About Anthelios and Seeds...

Well about the banish thing that several players are discuss, I accept the change (unwillingly) and start to change my decks. However, because of the repercussion of such act why instead of banning Anthelios why not make a simply change in part of the text?

Anthelios, the Red Star
Gehenna. A Methuselah can skip the master phase to exchange a master card in his or her hand for one in his or her ash heap.

Skipping the entirely master phase (not only a master phase action) may balance the card I think since methuselah that use it also will skip all effects on this phase too like Blood Doll, trifle, Path of Evil Revelations, Chantry, Parthenon, Anson and many other effects.

Seeds of Corruption I pretty sure as tournament judge for 12 years how hard is to arbitrate its effect but I think is easy create a unique clarification (collecting all ruling already posted about that) to simplify it.

About Temptation of Greater Power, I don’t have anything to say.

Is just a suggestion not a complain.

The Rules Director has stated that without physical reprints, there will be no errata.
One might argue that rulings are a way of errating something.

There must be a balance for the good of the game and new players using cards that they later find out have different text or work differently, is not positive, imo.
So I agree we should either leave the cards alone or ban them.

Lilith's Blessing is easily fixed, p.e..

Ban anthelios the red Star and create the Anthelios the banned Star with the new text, same for seeds of corruption ban and create the roots of corruption, no real reprints needed!
Temptation could have something similar To golconda, pay x, maybe 3 To cancel the card

Brum wrote: The Rules Director has stated that without physical reprints, there will be no errata.
One might argue that rulings are a way of errating something.

Rulings and errata serve two different functions.

Rulings exist to cope with situations where cards are unclear or ambiguous. Often, this means that the card text might work in one of several ways, and the ruling picks how it works - but within the realms of card text and the current rules, following existing precedent.

Errata says that current card text is wrong in some fashion, and is being changed outright. Anything can happen as the result of errata, because you can (in theory) rewrite text completely. Precedent isn't relevant here, because you can just write brand new card text that circumvents it.

Brum wrote: The Rules Director has stated that without physical reprints, there will be no errata.
One might argue that rulings are a way of errating something.

There must be a balance for the good of the game and new players using cards that they later find out have different text or work differently, is not positive, imo.
So I agree we should either leave the cards alone or ban them.

Lilith's Blessing is easily fixed, p.e..

I know about that stated Brum, but we already need to play with a book with all card changes between the expansions and over the years. When Villein is changed I need to update several card images in lackey and octgn programs database reflecting text changes made by vekn, most of changes are clarifications, improvement to understanding the cards and ballots rulling.

Then if they already did it before I don't know why not do it again instead of ban cards that are largely used by many years.

Sydnelson wrote: Then if they already did it before I don't know why not do it again instead of ban cards that are largely used by many years.

I believe that the Villein errata - and, similarly, the canvassing for Lilith's Blessing errata playtest suggestions - were made in anticipation that POD or DriveThruCCG or whatever would happen, and so the cards would be reprinted with the real text fairly soon.

Reality then worked out differently.