they thought they were too powerful.

Do what you gotta do to keep your group happy and intact. I would however, put it to a vote in the group, not just among the judges. It's not a judge ruling because the card allows you to remove all copies of all three cards, as has been stated many times already. Instead, decide as a group if you think its 'full' effect is too powerful.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
scottkthompson
Member Avatar
That other moderator guy
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Sorry, was typing while you guys were apparantly!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
FHR-X
Member Avatar
Regular
[ *  *  * ]
It's ok Scott.

But my point was only that if the creator the card wanted it to be played the way everyone on this thread says it does, it should have been written like so:

X-Gene Decoded
Plot Twist, 3
To play, exhaust a Mr. Sinister you control.
Reveal the top four cards of an opponent's deck. Remove all revealed non-character cards from the game. Search that deck for all cards with the same name as "all the cards" removed this way, then remove them from the game.

The way as it stands now, it can still be read two different ways. Which one is the correct one is still a matter of opinion and I will not say that mine is better then yours. I simply prefer mine.

I may be the only one on this thread who reads it that way, but I am not the only one in the world who does. Hence why I keep repeating, play it the way you want.
Edited by FHR-X, Jun 6 2009, 04:19 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
unclechawie
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
As an FYI, that wording wouldn't make it work the way we have been describing. There has yet to be any way for a Plot Twist to have more than one name which is what you wording would suggest.

I think a better way for you to have phrased it would have been:

Reveal the top four cards of the opponent's deck. Remove all revealed non-character cards from the game. Search that deck for all cards with the same name as "any of the cards" removed this way, then remove them from the game.

Again, just an FYI.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
FHR-X
Member Avatar
Regular
[ *  *  * ]
Very well Chawie. I would accept that too and I agree it is better worded then mine.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bliven731
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
I'll just post my interpretation quickly.

Search that deck for all cards with the same name as a card removed this way

You reveal plot twist A B C and a character.

You find a 2nd copy of A. Does it have the same name as a card removed this way? Yes
You find a 2nd copy of B. Does it have the same name as a card removed this way? Also yes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
FHR-X
Member Avatar
Regular
[ *  *  * ]
Sorry to say that as already been said by everyone but me Bliven.

It's not that I don't understand it. It's that I prefer my interpretation. Yours is not wrong, simply different from mine.
Edited by FHR-X, Jun 6 2009, 05:05 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shadowtrooper
Member Avatar
I Hate Rebel Scum!
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
This is on the issue of X-Factor Investigations. Cause I think there was a misinterpretation of the card.
Quote:
 
X-Factor Investigations (MEV-033R)
Location, 2
To flip, discard an X-Factor character card. <p> When you flip X-Factor Investigations, remove the top three cards of an opponent's deck from the game. <p> [Activate] >>> Negate target effect from a non-ongoing plot twist with the same name as a card removed this way.

When you play this card you remove the top 3 cards of an opponents deck from the game. simple enough

Activate --> Negate target effect from a non-ongoing plot twist with the same name as a card removed this way.

Here is where I think I saw some confusion. Lets say cards 1,2 and 3 were all plot twist. One was a Savage Beatdown, the other a Fliying Kick, and the last one a Crushing Blow.

All 3 cards were removed from the game by X-Factor Investigations therefore I can negate the effect any of these cards produce. I can't negate them all at once because I have to exhaust the damn thing, and there lies the trick.

This has relevance to the X-Gene Decoded situation that is happening here. Neither of these cards force you to choose one of the removed cards to continue the effect or power they produce. As such all cards that were removed by their initial part of the effect are subject to the conclusion of the effect. In one case is the ability to negate their effect, while in the other case it is the removal of all other copies of the cards.

FHR-X
 
I am simply stating that those cards can be read two ways, and I prefer the least powerful one. I won't stop anyone from playing it the way they prefer.
All the cards under specific conditions can be interpreted in two ways or more if you would like, but only one way is the correct way. It seems to me that you have chosen the less powerful way out of preference rather than because you really believe the card to work that way. Not having to choose from the removed cards gives you the freedom to remove all of them. Card X was "A" card removed this way and so was card Y and Z. The card can't very well say: "remove all cards with the same name as all cards that were removed this way" because then someone like you will say that they don't have a card with all the names of all the cards that were removed from the initial part of the effect, but they do have cards that share a name with a card that was removed. Your taking this grammar thing way out of proportion simply to keep playing the card the way you want to play it.

Just as you say that the intended effect was for only one card to be removed I can state that the intended effect was to remove all of them. That isn't really much of an argument. We on the other hand have even presented you with an example of a card that works in a very similar manner yet you continue to avoid hang on to a single letter.
FHR-X
 
It's not that I don't understand it. It's that I prefer my interpretation. Yours is not wrong, simply different from mine.
I'm sorry but one way has to be wrong, and if ours isn't wrong well then yours must be wrong. You preferring a card to work one way doesn't make it right, even if your play group agrees. In life there is always a right way and a wrong way, plain and simple.
FHR-X
 
LOL....

Oh man, this is just too amusing.
I'm sorry but this felt kind of rude. We are not here for your amusement, we are simply trying to reach an agreement of how the card actually works. I give you mad props for holding true to what you believe, and reading post after post of guys that don't share your point of view while maintaining your cool. If it was me I perhaps would of exploded. But don't let comments like this ruin a thread that has been so informative.

In the end you can play the card anyway you want, and as long as your play group agrees I don't think anyone will have a problem with that here, but don't expect us to agree with what you are saying because in all honesty I don't think anyone here agrees that the way you play the card is the correct way.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Zanth
No Avatar
Member
[ *  * ]
Hi, I'm the one FHR-X was waiting to hear my opinion from, the third judge in our community.

First off, I must say that when I read the card I see it as FHR-X, which from what everyone is saying is the wrong way to read it. I blame UDE for poor wording, has happened before, and will most likely happen again in any other TCG put out by anyone.

The "same name as 'a' card removed" makes my brain think it is only looking at one card that has been removed. Just as in 'X-Factor Investigations' activate effect, which I see as looking at 'one' of the 3 cards removed and negate a card with the same name.

For X-Gene the simpliest way to have worded it as what everyone else believes as intended is to change that pesky 'a' to 'each' as in:

"Search that deck for all cards with the same name as 'each' card removed this way, then remove them from the game."

As it stands, I'll probably play it here as the way FHR-X and I see it, at least in casual play. In tournament play I'll probably concede it to the way everyone else plays it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lupercal
Member Avatar
Regular
[ *  *  * ]
How are you people judges???

This is the most frustrating thread ever!

Everything you have posted is basically saying i dont like having these cards played against me.

Fhrc reasons it works the way i say so;

1. I'm a judge so i must be right.
2. I convinced another judge that its right.
3. "Only the card creator can know for definate".
4. I'm arguing pathetic interpretation of the grammar so the effect doesn't hit me as hard.

Dude, grow up and play it correctly.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
FHR-X
Member Avatar
Regular
[ *  *  * ]
Well I finally got my answer.

Thanks Zanth.

And Lupercal to address your points.

1. I never said I was right because I am a judge. That fact is irrelevant on this matter since it's about interpretation of text and not interpretation of rules.

2. I never convince any of my friends/community of this. We all read the card and we all played it the way Zanth and I sees it and it was never even an issue before this thread started. None of our other players ever even asked how the card worked since our entire community never gave it a second thought. We all just read it the way Zanth and I do.

3. Someone who creates something is always the primary person to ask about what his intentions were when he created it. If I could meet him and he would tell me I was playing it wrong, then I would ask him next time to be more specific. I am not the only one confuse about the wording. Like I said our community has never had an issue about this.

4. And interpretation of grammar is the basis of applying card's abilities/powers/effects. Just because you read it differently then I do and because on this board more people agree with you does not give you the right to ascertain your opinion that my interpretation is pathetic as if it were a fact.

And well, Lupercal, if you find me immature, that saddens me. I actually thought you were a stand-up guy originally. Now my judgement of you falls on hypocrisy. But at the same time I understand your frustration. I'll just end this post with: I hope you enjoy playing the game with your friends and play the card the way you want too. If everyone you play with agrees with you; what does it matter how our community plays it, right? :-)

Cheers,
Harvey

P.S. And Shadowtrooper, thanks for being you! :-)
P.P.S And HomerJ I was not laughing at you. I was laughing at the situation. I apologize if it came out like I was trying to be condescending. Cheers dude!
Edited by FHR-X, Jun 6 2009, 12:57 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shadowtrooper
Member Avatar
I Hate Rebel Scum!
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Zanth
Jun 6 2009, 07:07 AM
The "same name as 'a' card removed" makes my brain think it is only looking at one card that has been removed. Just as in 'X-Factor Investigations' activate effect, which I see as looking at 'one' of the 3 cards removed and negate a card with the same name.
Yes you look at 'one' of the cards that was removed but in fact you can negate all 3. Just like with X-Gene Decoded you look at 'a' card that was removed but you can remove all non-character cards. I don't see the difference.

Again where is is written in the cards that you have to choose between the removed cards?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Zanth
No Avatar
Member
[ *  * ]
Meh, as I said I'll play things my way in casual and everyone elses in Tournament play.

I guess too me, it probably does come down to how powerful X-Gene is when it can removed up to 16 cards from a deck with a simple exhaust of a specific character. If I'm not mistaken only one card has the ability to remove 5 and that's from MOR, and 4 is more the norm.

Regarding X-Factor Investigations, as it has the same wording as X-Gene, the way I'm seeing it when applying the "up to 16 cards" method of X-Gene, is that if 3 plot twists are played, and X-Factor is flipped and removes 3 cards each with the same name as one of those plot twists that are played, with a single activation it can negate all 3 of those plot twists on the chain. If that is the correct way to play it, well I'll have the same opinion of it as "X-Gene Decoded." Either way, I'll still play the game and have fun.

Zanth
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bkwrds
Member Avatar
is a Gypsy Doom
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
MEV is busted. All the MA stuff is stronger than anything else but MEV was just another step beyond.

But... it's not a single exhaust to remove 16 cards. You'd have to hit 4 plot twists, to make that happen, and there's no telling which will be relevant or not. I can imagine a lot of decks that could easily manage to win anyway. If your deck has an OPT or a location as a mulligan, you should have it by 3. They can X-Gene the remaining copies all they like, because I've already got one in my row.

They could always HAB! it but if you deck is that dedicated to disruption and exhausting their characters to play X-Gene they won't beat any rush deck. It's disruption but it's no more powerful than some other ridiculous cards out there. Paper, Scissors, Rock... right? X-Gene could beat curve decks dependent on search to hit their late drops but I don't think that deck has enough disruption to beat a rush deck.

I can agree that the card is difficult to read. I did not understand the card's function until this thread. However, given the explanations in this thread, I feel it is easy to understand. If judges are suggesting they agree with an incorrect reading, that makes me worry about attending Vs events in other places. I would have to travel to play and I would hate to come to an event and feel like a judge is misinformed. That would make it difficult to attend another event.
Edited by bkwrds, Jun 6 2009, 04:41 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Rules · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Marvel Comics Character Images, Character Names and Card Text Copyright 2009 Marvel Characters Ltd. and/or Upper Deck Entertainment, LLC. DC Comics Character Images, Character Names and Card Text Copyright 2009 DC Characters Ltd. and/or Upper Deck Entertainment, LLC.