Hi
we had some sort of argument last night about a game sequence that
happened last night:
Korah blocks Caliban. Pre-range, Caliban plays Carrion Crows, Korah
uses Reality Mirror to use Carrion Crows too.
Player using Korah says: "I´ll use it at superior, because the wording
of Reality Mirror does not forbid me to play at superior if I have the
discipline"(and Korah indeed has basic Animalism).
Hell unleashes.
I agreed with him by means of wording and the contitional sense of the
second part of the card, but it's complicated to explain.(english
grammar being the base of your point, but that point expressed in
spanish)
The opposite idea argued that the "been played from your hand" over-
ruled our grammar issue.
Who is reading it right?
( thanks by answering, by the way :) )
Text card:
Reality Mirror
Choose a combat card in the opposing minion's controller's ash heap,
and use the ability of that card as if that card had been played from
your hand (pay cost as normal). If the card requires a discipline this
vampire does not have, you can only use the basic ability of that
card. Only one Reality Mirror can be played during a game.
Korah
Sabbat, 7 cap, Priscus
OBF, AUS, DEM, ani
On Oct 29, 11:23 am, nac.snor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi
>
> we had some sort of argument last night about a game sequence that
> happened last night:
>
> Korah blocks Caliban. Pre-range, Caliban plays Carrion Crows, Korah
> uses Reality Mirror to use Carrion Crows too.
>
> Player using Korah says: "I´ll use it at superior, because the wording
> of Reality Mirror does not forbid me to play at superior if I have the
> discipline"(and Korah indeed has basic Animalism).
This is incorrect. See the text below:
> ( thanks by answering, by the way :) )> Text card:
>
> Reality Mirror
> Choose a combat card in the opposing minion's controller's ash heap,
> and use the ability of that card as if that card had been played from
> your hand (pay cost as normal).
So far so good. Everything below is irrelevant, because Carrion Crows
does not require a discipline Korah doesn't have.
> If the card requires a discipline this
> vampire does not have, you can only use the basic ability of that
> card.
Since Korah has the discipline, the "If" statement is false. Even if
you want to say "Korah doesn't have ANI", the statement still limits
it to inferior use.
Therefore, the card text is effectively 'use the ability of that card
as if that card had been played from your hand', and Korah has no
special letting her play ANI cards.
And if it is being played from your hand, it can't be at a level Korah
doesn't have.
-John Flournoy
nac.s...@gmail.com wrote:
> Korah blocks Caliban. Pre-range, Caliban plays Carrion Crows, Korah
> uses Reality Mirror to use Carrion Crows too.
>
> Player using Korah says: "I´ll use it at superior, because the wording
> of Reality Mirror does not forbid me to play at superior if I have the
> discipline"(and Korah indeed has basic Animalism).
>> The opposite idea argued that the "been played from your hand" over-
> ruled our grammar issue.
>
> Who is reading it right?
The opposite idea.
Q:
How could Korah, who has basic Animalism, play it from Hand?
A:
At basic, but not at superior.
So that's how she plays it.
Similarly, she could not use RM to play a card that required Assamite or anarch,
since the card text doesn't provide her any relief from those requirements.
Card text does provide the ability to meet the basic Discipline requirement of a
card even if the vampire doesn't have that Discipline, but it offers no way to
meet other requirements, so the vampire must meet those requirements.
[ quoted text not captured ]