|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 5:49PM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Jan 19, 2003
|
forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t...
Thanks!
Both Extort and the rules for Extort have a game function, and you know it.
No one is claiming that extort has no game function. It's the reminder text of extort that has no game function.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 04, 2013 - 10:06PM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Nov 16, 2007
|
No one is claiming that extort has no game function.
KyCygni did. He said the same logic that concluded the text that contained the symbol had no game function applied to Extort. Said text is the rules, and the rules do have a game function.
It's the reminder text of extort that has no game function.
The reminder text of Crypt Ghast, you mean. We know the reminder text of cards doesn't matter. We're talking about whether Extort's symbol matters.
Saying it doesn't matter because it doesn't matter for Charmed Pendant  is an invalid argument. The situation is quite different.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 05, 2013 - 4:52AM
#23
|
|
|
That's completely false. It's even an outright lie, I dare say. Both Extort and the rules for Extort have a game function, and you know it.
We're not talking about the rules text for Extort, we're talking about the reminder text in the card's text box.
Like all other italicised text in a card's text box - flavour text and ability words - reminder text has no rules meaning whatsoever.
207.2. The text box may also contain italicized text that has no game function.
207.2a Reminder text is italicized text within parentheses that summarizes a rule that applies to that card. It usually appears on the same line as the ability it’s relevant to, but it may appear on its own line if it applies to an aspect of the card other than an ability.
207.2b Flavor text is italicized text that, like the illustration, adds artistic appeal to the game. It appears below the rules text. 207.2c An ability word appears in italics at the beginning of some abilities. Ability words are similar to keywords in that they tie together cards that have similar functionality, but they have no special rules meaning and no individual entries in the Comprehensive Rules. The ability words are channel, chroma, domain, fateful hour, grandeur, hellbent, imprint, join forces, kinship, landfall, metalcraft, morbid, radiance, sweep, and threshold.
The fact is that, ath the moment, the card's rules text is considered to be the keyword, and not the CR definition attached to that keyword. This is why you can't Mind Bend  the colour word on Fear  - because it doesn't have one.
Finally, we don't have the CR definition of Extort yet, so we can't be sure whether the mana symbol appears in the rules definition of Extort.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 05, 2013 - 7:28PM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Jan 24, 2011
|
Interestingly, Reach is a keyword with a function but with no rules meaning (they define it anyway, but they don't have to), while Flying and Pseudoflying  have identical rules text but are functionally different.
Rules Advisor Please autocard: [c ]Disenchant[/c ] = Disenchant  .
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 05, 2013 - 7:40PM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Nov 16, 2007
|
Like all other italicised text in a card's text box - flavour text and ability words - reminder text has no rules meaning whatsoever.
I know. I said as much earlier.
That's completely false. It's even an outright lie, I dare say. Both Extort and the rules for Extort have a game function, and you know it.
We're not talking about the rules text for Extort, we're talking about the reminder text in the card's text box.
So for the third time, that's not true; there are issues with Crypt Ghast not present in Charmed Pendant. Now, did you actually want to add anything to the discussion?
Finally, we don't have the CR definition of Extort yet, so we can't be sure whether the mana symbol appears in the rules definition of Extort.
Poppycock. The symbol will necessarilly appear in the definition. Furthermore, not knowing the rule is irrelevant. We can discuss the consequences of the presense of the symbol in the rule whether it actually apears there or not.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 05, 2013 - 7:51PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Jan 19, 2003
|
EDIT: wow, ikegami, you edited your post about a half dozen times so far. I am responding to the part where you said reminder text has no effect.
Excellent we all agree that reminder text doesn't matter. Therefore, crypt ghast's color identity is black and only black (which is what the EDH rules council said too).
I think that about covers it, unless we want to discuss whether the rules should be changed.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 05, 2013 - 7:53PM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Nov 16, 2007
|
Excellent we all agree that reminder text doesn't matter. Therefore, crypt ghast's color identity is black and only black (which is what the EDH rules council said too).
Not at all. As I said before, it completely depends on whether there's a rule added that considers Extort's definitons's symbol or not. (yay, back to where we were in post #8!)
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 05, 2013 - 7:55PM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Jan 19, 2003
|
Not at all. As I said before, it completely depends on whether there's a rule added that considers Extort's definitons's symbol or not.
We know of no such rule, and the EDH rules council, which has been advising Matt Tabak, also knows of no such rule.
Would you like to discuss whether it's a good idea to add such a rule?
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 05, 2013 - 7:57PM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Sep 17, 2005
|
Not at all. As I said before, it completely depends on whether there's a rule added that considers Extort's definitons's symbol or not.
We know of no such rule, and the EDH rules council, which has been advising Matt Tabak, also knows of no such rule.
Would you like to discuss whether it's a good idea to add such a rule?
If you do want to discuss rules changes, please start a thread in RT&T. I think the current discussion has gone beyond RQ&A, and we already have the answer to the question that started the thread.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 05, 2013 - 8:00PM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Nov 16, 2007
|
We know of no such rule
You mean "We don't know there will be such a rule", which is as true as "We don't know that there won't be one."
I do think it less likely than when I thought there was no precedent for Keyword Abilities being different than the abilities they represent (when they represent abilities).
Would you like to discuss whether it's a good idea to add such a rule?
Not really. Rule theory is for another forum, but I won't complain if you state your opinion.
|
|
|
