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 (1,761 Views)
CptPugwash
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Word

Some modifiers look “for a card with the word “<text>”” on some part of it. <Text> on such a part of a card only matches if it’s a whole word.


key bit for me is - on some part of it.
I'm looking at mystique & i still can't see Batman on some part of it. (Although i know that Mystique has Batman in her name)

Quote:
 
Thing, Ben Grimm - States printed cost, so you can't up the cost and abuse his power.

Overload - States printed ATK. Didn't matter because in the end card was abused anyway:p.

System Failure - Also states printed ATK.

Removed from Continuity - States printed name and version. There is nothing in the game that granted the ability to gain a name while in your deck until Mystique, yet UDE put printed name on this card.

Karnak, The Shatterer - States printed DEF.

Rogue, Total Transformation - States printed name and version.

Taskmaster, Mnemonic Assassin - States printed ATK and DEF.


Again ATK, DEF COST can all change thats why printed is stated, i don't believe that words on a card can change.

Quote:
 
Removed from Continuity - States printed name and version. There is nothing in the game that granted the ability to gain a name while in your deck until Mystique, yet UDE put printed name on this card.


One can argue, (rightly or wrongly i don't know) that printed is here in this context so that one can K.O.
Aspiring Pawn, Army converted to Aspiring Pawn, Knight & be able to remove
all Aspiring Pawn, Army in the deck. (it depends on whether or not printed refers to the card in play, the cards in the deck or both)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OnyxWeapon
Member Avatar
Keeper of the Realm
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
but we have seen precedence with characteristics given from an effect while not in play.

i routinely used to search for lacuna. with a searcher matching an affiliated character in play.

trust me. if it was meant to check against printed incarnations the crd would certainly have no problem reflecting that.
As you say, it's quite obvious in it's other applications. In this particular one, it isn't there because it simply isn't intended to be.
yes that means mystique magically becomes searched as batman. unintended interaction? certainly. But easily functional.
I still laugh at other unintended things like, katana being a character and an equip.
i can actually recover katana with best friend forever by replacing a rowed equipment Katana. intended? nah. functional? yep.
Edited by OnyxWeapon, Jun 17 2010, 11:38 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
scottkthompson
Member Avatar
That other moderator guy
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I must say I'm shocked at the ruling myself. I'll accept it, but I'm definately in Baldman and Homer's camp. Word, to me, does imply printed. When I look at Mystique, she could have a million names, but only one word is on her card in the name area. If Mystique walks into a party with a "Hello, my name is Mystique" nametag on, then starts shapeshifting into all the other party guests, her name tag still says, "Hello, my name is Mystique", even if she's impersonating other people.

I understand Vs does not have the same logic as the fantasty world in my head, but that's the way I see the interaction.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HeroComplex
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Vader
Jun 17 2010, 10:56 PM
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.
Two quick responses:

1) Are you saying that you think the cards as printed don't interact this way, or that they do interact but you think it's an oversight on UDE's part. I see bits of each in there, so I'm not sure which way you come out at the end of the day.

2) The point that At Your Service was designed to help Batman, not Mystique, honestly doesn't do much for me. I get that you don't feel any particularly need to arrive at a conclusion that helps Mystique here, but a quick team-up lets Children of the Atom recover Lex Luthor. The team-up is supposed to give one team the benefits of the other, and Mystique is supposed to be anyone while in the deck.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vader
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I suppose that my first problem is that when you look at Mystique Batman is nowhere on the card. There is text that say she has all names but no where does it say Batman. Any other card I would be able to search for with At Your Service will actually have the name or word Batman on the card somewhere. As to your example of using a Children of the Atom on Lex, that is accomplished by a team-up that was made specifficly for the purpose of using one team with another and does not have anything to do with names. Mystique breakes a fundamental rule in VS, that being a character is the character printed on the card. Even if you look at other cards that can change or gain names All of them are limited to being in play not outside of it.

I repeat the fact, that I know of no other cards that can gain names outside of the in play field wether you are discussing Carrying the Torch or Syphon Power ect. If the play is legal I feel that it is an oversight on the part of UDE and not how they intended either card to be used.

I will go with your ruling in this because you are the closest thing to official as we have, but I still find the whole thing rather suspect.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OnyxWeapon
Member Avatar
Keeper of the Realm
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
her effect gives her all names.
how ELSE is it going to be used if not in some unique interactions like this?
If she were meant to be restricted to powering up they would have made her text more similar to phantom stranger for JSA.

Another prime example of bad foresight in MEV? yeah pretty much. But it seems quite cut and dry to me.
Edited by OnyxWeapon, Jun 18 2010, 01:34 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
THE BALDMAN
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
My objection is simply that the word Batman does not appear on the card Mystique no matter how many names she has. If she has the word Batman on the card, them I am sure you could just point it out to me. Requiring the word to be present is the same thing as requiring it to be written: The word can't be present if it isn't written. (Again, if it is present, just point it out to me on the card.)

Further, Superman/Batman is one word if She-Hulk is one word. The "-" and the "/" have many of the same powers in language, and if you are going to include one, then you must include the other. If Superman and Batman are different words, then so are She and Hulk. You really can't have it both ways, no matter how you decide to rule. It's a huge oxymoron to allow one and not the other.

And my remark about things being "official" is simply that. There is no more "official" anything unless the counsel makes a ruling on it and players respect and play with that ruling. As a tournament organizer, and one of the few remaining I might add, I am free to run an event how ever I want . "However I want" revolves around my players wanting things to be both balenced and fair, with a minimal amount of "well that's pretty damn stupid" thrown in.

The suggested interactions for "From The Darkness" and the Superman/Batman Robots v. Hulk far exceed my tolerance of "well that's pretty damn stupid". It's things like this that keep me from the Online scene altogether.

It is obvious that this suggestion is not how the card was intended to interact, and that is the best reason for an errata to clarify just how it does and does not work. And maybe I missed the original CDR on Superman/Batman Robots, but supporting a previously wrong decision is not the way to proceed. That CRD would obviously need revising given this (Superman/Batman and She-Hulk/Hulk) situation that must not have considered when making the original ruling. And if it was, then I am rather disappointed in the decision. I cannot agree with it, and will not rule in that fashion. Period.

And just because someone does not agree with an obviously warped sense of how to use a "-" or "/" does not mean that an event is not "real" nor "not being played by the rules". What it does mean is that I am willing to stand up for what I believe is right. If my players don't agree with me, then they won't show up to my events.

If that's not clear enough of an explanation of why I object, then I am not sure that you are really trying to understand. I think that if you really wanted to understand this that you can.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HeroComplex
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
My objection is simply that the word Batman does not appear on the card Mystique no matter how many names she has. If she has the word Batman on the card, them I am sure you could just point it out to me. Requiring the word to be present is the same thing as requiring it to be written: The word can't be present if it isn't written. (Again, if it is present, just point it out to me on the card.)
Of course it's not printed on the card---but what I've been trying to get clarification about is why folks are inferring from "word" that the language has to be "on the card," in the sense of physically printed. Non-printed names and powers are also made up of words, so I'm trying to pin down that connection. And I genuinely do want insight into people's thought processes, if for no other reason than, selfishly, it'll make responding easier for me.
Quote:
 
Further, Superman/Batman is one word if She-Hulk is one word. The "-" and the "/" have many of the same powers in language, and if you are going to include one, then you must include the other. If Superman and Batman are different words, then so are She and Hulk. You really can't have it both ways, no matter how you decide to rule. It's a huge oxymoron to allow one and not the other.
Since hyphens can be used to attach prefixes/suffixes, I think it's at least arguable that an entire hyphenated thing should be considered the word, in a way that isn't true when using a slash to separate two alternatives. I'm not saying it necessarily had to be done that way; like I said, I probably would have liked She-Hulk to be searchable, and I might have come down the other way on Superman/Batman if it had been my call. I personally don't see them as logically inconsistent, but I'm fine with reasonable minds disagreeing on it.



For the rest, it seems like my last post pissed you off somehow. Not sure exactly what happened there, hopefully it's just an example of the tone of a post or two not coming across somewhere along the line. It feels from your post like you've interpreted an attack in something I said, but I don't think I maligned your tournaments---I agreed that you can do whatever you want at them in my previous post. Really dunno what to say beyond that.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lex Luthor Jr
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
I'm sticking with my original argument. Since we do not have a gaming definition of the word "word", I believe we must rely on the English language definition.

Since a "word" can be either written or spoken, you can consider Mystique: Raven to have the word "Batman" in her name.

Mystique has all names. They are there. You can't see them, but they are there. A name is a word or words. It can't not be.

Whether written or spoken, a word is a word, you can't have a word not be a word.
Edited by Lex Luthor Jr, Jun 18 2010, 08:16 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CptPugwash
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
A name is a word or words. It can't not be.


The Artist formerly known as Prince.
Edited by CptPugwash, Jun 18 2010, 09:55 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KardKrazy
Member Avatar
"'I've got a huge" Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Yeah I am totally mind blown by people thinking since the card says "word" it has to be printed. Ummm...I just said a random word out loud and last I checked even though it wasn't printed on this response, that random word I said out loud is still a word.
A word does NOT have to be printed to be a word. If it was suppose to be printed UDE would have wrote "printed" in front of word.
later,
Kj
P.S: If you want an official Council Ruling on it though Baldman we might can arrange something=).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
banstylejbo
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Here's how I look at it: The definition of "word" in the CRD doesn't say anything about "printed". Therefore, in game terms, "word" is not restricted to what is visible on the card. If Mystique has all names while not in play, she is considered to have the name Batman, which would mean she has the word Batman.

This is from the definition of "Printed" in the CRD: If an effect or modifier does not specify that it looks for "printed" information, it will find the card’s current information, which includes what the card may have gained or lost due to modifiers, or its text being active or inactive, which may differ from what is printed.

That right there solves this issue for me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BatHulk
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Does Mystique have the word "Batman" in her name?

Unless At Your Service says "printed word", it seems fairly straightforward.

Now let's approach this from an intent/flavor perspective (not recommended but sometimes required for ruling judgements like this):

1. At Your Service was designed to search out "stuff" that is related to Batman (Alfred tech).
2. Mystique was designed to mimic ANY character... including Batman.

So would it not make sense that At Your Service is able to find Mystique as she is Batman for all intents and purposes?

"Alfred, go find Batman!"
"Here he is, sir." (being fooled by Mystique as many have been)

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BatHulk
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
By the way, great rules question Lex. I miss these types of discussions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HomerJ
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
HeroComplex
Jun 18 2010, 06:23 AM
Quote:
 
My objection is simply that the word Batman does not appear on the card Mystique no matter how many names she has. If she has the word Batman on the card, them I am sure you could just point it out to me. Requiring the word to be present is the same thing as requiring it to be written: The word can't be present if it isn't written. (Again, if it is present, just point it out to me on the card.)
Of course it's not printed on the card---but what I've been trying to get clarification about is why folks are inferring from "word" that the language has to be "on the card," in the sense of physically printed. Non-printed names and powers are also made up of words, so I'm trying to pin down that connection. And I genuinely do want insight into people's thought processes, if for no other reason than, selfishly, it'll make responding easier for me.
HC, you keep asking us "why do we think the word is not on the card"? Why do YOU think the word IS on the card.

Take the question out of the context of VS and simply ask "Is Batman on the Mystique card?". The answer is "no". THAT'S why I continue to argue that it's not, regardless of the game text. Is the word "Steve" on the card? Is the word "Freakazoid" on the card? The answer is always the same.

Please don't respond with "you can't take this out of context of vs" because that's not the point I'm trying to make. Why do I argue that the word Batman isn't on the card? Because it isn't. Why is there so much discussion about whether or not you should be able to find Mystique with At Your Service? Because within the context of the game, it's arguable that Mystique may or may not have Batman as a word, on the card.
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.