Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Foul Attitude

  1. #1

    Foul Attitude

    088-tn-preview.jpg

    Am I able to play this E if I do not have one of the specified attacks in hand? Can I choose NOT to reveal one of the specified cards? Would I have to do anything to show proof that I do not have one of the cards if I say I don't?
    ~Learn your rules, you better learn your rules,
    If you don't, you'll be eaten in your sleep~


    Arkansas Regionals 2012 Top 8
    Arkansas PTC 2013 Top 4
    Arkansas PTC 2017 Champ

  2. #2
    Senior Member dutpotd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    6,332
    Quote Originally Posted by JavelinChimera View Post
    088-tn-preview.jpg

    Am I able to play this E if I do not have one of the specified attacks in hand? Can I choose NOT to reveal one of the specified cards? Would I have to do anything to show proof that I do not have one of the cards if I say I don't?
    You are always able to pay cost, unless there is a restriction to playing the ability. So yes you can E destroy and play the ability.

    You are then required to resolve as much as you can. There is no choice involved.

    The rulebook as it is currently doesn't deal with the rest of your questions in a satisfactory way so we would move to precedent-based ruling and how the judge decides to rule it. Ideally the LGR can get an update in this area.

    Based on the italics, if you are found to choose not to (but could have) - then you would in fact be cheating.

    There are two solutions:

    1. If the rules people decide this is an isolated case the card receives a functional errata 'you may...'

    2. If the rules peoples decide to update the LGR, there are a few ways to go - likely something like this though.

    When asked by a game instruction to reveal card name or type X from a hidden zone, you may choose not to if you are the controller of the effect. If you are not the controller of the effect you must reveal all cards from the hidden zone.

    Honestly, I think functional errata to 'you may reveal' is best.
    "No, no, not by the hair on my chinny chin Chin."

  3. #3
    This is now covered by the 0.7 LGR, so all good!
    ~Learn your rules, you better learn your rules,
    If you don't, you'll be eaten in your sleep~


    Arkansas Regionals 2012 Top 8
    Arkansas PTC 2013 Top 4
    Arkansas PTC 2017 Champ

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO