Region types in card text

[Theo]

Umm . . . you may want to look at the *other* half of Wizard's Trove. Deliberately replaces a "reference" (exact quote) in the card text.

I would think that for us to be able to determine "Any reference to the site where the card can normally be stored", they need to be entities (under the English definition). I suppose they needn't be targetable entities... not sure we have much guidance on what isn't a targetable entity, though.

So is your judgement that because the once reference to "reference" in the rules does not require that a "reference" be a target, we should assume that ICE intended that all "reference" entities are not targetable?

It is thread-thin, but I suppose better than nothing!

[Konrad Klar]

Only our stubbornness prevents it.

No.
Negative definition of entity prevents it.
There is no (or is but I do not know it) positive definition of entity usable in the game.
Negative definition of entity is:
"Something what describes an entity is not entity itself".

The implication of this is that a non-textual-instance "Wilderness" CANNOT be targeted by Withered Lands, because it is a descriptor of a region entity rather than being an entity itself. Uhoh. Unless that's what you meant by "Unless a some entity is a group of other entities"? But I cannot find your definition in the primary sources, so I'll continue to call this stubbornness.

Meanwhile, a textual instance is still "a thing with distinct and independent existence"-Oxford. There is no description until one interprets it.

Elf character, elf ally, elf attack are entities.
Targeting any of the elves does not target "elf" class separately from character, ally, attack.
Action that can target "elf" may universally target elf character, elf ally, elf attack.*

*) Although

Cards only modify attacks if they say they specifically mention attacks.

[Konrad Klar]

Correction:
Negative definition of entity is:
"Something what describes an entity is not entity itself.
Unless a some entity is a group of other entities".

This means that if something cannot exist otherwise than in conjunction with some entity it is not entity itself.

A card is an entity. Text of a card cannot exist without conjunction with the card. So text of the card is not entity.

I'm maintaining the negative definition of entity, but I think now that the implication is not valid.

Corruption check (entity) cannot exist without character (entity) that is performing it.
However the corruption check does not describe the performing character.

[Bandobras Took]

Umm . . . you may want to look at the *other* half of Wizard's Trove. Deliberately replaces a "reference" (exact quote) in the card text.

I would think that for us to be able to determine "Any reference to the site where the card can normally be stored", they need to be entities (under the English definition). I suppose they needn't be targetable entities... not sure we have much guidance on what isn't a targetable entity, though.

You may have forgotten your original question.

Could a reference be provided for this notion of "just a reference to Region Types"?

You've got one. Cards that mention a site where they can be stored are explicitly said to be making reference to the site.

So is your judgement that because the once reference to "reference" in the rules does not require that a "reference" be a target, we should assume that ICE intended that all "reference" entities are not targetable?

No, it's my judgment that ICE lets us know when they want card text altered. With a given card, if they haven't, it doesn't. Mentioning the second half of Wizard's Trove is simply to puncture that "exempting" tangent. The fact that it happens rarely is irrelevant. We aren't allowed to assume that all the other Nazgul become long-events as well as short-events just because the Witch-King is the only one that becomes a long-event. Nor are we allowed to assume that any card alters another card's text just because a couple of cards do so explicitly. It is, rather, the reverse. Only the Witch-king becomes a long-event; only cards that explicitly alter card text alter card text.

[CDavis7M]

If it requires this much explaining, it's probably not correct, and almost certainly not intend.