Vampires entering play: triggered effects and contesting

DJHedgehog wrote:

jamesatzephyr wrote: If you think that cards can only do things that are defined in the rulebook, you are playing the wrong game.

Wow. Just wow. Add this to your "irrelevant" comment

I'm confused as to why you're upset that I'm pointing out that the central issue is that "enters play" and "as played" follow similar principles. It doesn't matter whether the rulebook says "moved" or "played" or "placed" or "put", because you can "enter play" in both ways - it is irrelevant which term is used, because you can enter play in both ways.

DJHedgehog wrote: and I can see why you're the perfect advocate for this game.

Pointing out that the Golden Rule for Cards is presented as the most important rule - the Golden Rule! - for V:TES means that anyone saying things don't exist because they're not in the rulebook is fundamentally wrong. V:TES's golden rule is that things that aren't in the rulebook can, do and will exist.

I can totally understand that people like games where only certain things can happen that are codified in a complete framework of rules and terminology, and that all cards must fit in - no card (or miniature, or whatever) not fitting that framework can exist. But that game is not V:TES. V:TES's cards, from the very start of the game and from V:TES's most important rule - go beyond the rulebook. To cite something not being in the rulebook as being a reason for why it cannot happen or exist is, at the most fundamental level of the game, wrong.

I think he suggesting that a flippant attitude to wanting clean rules is not helpful. Players just want to understand how the game functions and not look up a bunch of rulings all the time.

New vtes card
Name: Yessir
Text: 40% of the time it works every time

Golden rule says … yes

Mewcat wrote: I think he suggesting that a flippant attitude to wanting clean rules is not helpful.

I'm not being flippant, in any way. I'm saying that the line of thought around whether "enters play" only triggers with a "move" or a "put" or a "place" or a "transfer" or a "flip" or whatever, because Ankha drew the clear analogy with library cards being played, isn't relevant. If a cards move from not being in play to being in play, it enters play - whether that's from your uncontrolled region to your ready region via transfers, or via Illusions of the Kindred, or via Chain of Command.

Mewcat wrote: Players just want to understand how the game functions

That's why I explained how it works.

Let's look at this hypothetical response.

It is indeed troubling that the rulebook and the detailed play summary don't put us on firm ground to answer these questions ourselves. Ideally this would get cleaned up but the resources don't exist, I fear. A card entering play region from hand or uncontrolled region is considered played.

Mewcat wrote: It is indeed troubling that the rulebook and the detailed play summary don't put us on firm ground to answer these questions ourselves.

I wouldn't say this, because I don't find this troubling. V:TES cards use the normal meaning of English words to do all sorts of things that aren't defined in the detailed play summary or rulebook. That this can happen is a fundamental norm in V:TES.

The detailed play summary it explains many of the obvious timing windows that occur in the game. It certainly doesn't cover everything that can occur - it is a summary. The point about the meaning of "enters play" is difficult to put into that, because crypt cards can "enter play" at a wide variety of times in the game.

Mewcat wrote: Ideally this would get cleaned up but the resources don't exist, I fear. A card entering play region from hand or uncontrolled region is considered played.

When the issue at hands is what "enters play" means, you're answering a different question. Whether Anarch Convert can trigger, or Nana's in-play effect takes effect before being contested etc., isn't about whether something is "considered played" or not. It's about what "enters play" means. You haven't explained what "entering play" means - just that if it enters play, it is considered played.

"When the issue at hands is what "enters play" means, you're answering a different question. Whether Anarch Convert can trigger, or Nana's in-play effect takes effect before being contested etc., isn't about whether something is "considered played" or not. It's about what "enters play" means. You haven't explained what "entering play" means - just that if it enters play, it is considered played."

Read that non-sense wall of text and explain how anyone is supposed to understand the spaghetti rules that LSJ shit out through poor card design and templating.

Things should work a certain way and in a consistent fashion. Let's look at Sonja Blue:
"...if Sonja leaves play, remove her from the game."
So she moves to the ready region during my influence I gain 4. Based on your explanation, she definitely "enters play" and would trigger any text during that window that would apply, and then leaves play to become contested. This would, in my mind, mean that both copies of Sonja blue are removed from the game. BUT WAIT! It turns out that my copy never entered play and only the second copy did so I keep my copy (this is the LSJ ruling).

Nothing on the card would indicate this is the case. No "golden rule" text to override the rules of the game. Just super shitty rulings on poorly created cards and instead of anyone advocating for fixing the game you're here talking down to people who just want the game to make sense.