Can i discard zero cards for omars form ability to get a Man behind the mask from my discard pile. Man behind the mask has a zero difficulty.

Im assuming no because if you havent discarded a card you havent payed the cost for the ability that says discard any number of cards

Yes, but a hand of 0 is still a hand, so discarding 0 cards to pay the cost to search for a 0 difficulty makes perfect sense.

0 is included in any as far as all previous ruling are concerned.

Doesn't X have to be a positive number, tho? AR 2.13.8

Depending on which mathmatical theory you subscribe to 0 is a positive number.

2.13.8 When a player has the option to choose a number for X, X must be a positive number.

Omar reads:

F Discard any number of cards: Add 1 card of difficulty X or less from your discard pile to your hand. X equals the total difficulty of the discarded cards. OPOPT.

It's been previously ruled that even when you have no cards in hand you can still discard your hand (discarding 0 cards) for a cost. In this case you choose which cards to discard, but you don't choose X, so 2.13.8 doesn't apply. X is determined based on the cards you discarded. If you discarded 0 cards (which is acceptable) then the total difficulty is going to be 0. So X would be 0. And 0 is equal to 0.

So yes, you could discard nothing (once per turn) to grab a 0 difficulty card.

Hey Antigoth, GouHadou, and Korrin,

May we get a stamp or a ruling on this.

aslum said:

People seem to forget that zero is neither positive nor negative (you can check wikipedia on that) therefor not passing the qualifations for 2.13.8

DvON said:

As was stated earlier in this thread, that is debatable, depending upon which mathematical theories you believe in. It's a heavily debated subject.

but you are defining X with "any number of cards", you aren't just determining an X value.

I'd agree with this if it was "Discard X cards: blah blah blah" but it's "discard any number".

I'd lean toward yes, discarding 0 cards can fetch a 0 difficulty card, simply because as some may recall, this was possible with *Taki* back in SC01.

Actually, it's true, 0 is not positive. That's not really debatable either. (If you wish to debate it please at least find a source more reliable then wikipedia.)

However it's also irrelevent.

F Discard any number of cards: Add 1 card of difficulty X or less from your discard pile to your hand. X equals the total difficulty of the discarded cards.

Discard any number of cards. Can you discard 0 cards? Yes.

If you discard no cards, what is the total difficulty of the cards you discarded? Zero.

In this case you don't actually decide what X is at all. Rather, you choose what cards to discard, and that determines what X is. If you discard no cards X is zero.

I looked it up. Aslum is correct on all counts, factual and logical.

Rock on.

Scott?! O_O!

Just lurking. Nothing to see here.

Wait...did mence just show up from the shadows??!

aslum said:

I would say no, actually.

You can't discard 0 cards. You either discard cards (1 or more), or you don't discard cards.

This is similar to the way you can't take 0 damage in UFS. You either take some damage (1 or more), or you don't take any damage.

I would say you can discard a bunch of 0-difficulty cards (like a few copies of Cross Madness) to pick up a Man Behind the Mask. But you can't discard 0 cards, because then you haven't discarded.

I see this as very different from the "discard your hand" issue. "Discard your hand" means "if you have something, discard it": as long as you make your hand empty, you've met the requirements. It keys on the state of your hand, not the action of discarding.

To me, "Discard any number of cards" means that some cards have to leave your hand. (However, I admit that 0 is indeed a number. If this is ruled as aslum suggests, I can completely understand the ruling, and it wouldn't bother me at all. In fact, I think I like aslum's ruling better because it's simpler and would be less controversial.) When we do get a ruling, it would be a good one for the OmniFAQ.

Not unless you actually intentionally change the existing rules and therefore destroy the existing precedent. Old School Dhalsim1 said "F Destroy any number of your ready foundations: Your opponent discards X+1 cards. X equals the number of foundations destroyed" and destroying zero foundations to make them discard 1 was absolutely the norm and that ruling was checked, double checked an argued on the forum at the time.

Any number is exactly that, ANY number, including 0. Antigoth seems to have tried to clean up that loophole with the "when you choose X is must be at least 1" rule, but it doesn't reach to all templates of abilities. Now, it's true that there is a discernable difference between 'discarding your hand' being valid as 0 cards and choosing to discard no cards as a 'discard any number of cards' and you could easily shut that down within the rules, but you would have to add it to the rules. No such rule currently exists, and adding "when an ability requires you to choose 'any number' of something, 'any number' must be a positive number, not zero" may cause issues, though I don't think insurmountable ones.

So, if you can destroy 0 foundations you can discard 0 cards, there is precedent.. 0 cards = 0 difficulty, Man Behind the Mask is a 0 difficulty foundation. If this is not the intention then we need a RULING to change it.

(It's good to be home kids...)

Sorry ARMed_PIrate, I think Inquisitor is right on this, and his reasoning is exactly how I came to the same conclusion. I think if it were meant to be different it would say "(Minimum 1)".

Inquisitor M said:

Who's awesome?

YOU're awesome.

I can't refute Mence's logic here. It's good, and I'll side with it.