Jump to content
xbeaker

Restringuntus and Collar of Subordination

Recommended Posts

This came up in a game at PAX this weekend.  We even threw the TO for a loop!  I was playing Dis, Brobnar, Shadow.  My Opponent Dis, Brobnar, Sanctum.  

I played Restringuntus (CotA 094) "PLAY: Choose a House, your opponent cannot call that as their active house until Restringuntus leave play."  I choose Brobnar (important because we were both playing decks with house Bobnar.) My opponent used Collar of Subordination (CotA 105) Upgrade - "You control this creature" on Restringuntus.  The question was:

A. Does my opponent get to reassign the house and use it against me? (this was quickly determined to be a definite no)
B. Does the effect of Restringuntus apply to me, now that I am the opponent of of the controller of Restringuntus?  

Based on our discussions with the TO we decided that the effect of Restringuntus was established at the point it was played, since it was a "PLAY:" effect.  And that as my opponent was deemed the target at that time, the target does not change even though control of the creature did.  Furthermore, as Restringuntus never left play and only changed control, the effect persisted.

Of side note my opponent was very gracious during all of this.  We both immediately saw that this was a complex and ill-defined interaction.  There was never any argument, just us both going "Huh.. so how does this work?" In the end based on our decision that the change of possession of Restringuntus did not change the target, I allowed my opponent to choose a new target for his Collar of Subordination. 

So I am hoping to get and official ruling on this from FFG.  I hope we did it right as even the TO was not 100% sure.  But I figured I'd also get the community opinion as well.

Incidentally, I ultimately lost the game anyway. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s a play ability, that creates an effect until the creature leaves play. Changing control does not constitute leaves play, so the effect is still ongoing, neither does changing control “play” Restringuntus, so a new version (as it were) of his play effect is not created. I’d say your TO did a good job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having said that, if you’re really in a jam you could still take control of it and next turn choose House Dis and fight a creature with it to make sure it leaves play. Just make sure you’re not fighting an elusive creature (or Shadow Self etc) 😉.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, twinstarbmc said:

Under normal circumstances, does "your opponent" change when a creature changes control? What's the point of reference for "your" - owner, or controller?

controller. but the effect was already "activated" when the owner played the card originally, that effect doesn't "change controller"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, twinstarbmc said:

Under normal circumstances, does "your opponent" change when a creature changes control? What's the point of reference for "your" - owner, or controller?

Yeah, this was the only sticking point.  Since we both had Brobnar, which was the restricted house, my opponent thought it would restrict me from picking that house. As the house was clearly locked, but he thought the perspective of 'opponent' had now changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, xbeaker said:

Yeah, this was the only sticking point.  Since we both had Brobnar, which was the restricted house, my opponent thought it would restrict me from picking that house. As the house was clearly locked, but he thought the perspective of 'opponent' had now changed.

The perspective of opponent definitely changes...  but has zero impact on abilities that have occurred earlier in the game.  Play abilities only trigger when the card is played.  You would never re-trigger or re-evalutate the effect later in the game.  If player A plays the card and the effect says player B can't use Brobnar next turn...  that's it.  Player B can't use Brobnar.  Doesn't matter what else happens.  The creature could die almost immediately and player B sill couldn't use Brobnar next turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, KrisWall said:

  Doesn't matter what else happens.  The creature could die almost immediately and player B sill couldn't use Brobnar next turn.

Eehhh...that’s not right. The effect lasts until Restringuntus leaves play

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Palpster said:

Eehhh...that’s not right. The effect lasts until Restringuntus leaves play

Do you have a rules quote for that?  It's not an ongoing effect.  It's a Play effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KrisWall said:

Do you have a rules quote for that?  It's not an ongoing effect.  It's a Play effect.

it's on the card 😕

Play: Choose a house. Your opponent cannot choose that house as their active house until Restringuntus leaves play.

Edited by Poposhka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Poposhka said:

it's on the card 😕

Play: Choose a house. Your opponent cannot choose that house as their active house until Restringuntus leaves play.

Haha

Derp.  Missed that and didn't have the card image in front of me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this question interesting. Restringuntus has an ability that works exactly like a constant ability, but because it isn't actually a constant ability, it does not change target when stolen, but if it was a constant ability, it would. 

If "Your opponent" was on a new line, this would be a very different conversation.

Edited by Revert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting discussion! 😃 

I come from a programming perspective and this is the way I see it. All "Play:" effects triggers at the point when the card is being played and the text ("Play: Choose a house. Your opponent cannot choose the house as their active house until Restringuntus leves play." ) has to be evaluated at that time. So I look at the words "house" and "your opponent" as variables that can contain different values. In this case the word "house" would be a new variable. And it would also be empty until a house is chosen. After the decision is made the variable has gotten a value assigned to it and the word "house" now contains (in this case) Brobnar.

The last part of the text "Your opponent cannot choose that house as their active house until Restringuntus leves play" has an on-going effect. So in other words it's a "while loop" (again in programming terms ;)). While it is true that Restringuntus is in play the effect keeps running.

And now comes the real question (at least for me). Are the words "your opponent" a new and empty variable when the card is played, just like the word "house"? Or are that variable already assigned (in other parts of the code/rules)? I would argue that "your opponent" already has a value when the card is played and that the card does not assign any value to them. The card is simply pointing to "global" variables. So as long as the "while loop" keeps running the card is pointing, like an arrow, to "your opponent". So if another part of the code/rules changes the value of "your opponent" (in this case Collar of Subordination). I would not se it like the "Play:" effect gets re-evaluated or triggered again. It is simply continuing to pointing to the global variables that now have changed. So therefor the effect of the card now applies to the new opponent.

Hehe hope that this makes sense to someone ;) 

Edited by itPet
Just changed ' "your" and "opponent"'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, itPet said:

Very interesting discussion! 😃 

I come from a programming perspective and this is the way I see it. All "Play:" effects triggers at the point when the card is being played and the text ("Play: Choose a house. Your opponent cannot choose the house as their active house until Restringuntus leves play." ) has to be evaluated at that time. So I look at the words "house" and "your opponent" as variables that can contain different values. In this case the word "house" would be a new variable. And it would also be empty until a house is chosen. After the decision is made the variable has gotten a value assigned to it and the word "house" now contains (in this case) Brobnar.

The last part of the text "Your opponent cannot choose that house as their active house until Restringuntus leves play" has an on-going effect. So in other words it's a "while loop" (again in programming terms ;)). While it is true that Restringuntus is in play the effect keeps running.

And now comes the real question (at least for me). Are the words "your opponent" a new and empty variable when the card is played, just like the word "house"? Or are that variable already assigned (in other parts of the code/rules)? I would argue that "your opponent" already has a value when the card is played and that the card does not assign any value to them. The card is simply pointing to "global" variables. So as long as the "while loop" keeps running the card is pointing, like an arrow, to "your opponent". So if another part of the code/rules changes the value of "your opponent" (in this case Collar of Subordination). I would not se it like the "Play:" effect gets re-evaluated or triggered again. It is simply continuing to pointing to the global variables that now have changed. So therefor the effect of the card now applies to the new opponent.

Hehe hope that this makes sense to someone ;) 

I agree with this interpretation and its logic. The only «play» effect is choosing a house, than there's a static effect (as long as the card is in play). If the opponent change he'll be affect by the static effect (this is also how MTG cards work - i.e. Platinium Angel).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/12/2018 at 8:40 AM, itPet said:

Very interesting discussion! 😃 

I come from a programming perspective and this is the way I see it. All "Play:" effects triggers at the point when the card is being played and the text ("Play: Choose a house. Your opponent cannot choose the house as their active house until Restringuntus leves play." ) has to be evaluated at that time. So I look at the words "house" and "your opponent" as variables that can contain different values. In this case the word "house" would be a new variable. And it would also be empty until a house is chosen. After the decision is made the variable has gotten a value assigned to it and the word "house" now contains (in this case) Brobnar.

The last part of the text "Your opponent cannot choose that house as their active house until Restringuntus leves play" has an on-going effect. So in other words it's a "while loop" (again in programming terms ;)). While it is true that Restringuntus is in play the effect keeps running.

And now comes the real question (at least for me). Are the words "your opponent" a new and empty variable when the card is played, just like the word "house"? Or are that variable already assigned (in other parts of the code/rules)? I would argue that "your opponent" already has a value when the card is played and that the card does not assign any value to them. The card is simply pointing to "global" variables. So as long as the "while loop" keeps running the card is pointing, like an arrow, to "your opponent". So if another part of the code/rules changes the value of "your opponent" (in this case Collar of Subordination). I would not se it like the "Play:" effect gets re-evaluated or triggered again. It is simply continuing to pointing to the global variables that now have changed. So therefor the effect of the card now applies to the new opponent.

Hehe hope that this makes sense to someone ;) 

I agree with the logic you have proposed based on your assumptions but I believe your assumptions are in error.  "Your opponent cannot choose the house as their active house until Restringuntus leaves play" is not a static ability it is part of the play ability.  in programming terms, this would be an object creating a function being controlled and run by the player that played the card.  It is not attached to the card.  This simultaneously running function is pointing at the player's opponent and running a while loop that continuously checks for the presence of the original object in the object space called play.  If a person takes control of the object the play effect does not travel with it.  If a player played an action that somehow took control of a persistent effect then i agree opponent would change variable but nothing in the wording of the ability says anything about the current opponent of the owner of Restringuntus that would allow the function to check that variable and thus adjust its own.  Hope that makes sense as I try to stretch your own analogy to fit the situation more realistically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ebucklin said:

I agree with the logic you have proposed based on your assumptions but I believe your assumptions are in error.  "Your opponent cannot choose the house as their active house until Restringuntus leaves play" is not a static ability it is part of the play ability.  in programming terms, this would be an object creating a function being controlled and run by the player that played the card.  It is not attached to the card.  This simultaneously running function is pointing at the player's opponent and running a while loop that continuously checks for the presence of the original object in the object space called play.  If a person takes control of the object the play effect does not travel with it.  If a player played an action that somehow took control of a persistent effect then i agree opponent would change variable but nothing in the wording of the ability says anything about the current opponent of the owner of Restringuntus that would allow the function to check that variable and thus adjust its own.  Hope that makes sense as I try to stretch your own analogy to fit the situation more realistically.

Another programmer :) ! Yes it makes sense. After reading this I'm no loger sure where I stand on this. Thanks for posting. I believe it boils down to ones interpretation about this:

16 minutes ago, Ebucklin said:

 in programming terms, this would be an object creating a function being controlled and run by the player that played the card.  It is not attached to the card.

Is the "function" run by the player or by the card? Hmm... though I'm no loger sure I think I still lean towards that the function is attached to the card. Because this Play: effect is somewhat different from the usual Play: effects. It has (in one way or another) an on-going impact util the card leaves play. And it also seems more logical to me that it is the creature Restringuntus itself that is restricting the opponent (with those cool looking whips of his ;) ) and not the player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, itPet said:

Another programmer :) ! Yes it makes sense. After reading this I'm no loger sure where I stand on this. Thanks for posting. I believe it boils down to ones interpretation about this:

Is the "function" run by the player or by the card? Hmm... though I'm no loger sure I think I still lean towards that the function is attached to the card. Because this Play: effect is somewhat different from the usual Play: effects. It has (in one way or another) an on-going impact util the card leaves play. And it also seems more logical to me that it is the creature Restringuntus itself that is restricting the opponent (with those cool looking whips of his ;) ) and not the player.

There are other play effects that create lingering effects like this.  Just most of them aren't created by creatures but it shouldn't matter, a play effect is a play effect.  For example, library access.  It creates a while loop that constantly checks for the variable turn sequence until the variable reads end of turn.  That function is not run by the card.  The card goes to the discard after the function is created as the card has fully resolved.  The function then continues to do its thing separately.

P.S. other creatures with similar play abilities:

Card image for Harland MindlockCard image for Skippy TimehogCard image for Horseman of WarCard image for Sneklifter

Specifically the horseman's effect doesn't go away if the horseman is killed.  the effect has resolved and the function has begun running.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also a programmer :)  and there is a flaw in your logic...

*/ Set variables
Target = null
House = null
Alive = null
RestringuntusController = null

*/ Player 1 play Restringuntus
PlayRestringuntus(Target,House)
 Target = "Player2"
 House = "Brobnar"
 Alive = true
 RestringuntusController = "Player1"
Do While (Alive)
  BannedHouses(Target) = House
EndDo
BannedHouses(Target) = null
EndProc

PlayCollarOfSub(TargetCard)
TargetCard Controller = "Player 2"
EndProc

The while loop only maintains that the the variables are still in effect.  Not that any of the targets change.  Those are set during the initialization of the procedure and maintained until it stops looping.  The only variable The collar changes is the ownership of the card.

Edited by xbeaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, xbeaker said:

Also a programmer :)  and there is a flaw in your logic...

*/ Set variables
Target = null
House = null
Alive = null
RestringuntusController = null

*/ Player 1 play Restringuntus
PlayRestringuntus(Target,House)
 Target = "Player2"
 House = "Brobnar"
 Alive = true
 RestringuntusController = "Player1"
Do While (Alive)
  BannedHouses(Target) = House
EndDo
BannedHouses(Target) = null
EndProc

PlayCollarOfSub(TargetCard)
TargetCard Controller = "Player 2"
EndProc

The while loop only maintains that the the variables are still in effect.  Not that any of the targets change.  Those are set during the initialization of the procedure and maintained until it stops looping.  The only variable The collar changes is the ownership of the card.

More programmers! :) How dare you question the logic in my code (not serious) ;) I see your point.

 

18 minutes ago, Ebucklin said:

There are other play effects that create lingering effects like this.  Just most of them aren't created by creatures but it shouldn't matter, a play effect is a play effect.  For example, library access.  It creates a while loop that constantly checks for the variable turn sequence until the variable reads end of turn.  That function is not run by the card.  The card goes to the discard after the function is created as the card has fully resolved.  The function then continues to do its thing separately.

P.S. other creatures with similar play abilities:

Card image for Harland MindlockCard image for Skippy TimehogCard image for Horseman of WarCard image for Sneklifter

Specifically the horseman's effect doesn't go away if the horseman is killed.  the effect has resolved and the function has begun running.

Ok, those are some great examples proving your point. I must say you convinced me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2018 at 9:27 AM, xbeaker said:

This came up in a game at PAX this weekend.  We even threw the TO for a loop!  I was playing Dis, Brobnar, Shadow.  My Opponent Dis, Brobnar, Sanctum.  

I played Restringuntus (CotA 094) "PLAY: Choose a House, your opponent cannot call that as their active house until Restringuntus leave play."  I choose Brobnar (important because we were both playing decks with house Bobnar.) My opponent used Collar of Subordination (CotA 105) Upgrade - "You control this creature" on Restringuntus.  The question was:

A. Does my opponent get to reassign the house and use it against me? (this was quickly determined to be a definite no)
B. Does the effect of Restringuntus apply to me, now that I am the opponent of of the controller of Restringuntus?  

Based on our discussions with the TO we decided that the effect of Restringuntus was established at the point it was played, since it was a "PLAY:" effect.  And that as my opponent was deemed the target at that time, the target does not change even though control of the creature did.  Furthermore, as Restringuntus never left play and only changed control, the effect persisted.

Of side note my opponent was very gracious during all of this.  We both immediately saw that this was a complex and ill-defined interaction.  There was never any argument, just us both going "Huh.. so how does this work?" In the end based on our decision that the change of possession of Restringuntus did not change the target, I allowed my opponent to choose a new target for his Collar of Subordination. 

So I am hoping to get and official ruling on this from FFG.  I hope we did it right as even the TO was not 100% sure.  But I figured I'd also get the community opinion as well.

Incidentally, I ultimately lost the game anyway. :) 

A) No. (play effect)

B) Yes. (Owner May change throughout the game, at which point the opponent also changes). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Derrault said:

A) No. (play effect)

B) Yes. (Owner May change throughout the game, at which point the opponent also changes). 

Cards never changer Owner, only control, the person who's deck the card started in Is always the owner, regardless of who controls the card

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×