rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Secure Haven CSV/cardlist.txt wording

6 messages from 4 participants · 09 October 2010
original thread on Google Groups

Obtenebration

I was pursuing a totally evil thought of Secure Haven + Pentex (that doesn't work for obvious reasons) when I came across this in ARDB. The cardlist.txt also mirrors the wording. Name: Secure Haven [DS:C2, FN:PS, CE:PM, Anarchs:PAB, Third:PM, LotN:PS] Cardtype: Master Cost: 1 pool Master: unique location. Haven. Put this card on a minion you control. This minion cannot be -{the target of other Methuselahs' actions}-. Any Methuselah burns an additional pool when playing master cards on (or that target) this minion. Burn this card if this minion enters torpor. A minion may have only one haven. Artist: Edward Beard, Jr.; Katie McCaskill "This minion cannot be -{the target of other Methuselahs' actions}-." Shouldn't that be "...other minion's actions..." as Methuselah's don't have actions? This also seems to imply your own minions would be able to take actions that target the Secure Haven'ed vampire.

The Lasombra

On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 18:06:01 -0700 (PDT), Obtenebration wrote: >"This minion cannot be -{the target of other Methuselahs' actions}-." >Shouldn't that be "...other minion's actions..." as Methuselah's don't >have actions? It should be "other Methuselah's minion's actions. > This also seems to imply your own minions would be able >to take actions that target the Secure Haven'ed vampire. They can. Only 'directed' actions are prohibited, and actions that target things you control are not 'directed' at another player.

Jozxyqk

[ quoted text not captured ] It means "actions by minions controlled by other Methuselahs". Your own minions _can_ take actions that target your own secure haven'ed minion. That held true under the old definition for (D) actions (actions "Directed" at your own stuff are "Undirected") as well. The correction is just a reflection of the new definition for (D) actions; Now, an action that targets multiple Methuselahs is "directed", when it used to not be, so now your Secure Havened guy is immune to it.

LSJ

On Oct 8, 9:16 pm, Jozxyqk <jfeue...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote: > Obtenebration <pa...@obtenebration.org> wrote: > > I was pursuing a totally evil thought of Secure Haven + Pentex (that > > doesn't work for obvious reasons) when I came across this in ARDB. > > The cardlist.txt also mirrors the wording. > > Name: Secure Haven > > [DS:C2, FN:PS, CE:PM, Anarchs:PAB, Third:PM, LotN:PS] > > Cardtype: Master > > Cost: 1 pool > > Master: unique location. Haven. > > Put this card on a minion you control. This minion cannot be -{the > > target of other Methuselahs' actions}-. Any Methuselah burns an > > additional pool when playing master cards on (or that target) this > > minion. Burn this card if this minion enters torpor. A minion may have > > only one haven. > > Artist: Edward Beard, Jr.; Katie McCaskill > > "This minion cannot be -{the target of other Methuselahs' actions}-." > > Shouldn't that be "...other minion's actions..." as Methuselah's don't > > have actions? This also seems to imply your own minions would be able > > to take actions that target the Secure Haven'ed vampire. > > It means "actions by minions controlled by other Methuselahs". Correct (the card text is correct). > Your own minions _can_ take actions that target your own secure haven'ed > minion. > > That held true under the old definition for (D) actions (actions "Directed" > at your own stuff are "Undirected") as well. > > The correction is just a reflection of the new definition for (D) actions; > Now, an action that targets multiple Methuselahs is "directed", when it used > to not be, so now your Secure Havened guy is immune to it. Correct.

Obtenebration

On Oct 8, 6:21 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > On Oct 8, 9:16 pm, Jozxyqk <jfeue...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > Obtenebration <pa...@obtenebration.org> wrote: > > > I was pursuing a totally evil thought of Secure Haven + Pentex (that > > > doesn't work for obvious reasons) when I came across this in ARDB. > > > The cardlist.txt also mirrors the wording. > > > Name: Secure Haven > > > [DS:C2, FN:PS, CE:PM, Anarchs:PAB, Third:PM, LotN:PS] > > > Cardtype: Master > > > Cost: 1 pool > > > Master: unique location. Haven. > > > Put this card on a minion you control. This minion cannot be -{the > > > target of other Methuselahs' actions}-. Any Methuselah burns an > > > additional pool when playing master cards on (or that target) this > > > minion. Burn this card if this minion enters torpor. A minion may have > > > only one haven. > > > Artist: Edward Beard, Jr.; Katie McCaskill > > > "This minion cannot be -{the target of other Methuselahs' actions}-." > > > Shouldn't that be "...other minion's actions..." as Methuselah's don't > > > have actions? This also seems to imply your own minions would be able > > > to take actions that target the Secure Haven'ed vampire. > > > It means "actions by minions controlled by other Methuselahs". > > Correct (the card text is correct). Was wondering about this, as I didn't remember ever having an issue with the card's text itself. Unfortunately I'd have a hard time explaining why I have 5 large boxes of cards on my desk at work. > > > Your own minions _can_ take actions that target your own secure haven'ed > > minion. > > > That held true under the old definition for (D) actions (actions "Directed" > > at your own stuff are "Undirected") as well. > > > The correction is just a reflection of the new definition for (D) actions; > > Now, an action that targets multiple Methuselahs is "directed", when it used > > to not be, so now your Secure Havened guy is immune to it. > > Correct.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Well directed or undirected shouldn't matter right, it's just looking to see if the minion is a target? Horseshoes played at a minion you control is an undirected action that targets a minion you control.

Jozxyqk

Obtenebration <pa...@obtenebration.org> wrote: > Well directed or undirected shouldn't matter right, it's just looking > to see if the minion is a target? Horseshoes played at a minion you > control is an undirected action that targets a minion you control. It has to do with old rules vs. new rules. Under the old rules, a Directed action was an action that targeted a single Methuselah other than the acting minion's controller. An action that was typically Directed, but targeted one's own minion, was always Undirected. You could always target your own Secure Havened minion with otherwise-directed actions (such as Horseshoes). An action that targeted minions/cards/pool of multiple Methuselahs was always Undirected, and wasn't considered to be "targeting" anything. The main thing that changed with the new definition of Directed Actions is that last bit. An action that targets multiple other Methuselahs is now considered Directed. In order to clear up the ambiguity altogether, Scott started updating older cards' texts to reflect the new definition of Directed Action without using the term Directed Action or the (D) symbol.