LSJ: Mind Numb Permanent If Player Ousted?

If Methuselah A's vampire plays a Mind Numb on Methuselah B's vampire, the action card is placed on that vampire, so by 1.6.3 the target vampire then controls the Mind Numb card. As a result, the Mind Numb stays in play if Methuselah A is ousted before his next untap phase. In this situation, it seems that the Mind Numb will never leave play, since Methuselah A will never have another untap phase, and that Methuselah B's vampire will not untap as normal for the rest of the game. Is this all correct?

Emmit Svenson wrote: > If Methuselah A's vampire plays a Mind Numb on Methuselah B's vampire, > the action card is placed on that vampire, so by 1.6.3 the target > vampire then controls the Mind Numb card. As a result, the Mind Numb > stays in play if Methuselah A is ousted before his next untap phase. Correct. > In this situation, it seems that the Mind Numb will never leave play, > since Methuselah A will never have another untap phase, and that > Methuselah B's vampire will not untap as normal for the rest of the > game. Is this all correct? No. It is burned during "your" (the controller's) untap phase (just after the vampire failed to untap as normal). -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

LSJ wrote: > Emmit Svenson wrote: >> If Methuselah A's vampire plays a Mind Numb on Methuselah >> B's vampire, >> the action card is placed on that vampire, so by 1.6.3 the target >> vampire then controls the Mind Numb card. As a result, the Mind Numb >> stays in play if Methuselah A is ousted before his next untap phase. > > Correct. > >> In this situation, it seems that the Mind Numb will never >> leave play, >> since Methuselah A will never have another untap phase, and that >> Methuselah B's vampire will not untap as normal for the rest of the >> game. Is this all correct? > > No. It is burned during "your" (the controller's) untap phase (just > after the vampire failed to untap as normal). Mind rape stays forever and ever... and ever... =D -- Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com http://web2news.com/?rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Kulaid wrote: > LSJ wrote: > >>Emmit Svenson wrote: >> >>>If Methuselah A's vampire plays a Mind Numb on Methuselah >>>B's vampire, >>>the action card is placed on that vampire, so by 1.6.3 the target >>>vampire then controls the Mind Numb card. As a result, the Mind Numb >>>stays in play if Methuselah A is ousted before his next untap phase. >> >>Correct. >> >> >>>In this situation, it seems that the Mind Numb will never >>>leave play, >>>since Methuselah A will never have another untap phase, and that >>>Methuselah B's vampire will not untap as normal for the rest of the >>>game. Is this all correct? >> >>No. It is burned during "your" (the controller's) untap phase (just >>after the vampire failed to untap as normal). > > > Mind rape stays forever and ever... and ever... =D Correct. [LSJ 09-APR-2003] [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 12:40:41 -0400, LSJ wrote: > Emmit Svenson wrote: >> If Methuselah A's vampire plays a Mind Numb on Methuselah B's vampire, >> the action card is placed on that vampire, so by 1.6.3 the target >> vampire then controls the Mind Numb card. As a result, the Mind Numb >> stays in play if Methuselah A is ousted before his next untap phase. > > Correct. > >> In this situation, it seems that the Mind Numb will never leave play, >> since Methuselah A will never have another untap phase, and that >> Methuselah B's vampire will not untap as normal for the rest of the >> game. Is this all correct? > > No. It is burned during "your" (the controller's) untap phase (just > after the vampire failed to untap as normal). ************** Mind Numb [AH:C2, FN:PS2, CE:PV2] Cardtype: Action Cost: 1 blood Discipline: Presence [pre] (D) Put this card on any untapped vampire. Tap that vampire; he or she does not untap as normal during his or her controller's untap phase. Burn this card during your next untap phase. [PRE] As above, with +1 stealth. **************************** "your" directly after "his or her controller's" is logically the person who playing the card (A who has now been ousted) so you ought to change the card text if this is not the case. Technically you could read the card as you have said on the current wording but I can't imagine that anyone (disinterested) would do so without having been told to specifically. under your interpretation (above), A plays MN in As turn, then in B's untap phase the MN has two effects - >do not untap B's vamp< and >burn MN< so presumably B can order these effects how they wish and burn the MN then untap?

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Timlagor wrote: > under your interpretation (above), A plays MN in As turn, then in B's untap > phase the MN has two effects - >do not untap B's vamp< and >burn MN< so > presumably B can order these effects how they wish and burn the MN then > untap? Nope. Check section 4 in your rulebook. The first thing you do during your untap phase is untap all your cards. You can't order things ahead of this. -Matt

Timlagor wrote: > "your" directly after "his or her controller's" is logically the person who > playing the card (A who has now been ousted) so you ought to change the > card text if this is not the case. Incorrect. "Your" is logically "of the controller" on this (and every other) card. > Technically you could read the card as you have said on the current wording > but I can't imagine that anyone (disinterested) would do so without having > been told to specifically. Correct. But, since both readings lead to the proper functioning of the card in almost all cases, there's no point in "fixing" the card text by making it more stilted. > under your interpretation (above), A plays MN in As turn, then in B's untap > phase the MN has two effects - >do not untap B's vamp< and >burn MN< so > presumably B can order these effects how they wish and burn the MN then > untap? No. My interpretation explicitly said "(just after the vampire failed to untap as normal)", which explicitly denies your assertion. See Matt Morgan's response to this assertion for details of why this is so. [ quoted text not captured ]