A technical question for rulings completeness.
There are a few rulings on changes of sect, especially the ones around Writ of Acceptance , see [ANK 20190619] .
The current state of affairs, I think, is that you need to distinguish permanent changes from temporary changes. The temporary ones always overlay the permanent ones, and between two effects of the same category, the most recent one takes precedence. Go Anarch or the default rulebook action to go anarch, for example, exert a permanent change, that gets overridden by Writ of Acceptance if it is on the vampire to start with (potentially burning Go Anarch immediately).
This got complicated (or simplified) by [RTR 20201130] that states that a clan change no longer operates a switch to the "default sect", since clans have no default sects anymore. So most of the Clan Impersonation examples from the past don't work anymore ☺︎
But, Clan Impersonation is still a temporary clan change, same as Derange for example. If both of them are on a vampire, the most recent to arrive gets precedence because they're both temporary.
This begs the following questions: Are Barbaro Lucchese 's and Qadir ul-Ghani 's abilities permanent clan changes? Meaning if they have a Derange on them, using their ability does not remove the Malkavian overlay, but changes the underlying clan?
I would guess yes. What about Revelation of the Sire ? Is it a temporary change or a permanent one? What happens if the Caitiff had a Derange ?
If it's temporary, it override the Derange. If it's permanent, the temporary Derange overlay stays on top. Even without a Derange, what happens if the Revelation is removed, for example by Smear Campaign ?
If it's a temporary clan change, it should go away if the card goes away. If it's a permanent change (like Go Anarch), the clan stays and the vampire only loses the bonus capacity when the card is removed, I guess (like Praxis titles with capacity bonus)? Would it make sense to keep the clan and lose the capacity?
Well hm, ok but that does not really answer my questions. I'll try clearer and more explicit versions:
If Barbaro Lucchese has a Derange on him making him Malkavian and he uses his ability to become Tremere Antitribu, does he stay Malkavian or become Tremere Antitribu? If a Caitiff has a Derange on him making him Malkavian and a Revelation of the Sire is played to make him Ventrue, does he stay Malkavian or become Ventrue? If a Caitiff has a Revelation of the Sire on him making him Ventrue, what happens if it gets destroyed by a Smear Campaign? Does he stay Ventrue or become Caitiff again? Does he lose the capacity bonus?
Here bleow is LSJ´s definition of whether a card imposes a permanent change or a temporary (layered) one which to me seems to be having contradictions when Derange was ruled to function similar to Clan Impersonation [PIB 20110807] [ANK 20200415]
> LSJ wrote:
> > > > So what is the criteria for certain library cards being "temporary"
> > > > and others being "permanent"? It would be nice to know how you
> > > > differentiate the two, in case a similar situation comes up while
> > > > someone is judging a tournament, or in casual play where one cannot
> > > > simply ask on the news group.
> >
> > > Go Anarch implies its function by removing itself when sect changes.
> >
> > > Which others are causing confusion?
> >
> > It's not a question about specific cards. The whole point is to
> > understand how the rules are implemented. Every person who plays this
> > game should be able to answer these sorts of questions without having
> > to ask a question on a Google forum. The rules for understanding how
> > cards interact with one another should be clear in the official
> > rulebook.
> >
> > So, it seems, your criteria for whether a card carries a "temporary"
> > change or a "permanent" change is whether it has some sort of clause
> > allowing for its removal?
> No, not "some sort", but a very specific sort: that is, if the thing
> the card sets is changed, remove the card. The sort of thing that
> makes the card work like Title cards. (Titles also do not layer.)
>
groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/kGKWcs3k6vI/m/OSnx93gGyIsJ
Does this mean that the above is reversed and we don´t have a clear definition of what makes a permanent effect vs a temporary (layered) effect ???
Card Texts
Clan Impersonation
Cardtype: Action
Cost: 2 blood
+1 stealth action.
Choose a clan and put this card on the acting vampire. This vampire is considered to be of the chosen clan instead of his or her original clan (if any). This vampire can burn this card as an action.
Derange
Cardtype: Action
Clan: Malkavian/Malkavian antitribu
This is a +1 stealth action.
Put this card on a younger vampire. The vampire with this card is considered to be the same clan as the acting vampire. The vampire with this card does not unlock as normal. During his or her controller's unlock phase, he or she may burn 1 blood to unlock. The vampire with this card may move it to another vampire as a action. This card cannot be placed on a Malkavian or Malkavian antitribu.
Barbaro Lucchese
Cardtype: Vampire
Clan: Baali
Group: 3
Capacity: 5
Discipline: dai obf pre tha
Independent: Barbaro can change his clan to Tremere antitribu as +1 stealth action. He can put 1 taint counter on a minion as a +1 stealth action; if the minion has 2 taint counters, burn them and the minion becomes infernal. Infernal.
Qadir ul-Ghani
Cardtype: Vampire
Clan: Banu Haqim
Group: 2
Capacity: 9
Discipline: nec tha CEL OBF QUI
Independent: Qadir can change his clan to any other clan as a +1 stealth action that costs 1 blood. Blood cursed. +1 bleed.
Revelation of the Sire
Cardtype: Action
Cost: 1 blood
Requires a ready non-sterile vampire who is not Caitiff.
Put this card on a younger Caitiff. The vampire with this card is now considered to be a member of the same clan as the acting vampire. He or she is no longer considered Caitiff. His or her capacity increases by 1.
Writ of Acceptance
Cardtype: Equipment
Equipment.
The vampire with this equipment is considered a Camarilla vampire.
Go Anarch
Cardtype: Action
+1 stealth action. Requires a ready non-titled, non-{A}narch vampire.
Put this card on the acting vampire and unlock this vampire. This vampire is considered {Anarch}. If this vampire changes sects, burn this card.
Smear Campaign
Cardtype: Master
Cost: 1 pool
Unique master. Requires a ready anarch.
Put this card in play. Lock during your unlock phase and choose a locked non-anarch minion controlled by your predator or prey to burn a card on that minion. Cannot be used to burn an equipment or a retainer. That minion's controller then takes control of this card.
> lip wrote:
> Are Barbaro Lucchese 's and Qadir ul-Ghani 's abilities permanent clan changes?
>
Yes, due to the way it is written ("change the clan").
> lip wrote:
> Meaning if they have a Derange on them, using their ability does not remove the Malkavian overlay, but changes the underlying clan?
>
Correct.
> lip wrote:
> What about Revelation of the Sire ?
> Is it a temporary change or a permanent one?
>
Temporary, due to the way it is written ("is considered...")
> lip wrote:
> What happens if the Caitiff had a Derange ?
>
It depends which one was played last (the last change takes precedence). If Derange was played after Revelation of the Sire, the vampire is Malkavian or !Malkavian. Otherwise, the vampire is considered to be of the clan of the sire.
groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/kQpR-Cn9nW0/m/0cNMARSt9PIJ
> lip wrote:
> Even without a Derange, what happens if the Revelation is removed, for example by Smear Campaign ?
> If it's a temporary clan change, it should go away if the card goes away.
>
Correct. The underlying clan becomes effective again.
> lip wrote:
> If Barbaro Lucchese has a Derange on him making him Malkavian and he uses his ability to become Tremere Antitribu, does he stay Malkavian or become Tremere Antitribu?
>
He stays Malkavian. His underlying clan changes to Tremere Antitribu (the clan he'll become part again once the Derange is gone).
> lip wrote:
> If a Caitiff has a Derange on him making him Malkavian and a Revelation of the Sire is played to make him Ventrue, does he stay Malkavian or become Ventrue?
>
He becomes Ventrue, since Revelation of the Sire was played last.
> lip wrote:
> If a Caitiff has a Revelation of the Sire on him making him Ventrue, what happens if it gets destroyed by a Smear Campaign? Does he stay Ventrue or become Caitiff again? Does he lose the capacity bonus?
>
He reverts to his underlying clan, that is Caitiff, and lose his capacity increase (granted by the card).
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
> inm8 wrote:
> Here bleow is LSJ´s definition of whether a card imposes a permanent change or a temporary (layered) one which to me seems to be having contradictions when Derange was ruled to function similar to Clan Impersonation [PIB 20110807] [ANK 20200415]
>
> > LSJ wrote:
> > > > > So what is the criteria for certain library cards being "temporary"
> > > > > and others being "permanent"? It would be nice to know how you
> > > > > differentiate the two, in case a similar situation comes up while
> > > > > someone is judging a tournament, or in casual play where one cannot
> > > > > simply ask on the news group.
> > >
> > > > Go Anarch implies its function by removing itself when sect changes.
> > >
> > > > Which others are causing confusion?
> > >
> > > It's not a question about specific cards. The whole point is to
> > > understand how the rules are implemented. Every person who plays this
> > > game should be able to answer these sorts of questions without having
> > > to ask a question on a Google forum. The rules for understanding how
> > > cards interact with one another should be clear in the official
> > > rulebook.
> > >
> > > So, it seems, your criteria for whether a card carries a "temporary"
> > > change or a "permanent" change is whether it has some sort of clause
> > > allowing for its removal?
> > No, not "some sort", but a very specific sort: that is, if the thing
> > the card sets is changed, remove the card. The sort of thing that
> > makes the card work like Title cards. (Titles also do not layer.)
> >
> groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/kGKWcs3k6vI/m/OSnx93gGyIsJ
>
> Does this mean that the above is reversed
>
There are so many things above, I don't know exactly what you are refering to.
The clarification about Valerius vs Infernal Insurgent is correct.
> inm8 wrote:
> and we don´t have a clear definition of what makes a permanent effect vs a temporary (layered) effect ???
>
"changes clan", "becomes"... are permanent effects.
"the attached/this vampire is...", "is considered..." etc. are temporary effects (active as long as the card granting the effect is there).
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
> Ankha wrote:
>
> > inm8 wrote:
> > Here bleow is LSJ´s definition of whether a card imposes a permanent change or a temporary (layered) one which to me seems to be having contradictions when Derange was ruled to function similar to Clan Impersonation [PIB 20110807] [ANK 20200415]
> >
> > > LSJ wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > No, not "some sort", but a very specific sort: that is, if the thing
> > > the card sets is changed, remove the card. The sort of thing that
> > > makes the card work like Title cards. (Titles also do not layer.)
> > >
> > groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/kGKWcs3k6vI/m/OSnx93gGyIsJ
> >
> > Does this mean that the above is reversed
> >
> There are so many things above, I don't know exactly what you are refering to.
> The clarification about Valerius vs Infernal Insurgent is correct.
>
> > inm8 wrote:
> > and we don´t have a clear definition of what makes a permanent effect vs a temporary (layered) effect ???
> >
> "changes clan", "becomes"... are permanent effects.
> "the attached/this vampire is...", "is considered..." etc. are temporary effects (active as long as the card granting the effect is there).
>
I think it would be good if the linked rulings thread was read in full to get the whole picture.
Starting from here: groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/kGKWcs3k6vI/m/d0-6NhgEylsJ
One of the rulings there talks about eg Go Anarch being a permanent change and not as you are stating with the provided definition that it is temporary.
groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/kGKWcs3k6vI/m/cOJHf2LFppoJ
text set to bold by me to highlight
Current text:
Name: Go Anarch
[Anarchs:C2/PAB4]
Cardtype: Action
+1 stealth action. Requires a ready non-titled, non-{A}narch vampire.
Put this card on the acting vampire and unlock this vampire. This vampire is considered {Anarch}. If this vampire changes sects, burn this card.
Text at the time of the ruling above:
Go Anarch
Type: Action
Requires: non-anarch,non-titled
+1 stealth action. Requires a ready non-titled, non-anarch vampire.
Put this card on the acting vampire and untap this vampire. This
vampire is considered anarch (and independent). If this vampire
changes sects, burn this card.
> Ankha wrote:
>
> > lip wrote:
> > If a Caitiff has a Derange on him making him Malkavian and a Revelation of the Sire is played to make him Ventrue, does he stay Malkavian or become Ventrue?
> >
> He becomes Ventrue, since Revelation of the Sire was played last.
>
The principle stands (the latest temporary effect dominates), but I'd like to point out that these particular temporary effects can't occur in this order. Revelation of the Sire can't be played on the now-Malkavian vampire.
> Beatrice wrote:
>
> > Ankha wrote:
> >
> > > lip wrote:
> > > If a Caitiff has a Derange on him making him Malkavian and a Revelation of the Sire is played to make him Ventrue, does he stay Malkavian or become Ventrue?
> > >
> > He becomes Ventrue, since Revelation of the Sire was played last.
> >
> The principle stands (the latest temporary effect dominates), but I'd like to point out that these particular temporary effects can't occur in this order. Revelation of the Sire can't be played on the now-Malkavian vampire.
>
Right, lip's scenario is not valid.
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
> inm8 wrote:
> One of the rulings there talks about eg Go Anarch being a permanent change and not as you are stating with the provided definition that it is temporary.
>
Right, here is an ERRATA on Galaric's Legacy and Go Anarch:
Galaric's Legacy
Master
{}Trifle.
Put this card on a ready non-titled, non-{A}narch vampire you control {to make them Anarch}. If this vampire changes sects, burn this card.
Go Anarch
Action
+1 stealth action. Requires a ready non-titled, non-{A}narch vampire.
Put this card on the acting vampire{; they become Anarch and unlock.} If this vampire changes sects, burn this card.
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
The errata are all good for the purpose of clarity for those cards, but what about the ruling providing the definition of what constitutes a permanent vs temporary change... the one provided by you Ankha isnt aligned with the one given by LSJ so are you reversing the latter?
> Ankha wrote:
> "changes clan", "becomes"... are permanent effects.
> "the attached/this vampire is...", "is considered..." etc. are temporary effects (active as long as the card granting the effect is there).
>
vs.
>
> LSJ wrote:
> if the thing the card sets is changed, remove the card. The sort of thing that makes the card work like Title cards. (Titles also do not layer.)
>