Djinn, cost of hosted programs

[player1895329 0]

Hello!

 

On the card Djinn the second paragraph states:
"The memory costs of hosted programs do not count against your memory limit."

Do this card need errata so that it becomes self-referential and actually states:
"The memory costs of hosted programs on Djinn do not count against your memory limit."

As I understand it as it is written this means I can host, for example, parasite on my opponent's ice and I do not pay any memory cost for it because the parasite is a hosted program, is this a correct interpretation. If not, where can i find the rule stating it is not?

[Khouri 96]

The FAQ document has some additional information on Hosting with Djinn and Parasite mentioned specifically in card clarifications.

 

What Djinn does is give you 3 memory to host programs on it rather than using the memory available from your rig (hence the "memory costs of hosted programs on Djinn").The downside of this is that if Djinn is trashed, all programs hosted on it are also trashed.

 

As parasite is already hosted on another card, it cannot be used with Djinn as a card can only be hosted in one place at a time.

[player1895329 0]

I am aware of that but that was not my question.

I am wondering if there should be errata on the second paragraph on the card as it states that any hosted programs do not cost memory. If the intention is that only cards hosted by Djinn do not cost memory then the card need a errata.

[CommissarFeesh 458]

Le sigh. Yet another example of card text being wrenched to fit a purpose outside its intent. If you're concerned about it, send it to Lukas, but I guarantee if you argued that in a tournament, you'd be overruled. It's clear to everyone that the card means programs hosted on Djinn.

[player1895329 0]

Actually I have no purpose at all with it except that I do not like to second-guess a designers or publishers intent. I do not use the card as I described but I like games where the rules and the cards actually state what they mean.

If the intention is not what they wrote, why did they write it that way then? If it is incorrect a errata is in order, do you not think so?

How do I get in touch with Lukas?

[CommissarFeesh 458]

There is a rules questions link at the bottom of this page, where you can submit a query. If you feel this deserves an errata, mention it. You are, so far, the only person who I have EVER seen read the card in this fashion.

[player1895329 0]

Nice to be the first with something. ;-)

I think it depends on what tradition you come from. My main game is Advanced Squad Leader and in that game everything is played exactly as it is written until such a time the designer/publisher publishes a errata or clarification about the issue.

I understand that is not the case in many other games.

 

Happy New Year and thanks for the help. I will send a message to Lukas and we will see what turns up.

[CommissarFeesh 458]

Sorry to drag this back up, I know you've already sent this in. Just popped into my head and I wanted to write it down before I forgot.

Figured out why this has never come up before. Hosting explicitly describes a relationship between two objects - the host, and the hosted. This is why Djinn doesn't need to say 'cards hosted on Djinn'.

Further example: do you think you could spend the hosted agenda counter on Executive Retreat to trigger Nisei MkII? Of course not. Because the word 'hosted' refers, by default, to something hosted on this card.

Edited January 2, 2014 by CommissarFeesh

[player1895329 0]

Thank you for your answer.

I really think your answer is the correct one and I have always thought so but the wording on the card is somewhat unclear if read strictly and the same is true to what you describe above.