Molly and Bete Noire's One with the Night

[Spiku]

Slightly more involved Molly question:

Molly can copy a 1 spell, if she doesn't cast it, her totem has access to that spell until Molly casts the stolen spell, or steals a new spell.

Bete in play. You copy One with the Night. This spell refers to "this model", not the name of the model, and states "It may use Drawn to Death to return to play beginning on the next turn." Given this is the case, and Drawn to Death specifically says "this model" and not Bete Noir, Drawn to Death can be used as part of the spell for Molly and the Necrotic Machine?

Any conflict?

[Da Big Baws]

Slightly more involved Molly question:

Molly can copy a 1 spell, if she doesn't cast it, her totem has access to that spell until Molly casts the stolen spell, or steals a new spell.

Bete in play. You copy One with the Night. This spell refers to "this model", not the name of the model, and states "It may use Drawn to Death to return to play beginning on the next turn." Given this is the case, and Drawn to Death specifically says "this model" and not Bete Noir, Drawn to Death can be used as part of the spell for Molly and the Necrotic Machine?

Any conflict?

Molly/NR lack Drawn to Death, so why would you cast this?

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

You could great your buried. How are you going to unbury?

[Spiku]

I take it neither of you want to read the part that says:

"Given this is the case, and Drawn to Death specifically says "this model" and not Bete Noir, Drawn to Death can be used as part of the spell for Molly and the Necrotic Machine?"

It is a question.

[JackRussel]

Can Molly even take bete, I thought Molly could only hire belles and horrors.

[Ratty]

If she's not in charge Bete and Molly can be in the same crew. But as has been said she could copy One with Night, but has no way to get back onto the board.

[Da Big Baws]

I take it neither of you want to read the part that says:

"Given this is the case, and Drawn to Death specifically says "this model" and not Bete Noir, Drawn to Death can be used as part of the spell for Molly and the Necrotic Machine?"

It is a question.

I take it you don't realise Drawn to Death is an ability, not part of the spell?

[Fetid Strumpet]

When she is used as a Henchman and not a Master yes, she can be in the same crew as Bete.

My interpretation is that yes, Molly and her totem could in fact use Bete's One with the Night, and the fact that the spell itself grants permission to use Drawn to Death would allow Molly or her Totem to come back from being Buried, but I'm not certain how useful an ability this is.

However, while I think it would work this way, I could make a convincing argument against its use in this way, so a Rules Marshall would be required to give final interpretation.

[Mike3838]

In Molly's case I guess you have to read the ability as: "it may use Drawn to Death if it has that ability to return to play beginning on the next turn"

Mike

[Spiku]

I had seen your comment regarding them not having it, but had no rules point in reference to a spell referring to the ability not superceding that. Ratty said it is so, so it is true, mind you; even if the specific clarification of why (re: not having the ability themselves) was not cited.

Fetid: as was my interpretation, but Ratty said no, so it's not ;3

[Da Big Baws]

I had seen your comment regarding them not having it, but had no rules point in reference to a spell referring to the ability not superceding that. Ratty said it is so, so it is true, mind you; even if the specific clarification of why (re: not having the ability themselves) was not cited.

Fetid: as was my interpretation, but Ratty said no, so it's not ;3

In my opinion, there is no need for specific rules. It is simple logic and semantics.

If X thing (Molly's stealing spell) grants you Y thing (stolen spell) that lets you use Z specific thing (unburrowing ability) in a new different circumstance, it's stance to reason, you must have Z thing before hand.

[Spiku]

Sadly, it is ambiguous, the structure of English follows that I "may" use X, which overrides. Ratty's spoken, so it's done~

[Omenbringer]

The model may use Drawn to Death to return next turn if it has the ability Drawn to Death (Neither the Spell One with the Night nor Molly's Whispered Secrets provides the Drawn to Death ability for the model if it doesn't possess it).

Edited November 27, 2011 by Omenbringer

[Da Big Baws]

Sadly, it is ambiguous, the structure of English follows that I "may" use X, which overrides. Ratty's spoken, so it's done~

Let me put it to you in a simple way. If Molly got the Spell, where do you get the rules to do Drawn to Death? Molly's card doesn't have it, and all you borrow is the text in the spell.

[Spiku]

In the scenario persented, Baws, the suggestion was that she got the rules for Drawn to Death from the spell she has stolen, which is on Bete's card; to which the stolen spell has a provisio for the use of.

However, I am unsure as to why you are still pressing this given I have conceeded to a rules martial, and it has been pointed out twice by them. Omenbringer, specifically, has pointed out how the card should be interpreted; his method is the "simple" way. There is no dispute to be had, given that as soon as Ratty says something, it is law.

[Da Big Baws]

In the scenario persented, Baws, the suggestion was that she got the rules for Drawn to Death from the spell she has stolen, which is on Bete's card; to which the stolen spell has a provisio for the use of.

However, I am unsure as to why you are still pressing this given I have conceeded to a rules martial, and it has been pointed out twice by them. Omenbringer, specifically, has pointed out how the card should be interpreted; his method is the "simple" way. There is no dispute to be had, given that as soon as Ratty says something, it is law.

Not disputing, I just don't get why/how you could think stealing a spell that lets you use a specific rule grants you said rule. It is cristal clear to me and never even thought it might.

[Spiku]

Equally, I don't get why/how you could not comprehend the same after I have explained the basis for my confusion to you, and after a Rules Martial has had to adjust the disambiguation to provide clarity.

I shall explain one final time why I had to ask, and why the confusion existed. If you still refuse to accept that this is the reason I asked, I can only consider it to be an effort to antagonise me over my ignorance.

The spell indicates that you may use the linked ability. The provision may, is a permissive conjuctive. It indicates that permission is granted to use what it refers to. Where you would not normally be able to do Drawn to Death, the spell One with the Night provides that you may use it. The rules are clear that they are to be broken whenever the wording on a card contradicts them.

Now, to make things crystal clear, yes, we all know this is not the case. It has been answered by Ratty as such, which means that it cannot be. A To continue:

If you had an ability that indicated you may be considered Living or Undead in relation to effects targetting you, there is no suggestion that you cannot be considered Undead because you did not have Undead written in your type text. Equally, Molly does not have Drawn to Death on her card.

I code for a very simple MUDlib. If write an action that includes a MAY trigger, that action will automatically be active with the criterea of the MAY trigger. Unless I include an IF/UNLESS trigger precluding the MAY trigger, the may trigger will be available.

I would finally draw your attention to the 5th entry in the dictionary.reference.com definition of "can".

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/can

I would equally assume that if a card sad I can do something, then I would assume that I could do it.

As you stated yourself, it is semantics. Logical progressions are precisely what lead me to ask the question; it says I may use it, it's not on my card, but it says I may. I better clarify. English is imperfect, as clearly am I, otherwise I wouldn't be sitting here having to type out a 6 minute explanation of the use/misuse of may whilst I wait for champion selection in League of Legends.

[Da Big Baws]

Equally, I don't get why/how you could not comprehend the same after I have explained the basis for my confusion to you, and after a Rules Martial has had to adjust the disambiguation to provide clarity.

I shall explain one final time why I had to ask, and why the confusion existed. If you still refuse to accept that this is the reason I asked, I can only consider it to be an effort to antagonise me over my ignorance.

The spell indicates that you may use the linked ability. The provision may, is a permissive conjuctive. It indicates that permission is granted to use what it refers to. Where you would not normally be able to do Drawn to Death, the spell One with the Night provides that you may use it. The rules are clear that they are to be broken whenever the wording on a card contradicts them.

Now, to make things crystal clear, yes, we all know this is not the case. It has been answered by Ratty as such, which means that it cannot be. A To continue:

If you had an ability that indicated you may be considered Living or Undead in relation to effects targetting you, there is no suggestion that you cannot be considered Undead because you did not have Undead written in your type text. Equally, Molly does not have Drawn to Death on her card.

I code for a very simple MUDlib. If write an action that includes a MAY trigger, that action will automatically be active with the criterea of the MAY trigger. Unless I include an IF/UNLESS trigger precluding the MAY trigger, the may trigger will be available.

I would finally draw your attention to the 5th entry in the dictionary.reference.com definition of "can".

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/can

I would equally assume that if a card sad I can do something, then I would assume that I could do it.

As you stated yourself, it is semantics. Logical progressions are precisely what lead me to ask the question; it says I may use it, it's not on my card, but it says I may. I better clarify. English is imperfect, as clearly am I, otherwise I wouldn't be sitting here having to type out a 6 minute explanation of the use/misuse of may whilst I wait for champion selection in League of Legends.

While I can see your reasoning, I can't agree with it. In your comparison to Undead, Undead is a global term defined in the Rules Manual. Every card that says Undead doesn't need to define it. But Drawn to Death isn't defined as a global term. It is defined in one specific card. Betê's spell tells you may use Drawn to Death, but Drawn to Death means nothing to Molly or her Totem, thus it should be ignored.

Anyway, it isn't my intention to antagonize, so I'm leaving this here

Edited November 27, 2011 by Da Big Baws

[Issalbotproto]

Think of it this way, if you take a man's gun and he's a world renowned sharpshooter, when you use his gun do you get to use his sharpshooting (I'll answer it, no because you gotta learn it yourself)

[Fetid Strumpet]

Da Big Paws, He has already conceded that Ratty is the definitive answer. His original interpretation is also how I interpreted it. It is a logical way to read the rules that just happened to be wrong. His analogy wasn't the greatest, but it was concise, I just don't see why this issue is still being discussed. Your follow up post asked why he would have originally interpreted it in the way he did, he explained, and you have point out, again, that it was wrong.

Don't get me wrong, I quite enjoy reading your posts, but maybe we should let this one rest.

[Keegantir]

While I can see your reasoning, I can't agree with it. In your comparison to Undead, Undead is a global term defined in the Rules Manual. Every card that says Undead doesn't need to define it. But Drawn to Death isn't defined as a global term. It is defined in one specific card. Betê's spell tells you may use Drawn to Death, but Drawn to Death means nothing to Molly or her Totem, thus it should be ignored.

Anyway, it isn't my intention to antagonize, so I'm leaving this here

Where does the rulebook define what a global term verses a specific term? There is a common abilities list, but that is only for quick reference, and to save space on a card, not to differentiate them from abilities that are not common.

There is really only one argument for the ruling the way it was ruled, and that is that the spell does not specifically say that it gets the ability, only that it can use the ability.

[Omenbringer]

Gentlemen, I would recommend we let this one lye (as a ruling has already been made) before warnings and such are sent out (it is begining to skirt the personal now).

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Replied before reading full thread no need for more snarkyness

Edited November 27, 2011 by Mr. Bigglesworth

[Da Big Baws]

Gentlemen, I would recommend we let this one lye (as a ruling has already been made) before warnings and such are sent out (it is begining to skirt the personal now).

I have. Not replying anymore.