Straight errata for particular card is the only cure then.
Unattaped state as active condition and "tap" as main effect
- Konrad Klar
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Why does Far-sight need an untapped sage at resolution? I believe it only needs the sage to be tapped at resolution.Bandobras Took wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 10:13 pm Not to derail further but:
Tapping the sage/site are clearly active conditions of declaring the search the deck action. That means they have to tap before resolution, but Far-sight needs an untapped sage/site at resolution for card play.Tap the sage and the site to search through your play deck and choose an item that you must reveal to your opponent.
Or do you mean that under the OP proposal the sage would need to be untapped at resolution? Then I agree.
Let's fix it. Perhaps:
Resources and "agent-resource" hazards need the active condition to prevent double-dipping. I don't think (ideologically) that tapping between declaration and resolution should cancel other adversarial effects; I'm mostly thinking of a hypothetical hazard that taps an opposing resource AND does something else. But as far as I know, no such hazards exist. So it seems reasonably safe to drop the parenthetical at this point.If an action that you actively declare taps an entity (of yours) as a main effect, that action has the active condition that the entity is untapped unless it specifies otherwise.
Far-sight needs fixing regardless.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/