[ Scalpel ] sabbat obedience vs. vtes/jyhad obedience?

Ok, the Sabbat version of Obedience doesn't untap the vampire playing it while the vtes/jyhad version does. Should they be played as different cards or using the wording of one or the other? Mike

[ quoted text not captured ] The VtES/Jyhad says that the reacting vampire "remains utapped" - mistakenly assuming that the reacting vampire was untapped to start with. It doesn't actually "untap" the reacting vampire. (A vampire who played Wake with Evening's Freshness, for eample, would not be untapped by playing Obedience.) It (the VtES/Jyhad version) *does* however, allow a blocking vampire to play obedience and not become tapped. The Sabbat version, when read literally, would leave a blocker tapped even though combat has been avoided. The text change probably came about as an attempt to clear up the "untap" vs. "remain untapped" confusion. And, due to the extensive testing they did on the new cards, a new problem was introduced and overlooked. :-) -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Experience is something you http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | get just after you need it. Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |

sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) writes: >mboh...@students.uiuc.edu (michael charles bohlmann) writes: >The VtES/Jyhad says that the reacting vampire "remains utapped" - mistakenly >assuming that the reacting vampire was untapped to start with. >It doesn't actually "untap" the reacting vampire. (A vampire who played >Wake with Evening's Freshness, for eample, would not be untapped by >playing Obedience.) I actually knew, that but wasn't thinking about it. My whole point, of course, was that the reacting/blocking vampire is untapped in the end if it was untapped in the beginning. >It (the VtES/Jyhad version) *does* however, allow a blocking vampire to play >obedience and not become tapped. The Sabbat version, when read literally, >would leave a blocker tapped even though combat has been avoided. >The text change probably came about as an attempt to clear up the "untap" >vs. "remain untapped" confusion. And, due to the extensive testing they >did on the new cards, a new problem was introduced and overlooked. :-) So you're saying we have to wait for a ruling? :) Mike

In article <56i07f$2...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, mboh...@students.uiuc.edu (michael charles bohlmann) wrote: > Ok, the Sabbat version of Obedience doesn't untap the vampire playing it > while the vtes/jyhad version does. Should they be played as different > cards or using the wording of one or the other? Noted for the next Rules Meeting. ------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Wilkie Wot...@aol.com a.k.a."Scalpel" Customer Service, Wizards of the Coast "This isn't going to have a happy ending" -Detective Somerset, Se7en -------------------------------------------------------------

michael charles bohlmann <mboh...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote in article <56i07f$2...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>... > Ok, the Sabbat version of Obedience doesn't untap the vampire playing it > while the vtes/jyhad version does. Should they be played as different > cards or using the wording of one or the other? Obedience is a reaction card. Reactions never tap the vampire playing them unless they state so on the card. If you wake and play obedience you don't untap. -- Steve Bucy I'd be better off undead... "Hmmm. I notice the number of conditional phrases in there... _seems_ to indicate a weakness, _may_ be vulnerable in theory." - G'Kar

On 15 Nov 1996 16:57:38 GMT, sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) wrote: >mboh...@students.uiuc.edu (michael charles bohlmann) writes: >>Ok, the Sabbat version of Obedience doesn't untap the vampire playing it >>while the vtes/jyhad version does. Should they be played as different >>cards or using the wording of one or the other? >The VtES/Jyhad says that the reacting vampire "remains utapped" - mistakenly >assuming that the reacting vampire was untapped to start with. >It doesn't actually "untap" the reacting vampire. (A vampire who played >Wake with Evening's Freshness, for eample, would not be untapped by >playing Obedience.) >It (the VtES/Jyhad version) *does* however, allow a blocking vampire to play >obedience and not become tapped. The Sabbat version, when read literally, >would leave a blocker tapped even though combat has been avoided. >The text change probably came about as an attempt to clear up the "untap" >vs. "remain untapped" confusion. And, due to the extensive testing they >did on the new cards, a new problem was introduced and overlooked. :-) >-- >L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Experience is something you >http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | get just after you need it. >Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. | Or perhaps we could treat it as if it were simply a different card with a different strategy. This for example wont allow one older blocker to handle an effective untap and combat ends in one card. The new one does have the advantage if I remember it right of ignoring age at superior. Rory The Ref at refp...@best.com