[LSJ] Shadow of Taint

Hello, Shadow of Taint : [val] (...) move a card played by another Methuselah on a vampire in your ready region to another minion on whom the card could be played. That minion cannot be a vampire older than the vampire with the card. I play Shadow of Taint to attempt to move a Fame played by my predator on a vampire controlled a third Methuselah : is the action undirected ? Or is the action directed at that third Methuselah ? Seeds of Corruption can only target one's prey's vampire IIRC. Can I Shadow of Taint a Seeds of Corruption to any vampire ? Or does the "on whom the card could be played" clause limit this ? Thank you, François

François wrote: > Shadow of Taint : > [val] (...) move a card played by another Methuselah on a vampire in > your ready region to another minion on whom the card could be played. > That minion cannot be a vampire older than the vampire with the card. > > I play Shadow of Taint to attempt to move a Fame played by my predator > on a vampire controlled a third Methuselah : is the action undirected ? > Or is the action directed at that third Methuselah ? Directed at that third Methuselah. Like moving a Society of Leopold. > Seeds of Corruption can only target one's prey's vampire IIRC. Can I > Shadow of Taint a Seeds of Corruption to any vampire ? Or does the "on > whom the card could be played" clause limit this ? You can move it to any vampire. The "your prey" is meaningless once the card is in play. This also applies to Madman's Quill, Mark of Damnation, and Slaughtering the Herd

In article <1142428033.8...@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>, "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > François wrote: > > I play Shadow of Taint to attempt to move a Fame played by my predator > > on a vampire controlled a third Methuselah : is the action undirected ? > > Or is the action directed at that third Methuselah ? > > Directed at that third Methuselah. Like moving a Society of Leopold. Just nitpicking: this means that the card to move is not a target of the action (otherwise the action would have two targets controlled by different Methuselahs and be undirected). Is there some wording in the action's text that can explain why the card itself is not a target?

[ quoted text not captured ] Just the same thing that has always led to Society of Leopold's function as a (D) action -- obvoiusness, I suppose.

On 15 Mar 2006 19:57:37 -0800, "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> > > I play Shadow of Taint to attempt to move a Fame played by my predator >> > > on a vampire controlled a third Methuselah : is the action undirected ? >> > > Or is the action directed at that third Methuselah ? >> > Directed at that third Methuselah. Like moving a Society of Leopold. >> Just nitpicking: this means that the card to move is not a target of the >> action (otherwise the action would have two targets controlled by >> different Methuselahs and be undirected). Is there some wording in the >> action's text that can explain why the card itself is not a target? >Just the same thing that has always led to Society of Leopold's >function as a (D) action -- obvoiusness, I suppose. Shadow of Taint cannot be played on a minion controlled by another player. Card text. "on an ally in your ready region" and "on a vampire in your ready region" You control the minions in your ready region. While that vampire is one you control, the only possible targets are yourself and the player of the offending/target card. If the card is a minion card, you will control it, and the action is undirected. Example: War Party, Blood Hunt, Sensory Deprivation. If the card is a master card, they still control it, and the action is directed at the person who played the card. Example: Fame, Haven Uncovered, Dementation. Certain minion cards indicate that control remains with the playing Methuselah, in which case Shadow of Taint will again be a directed again. Example: Deep Cover Agent. If you have temporary control of the minion with Temptation or Mind Rape, the same examples above apply. There is never a third party to be involved. Only the player of the target card and the player of Shadow of Taint. Carpe noctem. Lasombra http://www.TheLasombra.com

[ quoted text not captured ] Both The Lasombra's and Charles' points are valid here and may contradict the 'obviousness' of The Society's D action: It would seem that you are targeting the card that the SoT would like to move, which would make all of Lasombra's statements true. If so then what would happen if the vamp playing the SoT target's a card on herself (and to further complicate things, what if the card in question is a Society)? On the contrary, if moving the card is not directed at the card that is being moved, what in the text makes it obvious that this is so (especially if the card is not on the acting minion)?

The Lasombra wrote: > On 15 Mar 2006 19:57:37 -0800, "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >> > > I play Shadow of Taint to attempt to move a Fame played by my predator > >> > > on a vampire controlled a third Methuselah : is the action undirected ? > >> > > Or is the action directed at that third Methuselah ? > > >> > Directed at that third Methuselah. Like moving a Society of Leopold. > > >> Just nitpicking: this means that the card to move is not a target of the > >> action (otherwise the action would have two targets controlled by > >> different Methuselahs and be undirected). Is there some wording in the > >> action's text that can explain why the card itself is not a target? > > >Just the same thing that has always led to Society of Leopold's > >function as a (D) action -- obvoiusness, I suppose. > > Shadow of Taint cannot be played on a minion controlled by another > player. > > Card text. > > "on an ally in your ready region" > and > "on a vampire in your ready region" Note that Shadow of Taint is not played on any minion at all, by card text. It is just an action to move some other card that is on one of your minions. It moves that card to another minion. > You control the minions in your ready region. While that vampire is > one you control, the only possible targets are yourself and the player > of the offending/target card. Another possible target is the minion who is the target of the move. And, as it turns out, this is indeed the actual target. The Shadow of Taint action to move a card on your minion to a minion controlled by Methuselah B is directed at Methuselah B. Just like the Society of Leopold action to move a Society of Leopold card on your minion to a minion controlled by Methuselah B is directed at Methuselah B. Both are true even if Methuselah B is not the controller of the card being moved. > If the card is a minion card, you will control it, and the action is > undirected. Example: War Party, Blood Hunt, Sensory Deprivation. > > If the card is a master card, they still control it, and the action is > directed at the person who played the card. Example: Fame, Haven > Uncovered, Dementation. > > Certain minion cards indicate that control remains with the playing > Methuselah, in which case Shadow of Taint will again be a directed > again. Example: Deep Cover Agent. In all cases (Sensory Deprivation, Fame, Deep Cover Agent), if the card is to be moved to a target minion controlled by another Methuselah, then the action is directed at that Methuselah. > If you have temporary control of the minion with Temptation or Mind > Rape, the same examples above apply. There is never a third party to > be involved. Only the player of the target card and the player of > Shadow of Taint. The controller of the target minion -- the minion that receives the card being moved. See also the action to move Derange (targets the minion receiving the Derange, not the controller of the Derange. Also Enticement (although it makes the distinction clear with parenthetical text).

Robert Scythe wrote: > It would seem > that you are targeting the card that the SoT would like to move, which > would make all of Lasombra's statements true. Perhaps. But in fact you are targeting the recipient. The target minion. >If so then what would > happen if the vamp playing the SoT target's a card on herself (and to > further complicate things, what if the card in question is a Society)? No complication. The action is directed at the recipient of the moved card. > On the contrary, if moving the card is not directed at the card that is > being moved, what in the text makes it obvious that this is so > (especially if the card is not on the acting minion)? The same text (probably just inherent obviousness) that makes the action to move Society of Leopold, Derange, or even Ghoul Messenger target the recipient. That is, the target of an action to give something away is directed at the recipient of the gift. The target of an action to take something from someone else to yourself (stealing, although not necessarily involving a change of control in this case) is directed at the thing being stolen. The target of an action to remove something (burned or removed from the game) is directed at the thing being removed.