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
Quick Question
Topic Started: Jun 17 2010, 12:52 AM (1,762 Views)
HeroComplex
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
"Word" just means that it has to appear as a whole word. Hulkling and Hulkbuster Armor don't have the word "Hulk," but Superman/Batman Robot does have the word "Batman." And Mystique fulfills that requirement twice.

The glossary entry for "word" doesn't imply or refer to a printed restriction. And to be honest, I don't entirely see the connection being drawn between the two---is there something about "word" that's specifically evoking "printed" for you guys? Non-printed names and text seem to have words in them just as much as printed ones do, so limiting it that way seems a bit strange to me.

Is it possibly a byproduct of At Your Service referring to "a card?" That wording's just so the search isn't limited to just one type of card, but a couple people have used the phrase "on the card" as a substitute for "printed," so I can sort of picture an accidental connection there. Imagine there was a card "Ready target character with the word "Batman" in its name, version, or game text," and a character who has Carrying the Torch for Batman. Would you say he's a legal target?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kariggi
Member Avatar
Hero For Hire
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
HeroComplex
Jun 17 2010, 05:10 PM
Imagine there was a card "Ready target character with the word "Batman" in its name, version, or game text," and a character who has Carrying the Torch for Batman. Would you say he's a legal target?
I would now but I think it might have taken one of these threads to convince me. I think it would confuse the matter, as it has in this case, even if the confusion only comes because of the word word infering a printed word to some of us. I realize that inference in vs is almost always the improper route.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HomerJ
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
kariggi
Jun 17 2010, 01:07 AM
At Your Service
To play, discard a [Gotham Knights] character card.
Search your deck for a card with the word "Batman" in its name, identity, or text. Reveal that card and put it into your hand.

Mystique, Raven
Mystique has all character names while in your deck, hand, or KO'd pile.
I have to disagree that it works. I believe the intent of using this template is that the word in question "physically" appears on the card. In order for this to work for Mystique, it would need to be something like:

At Your Service
To play, discard a [Gotham Knights] character card.
Search your deck for a card with the name or version "Batman", or the word "Batman" in its text. Reveal that card and put it into your hand.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CptPugwash
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
"Word" just means that it has to appear as a whole word. Hulkling and Hulkbuster Armor don't have the word "Hulk," but Superman/Batman Robot does have the word "Batman." And Mystique fulfills that requirement twice.


I now see why the point of having "the word" in At your Service. So while i am not entirely convinced of this, HC has least satisfied that part of the argument against.

Anyway while there is no FAQ or clear ruling either way, whatever HC says is gospel as far as i'm concerned.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KardKrazy
Member Avatar
"'I've got a huge" Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
HomerJ
Jun 17 2010, 05:50 PM
kariggi
Jun 17 2010, 01:07 AM
At Your Service
To play, discard a [Gotham Knights] character card.
Search your deck for a card with the word "Batman" in its name, identity, or text. Reveal that card and put it into your hand.

Mystique, Raven
Mystique has all character names while in your deck, hand, or KO'd pile.
I have to disagree that it works. I believe the intent of using this template is that the word in question "physically" appears on the card. In order for this to work for Mystique, it would need to be something like:

At Your Service
To play, discard a [Gotham Knights] character card.
Search your deck for a card with the name or version "Batman", or the word "Batman" in its text. Reveal that card and put it into your hand.
Yeah but you can't rule on the interaction with what you believe the "intent" was. No matter what we believe the "intent" was, the card does not state printed so you don't have to find the printed word Batman on the card.
later,
Kj
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BatHulk
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
HC hits it on the head with his explanation of "word" and the implication that it needs to be printed or not.

I think those who disagree are getting tied up with a requirement of "name" being printed ("text" usually is but I believe "version" has cases where it is not). We all know that "name" does not necessarily have to be printed (like "affiliation"), so the requirement of looking for a "word" in a "name" is satisfied by Mystique.

It's just as simple as searching for a card with the "name" of [something], [something] is not printed on Mystique, but we can search for it because it matches the "name". So we can search for Mystique because her "name" contains the "word" of [Batman].

They really picked the right guy in HC to do the rules work for Vs.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
axon
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
This is really a fascinating discussion on the nature of language and metalanguage.
This occurs everywhere from computer science to philosophy to Alice In Wonderland (wherein they discuss the properties of a song: the name of the song, what the name of the song is called, what the song is called, and the song itself all being different).
My particular interpretation of all this is that it should work, and it was also the designers intent for it to work (if, of course, they actually considered this interaction).
In this context, I don't believe there is any semantic difference between them saying "the word Batman" and just "Batman."
However, I do see how there could be confusion.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lex Luthor Jr
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
I always seem to ask the thought-provoking questions. I was also the guy who first asked about the connection between Sinestro: Corrupted by the Ring and Press.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HeroComplex
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
I have to disagree that it works. I believe the intent of using this template is that the word in question "physically" appears on the card.
But like I was asking earlier---why is that? What about "word" is evoking "physically printed" for you? I don't see how the first leads to the second. How would you respond to my hypo above about a power "Ready target character with the word "Batman" in its name, identity, or game text" and Carrying the Torch?
Quote:
 
In order for this to work for Mystique, it would need to be something like:

At Your Service
To play, discard a [Gotham Knights] character card.
Search your deck for a card with the name or version "Batman", or the word "Batman" in its text. Reveal that card and put it into your hand.
Except that now you've changed the card so it can't find Superman/Batman Robot---such a card would work, but it's simply not an alternate wording for At Your Service.

Beyond that, let's try a new hypo. What if you had a card that gave powers/text to cards in your deck? Like a card that changed references to Superman in all zones into references to "Superman or Batman," to help enable a World's Finest deck. Would you say that At Your Service is now able to find Cadmus Labs while this modifier is working?
Edited by HeroComplex, Jun 17 2010, 07:41 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HomerJ
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
HeroComplex
Jun 17 2010, 07:36 PM
But like I was asking earlier---why is that? What about "word" is evoking "physically printed" for you? I don't see how the first leads to the second. How would you respond to my hypo above about a power "Ready target character with the word "Batman" in its name, identity, or game text" and Carrying the Torch?

******

Except that now you've changed the card so it can't find Superman/Batman Robot---such a card would work, but it's simply not an alternate wording for At Your Service.

Beyond that, let's try a new hypo. What if you had a card that gave powers/text to cards in your deck? Like a card that changed references to Superman in all zones into references to "Superman or Batman," to help enable a World's Finest deck. Would you say that At Your Service is now able to find Cadmus Labs while this modifier is working?
By using "the word" my feeling is the intent is to actually see the word printed on the card, as though it were a proper noun or something. I think that it's important to note that while we don't actually rule on card based on intent, most errata is due to when the intent and the application differ. In this case, an FAQ or errata seems appropriate.

***
Re: Carry the Torch example,
No, the way I read "the word", you would not be able to target the CtT character

***
Re: Changing the card text,
I did change the card. I wrote it the way I think it would be, if it was intended to be able to find Mystique. I'm not saying it's what should be done, just that my wording is what I think it would require to find her. And you're right, it then would not be able to find the SuperBatBot.

***
Re: Cadmus Labs example,
No, no I don't. I still think that by adding "the word" the intent of the card was to see it printed in one of those 3 areas.



To summarize my opinion (admittedly not necessarily the correct opinion): At Your Service is written in such a way to infer "the printed word Batman in the name, version, or textbox" and should be FAQ/Errata'd clarify the card as such.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
THE BALDMAN
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Simply put, if Batman is in the name Superman/Batman robots, then Hulk is definitely contained in Hulkling. These are both pieces of the names, and not the complete names.

And the nicest part about UDE being gone? I don't HAVE to use this ruling if I don't agree with it. Other than the opinion of a few people, nothing here is official since there is no longer an official capacity for rulings...and if the counsel does not issue an errata or FAQ, it is up to TO's to interpret and balence situations like this for the best of their player base. (You may feel free to disagree...and you can get back to me when you run tournaments that 20-30 people show up to and complain about rulings that appear on this online forum and nowhere else.)

I have interpreted "From the Darkness" in the past to require the name be present on the card since the word is required to be in the name, identity or text. While she does have all names, "Batman" does not appear in her name, identity or text...just Mystique.

Until I see an errata or an official clarification on the card, I will rule this the way I always have at my tournaments...it just doesn't work because it is stretching the card past its intended use. (If you don't like that, then work to get an errata passed by the counsel, or don't attend the events I run.)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HeroComplex
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
I did change the card. I wrote it the way I think it would be, if it was intended to be able to find Mystique. I'm not saying it's what should be done, just that my wording is what I think it would require to find her. And you're right, it then would not be able to find the SuperBatBot.
Then maybe I'm just kind of confused on the purpose of your re-word. If you're just trying to show how the card would/could have been worded to either avoid ambiguity or work in a certain way, (and from your initial post it seems like that was the point,) it feels like cheating to just unilaterally change parts of its established and intended functionality along the way to make it easier.

What I mean is---your re-wording doesn't do what At Your Service is supposed to do and is even described in the CRD as doing, so it can't possibly be a valid wording of what At Your Service would be if it were intended to find Mystique. At Your Service is intended to be able to find a card like Batman and the Outsiders, so it was worded to only require Batman be a word in the name, not an entire name. If you're suggesting that they would have worded it differently if they wanted to find Mystique, it seems to me that you've actually gotta offer a wording that does what you think they wanted. Without using "word," what's a wording that clearly requires Batman to show up as a whole word, but not as an entire name?
Quote:
 
I still think that by adding "the word" the intent of the card was to see it printed in one of those 3 areas.
I'm still not understanding how it implies that to you---what is it about "the word" that suggests it has to be printed?

Even if there is a logical connection between them, though, the examples that are in the CRD glossary make it pretty clear, to me, that "word" was included to require full words, not just parts. That's (at least part of) it's purpose. So it's not like you need to find with some reason for "word" to be there. For me, the use of "word" to express a different kind of intent, and one that seems pretty directly related to "word" already, tends to counterfeit the argument that "word" was included to express a requirement that it be printed. Cards already frequently use the word "printed," so rather than put double the weight on "word," why would they not have used both "word" and "printed" if that's what they intended.

You probably can tell, I'm still having a fair amount of trouble figuring out what the argument is for the card being restricted to printed material. Please do help me on that front if you can.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OnyxWeapon
Member Avatar
Keeper of the Realm
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
When Bizarro had all names during the legend format, he could use From the Darkness just fine in tourney play.

we're essentially looking at the same kind of interaction with mystique and at your service.

this kind of effect resolution isn't unprecedented. It wasn't that long ago we were going over the merits of one of the Bizarro World texts:

Bizarro World
Bizarro World is considered to be in all sets. Flip only if you control a Revenge Squad character.

[Activate] -> Reveal the top card of your deck and put it into your hand. If it has the word "Bizarro" in its name or game text, continue this process until you put a card into your hand without the word "Bizarro" in its name or game text

Because it's effect specifically referenced "word" it allowed sucessful rallying of Bizarro ray, other Bizarro Worlds, Bizarro brawl, and of course Bizzaro's themselves.

Also it's worth noting that similar cards such as Rick Jones' effect was ruled (as of the last vs system event ever held in an official capacity) that when his effect rally's into a Mystique, Raven. the rally is considered successful since her effect clearly grants all names.

the card just doesn't say "printed" so mystique works.
as we all learned by trial through fire, if it doesn't say "target" it doesn't target. this seems to be a similar lesson If it doesn't specify "printed", it just doesn't care where the name comes from.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HeroComplex
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Simply put, if Batman is in the name Superman/Batman robots, then Hulk is definitely contained in Hulkling. These are both pieces of the names, and not the complete names.
While of course you're allowed to do whatever you want in your tournaments, keep in mind these are actually already in the CRD. Later in the post you seemed to be saying that you follow everything official, but that otherwise you'd use your discretion---but it also seems like you're disagreeing with this bit from UDE, so I'm genuinely a bit confused on your stance. Is it that with UDE gone, you don't consider stuff from the UDE days official anymore? Or that it's official, but can be changed when needed?

For reference, when the Superman/Batman Robot question came up, I really wasn't sure what UDE wanted, which is why it went in for clarification. Hulk inside Hulkling isn't a full word, so it makes sense to me. I probably would have liked She-Hulk to be searchable, but the way hyphens are used in the language, I get the ruling that it's not a full word. Superman/Batman Robot...if I'd absolutely had to rule on it without input from UDE, I think it would have been an extremely close call, and I might have ruled in its favor. If you think about "either/or," those both come off as complete words to me, not just fragments of a greater word. Or if I were to say "I'm happy/content," I'm using them as distinct words, even if there aren't spaces between. So at the end of the day, I actually see the "word" distinctions as reasonably consistent.

Quote:
 
I have interpreted "From the Darkness" in the past to require the name be present on the card since the word is required to be in the name, identity or text. While she does have all names, "Batman" does not appear in her name, identity or text...just Mystique.
Like I've asked the others---could you help explain for me what led you to infer that cards like this are restricted to printed material? In the second sentence above, you seem to be referring just "name" but implicitly talking about "printed name," and I'm having trouble figuring out where that shift is happening. If you're not limited to printed material, then her name is the combination of every character name in the game, so the question seems to hinge on---what are you reading as a signal that non-printed names don't count for At Your Service?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vader
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Hero I think I understand what you mean but I still have a hard time agreeing with you on this(which is a first). I don't even know how to phrase my objection. I don't believe that At Your Service was intended to work with a card like that. As we can all attest to, UDE put very little time into playtesting Mev. The Mystique one drop is the only card out side of being an in play card that can gain names. Mystique, like every other problem that has come out of Mev, the concept is cool but the follow through is horrible. At Your Service was designed to help Batman or those from the Batman story arcs in which his name would natually appear, like the Outsiders, birds of prey, or maybe teen titans, not a character that is given a name threw poor wording and lack of thought.
Edited by Vader, Jun 17 2010, 10:58 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
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.