3 hours ago, twinstarbmc said:

(1) Would a Mars-Maverick Pitlord still force you to call Dis, or would it force-call Mars instead?

(2) Can non-creature cards be Mavericks?

1) don’t know. Also not sure Pitlord can be a maverick in the algorythm.

2) for sure, I have seen several, like Library Access or Wild Wormhole.

I hate this ruling. I could understand it as an on the spot ruling from a tournament organizer who had to be literal with the rules and couldn’t be expected to weigh the intent of the card, the effect on the overall game etc. But those rulings should flag up to the game maker to correct this.

This ruling takes a useful card, perverts it’s intended use in a predictable and frustrating way, makes it less useful and generally established that rules lawyering rather than fun gameplay will be supported by the game developers even if it clearly flies in the face of the intention of the card. The opposite ruling is not likely to make opponents of biomatrix backup players as salty as this ruling is guaranteed to make anyone with this card in their decks. I think it sucks and I don’t even have the card.

yuck

FFG can sometimes be swayed by strong support from the community, I would just caution us all to make sure that our complaints are targeting the actual problem. And to be especially clear: the problem isn’t the ruling, or even the “typo” on the card itself, it’s the rules that allow your opponent to manage your cards / triggers / effects during their turn. What might have been a lazy attempt to preempt more severe corner cases is instead leading to NPEs.

35 minutes ago, WonderWAAAGH said:

FFG can sometimes be swayed by strong support from the community, I would just caution us all to make sure that our complaints are targeting the actual problem. And to be especially clear: the problem isn’t the ruling, or even the “typo” on the card itself, it’s the rules that allow your opponent to manage your cards / triggers / effects during their turn. What might have been a lazy attempt to preempt more severe corner cases is instead leading to NPEs.

I do not think having a reaction on the others turn is a horrible game ending thing. Most other card games have reactions in some form. What is an NPE?

2 minutes ago, Dalek5 said:

I do not think having a reaction on the others turn is a horrible game ending thing. Most other card games have reactions in some form. What is an NPE?

Negative play experience. Not a phrasing of my own invention, mind you.

I’m not railing against interaction on your opponent’s turn. In fact, I rather prefer that. What I think detracts from the fun of the game is that the active player manages all triggers and card effects, even ones that aren’t his/her own. It’s a concession (see: cop out) to a more robust set of timing rules.

20 hours ago, WonderWAAAGH said:

Negative play experience. Not a phrasing of my own invention, mind you.

I’m not railing against interaction on your opponent’s turn. In fact, I rather prefer that. What I think detracts from the fun of the game is that the active player manages all triggers and card effects, even ones that aren’t his/her own. It’s a concession (see: cop out) to a more robust set of timing rules.

I concur here. I like that the active player chooses timing (the order in which multiple effects are applied if there is a conflict). I greatly dislike the ACTIVE player making decisions on choices that should belong to the player who played the card.

Biomatrix Backup (per the games designer, Richard Garfield) should not say "You may..." It should just put the destroyed creature into Archives. But that ship has sailed (at least for the moment) and the typo has been left in as a legit part of the card function. So be it, that doesn't mean that the ACTIVE player should be 'You' in the "You may..." portion of the card.

I think the best way to handle this is to start printing the card correctly and just put out an FAQ that states the card should be played as intended (not an optional effect when the creature is destroyed).

Additionally I would be in favor of the rule on Active players changing to read that the Active player makes all timing decisions, but not on what can and cannot trigger on their opponents cards.

6 hours ago, Krashwire said:

I concur here. I like that the active player chooses timing (the order in which multiple effects are applied if there is a conflict). I greatly dislike the ACTIVE player making decisions on choices that should belong to the player who played the card.

Biomatrix Backup (per the games designer, Richard Garfield) should not say "You may..." It should just put the destroyed creature into Archives. But that ship has sailed (at least for the moment) and the typo has been left in as a legit part of the card function. So be it, that doesn't mean that the ACTIVE player should be 'You' in the "You may..." portion of the card.

I think the best way to handle this is to start printing the card correctly and just put out an FAQ that states the card should be played as intended (not an optional effect when the creature is destroyed).

Additionally I would be in favor of the rule on Active players changing to read that the Active player makes all timing decisions, but not on what can and cannot trigger on their opponents cards.  

The active player is not the "you". The decision of whether or not to allow the owner of the card to place it in their archives is made by the active player. "You [the owner of the card] may [if the active player allows it] put this creature into it's owner's archive."

With some time to process this ruling, I think the most sensible decision would have been this. "Other than biomatrix backup, all decisions must be made by the active player. For biomatrix backup, the owner of the card gets to make this one decision." Then, fix the misprint of the card in future printings. And in a future online implementation (where the active player thing does matter) you only support the fixed version of biomatrix that does not contain a choice. This lets you fix the issue in the rules, avoid issuing an errata, make players happy, and still support the future.

1 hour ago, saluk64007 said:

The active player is not the "you". The decision of whether or not to allow the owner of the card to place it in their archives is made by the active player. "You [the owner of the card] may [if the active player allows it] put this creature into it's owner's archive."

With some time to process this ruling, I think the most sensible decision would have been this. "Other than biomatrix backup, all decisions must be made by the active player. For biomatrix backup, the owner of the card gets to make this one decision." Then, fix the misprint of the card in future printings. And in a future online implementation (where the active player thing does matter) you only support the fixed version of biomatrix that does not contain a choice. This lets you fix the issue in the rules, avoid issuing an errata, make players happy, and still support the future.

I can get behind that.

However I believe your explanation just makes the choice doubled. Its worded in such a way as to give 'you' a choice after the active players choice.

If the card drops the 'may' it functions correctly.
If the card drops the 'you' it functions as ruled.

With them both its an abnormality.

This ruling is the type that needs to be constantly reminded and remembered so that it doesn't get lost in the shuffle

I find it odd that Biomatrix Backup can only be played 1 way and if that 1 way doesn't work out the way yous guys want it, well we get this thread.

Just now, 10Ten said:

I find it odd that Biomatrix Backup can only be played 1 way and if that 1 way doesn't work out the way yous guys want it, well we get this thread.

Yeah, I'm not getting all the salt. It's a common card, and not all that amazing before the ruling. Play around the ruling by using it on your turn.

I think this is the best solution: accept that Backup isn't as good as we thought, and that it should have been written differently but wasn't; and future cards need to be checked for this more closely.

Maybe even, Backup doesn't get put into future decks / sets.

But otherwise, I like that it isn't errata'd which means the card still does what the words on it say, and I like that the rules have been kept consistent, even though it is a shame that this card is less useful due to that.

4 hours ago, Brekekekiwi said:

I think this is the best solution: accept that Backup isn't as good as we thought, and that it should have been written differently but wasn't; and future cards need to be checked for this more closely.

Maybe even, Backup doesn't get put into future decks / sets.

But otherwise, I like that it isn't errata'd which means the card still does what the words on it say, and I like that the rules have been kept consistent, even though it is a shame that this card is less useful due to that.

I could loop back around and say that its still not consistent.

Yet, what I find ironic in the entire thing is that this ruling is more likely to confuse people than the proposed ettata'd text.

I think I have a solution that solves the three major issues I am seeing.

1) To prevent slow downs, only the active player should be doing anything on thier turn.

2) Fixing cards with errata require people to memorize its contents to a level that only judges should have.

3) New players should do the right thing most of the time.

The current solution fails 3. Most other solutions fail 1 or 2.

What if we changed the rulebook from 'the active player makes all decisions' to 'if you are given a choice to either do something or not do something while you are not the active player, you must choose to do it. If you are given a list of options, you must choose the first option listed.'

6 minutes ago, Revert said:

I think I have a solution that solves the three major issues I am seeing.

1) To prevent slow downs, only the active player should be doing anything on thier turn.

2) Fixing cards with errata require people to memorize its contents to a level that only judges should have.

3) New players should do the right thing most of the time.

The current solution fails 3. Most other solutions fail 1 or 2.

What if we changed the rulebook from 'the active player makes all decisions' to 'if you are given a choice to either do something or not do something while you are not the active player, you must choose to do it. If you are given a list of options, you must choose the first option listed.'

There are multiple triggers that make me do something on my opponent’s turn, most involve either “fighting” or “destroyed” triggers. So 1) isn’t true for this game. It’s only true for making choices. I can’t do that on my opponents turn and that is precisely why this thread was spawned. Biomatrix Backup is the only card that I can play, but my opponent can decide wether to use it’s ability or not and that makes it weird, but it fits the rules.

as for “2)”, most card games use errata. I don’t see why that would be a problem if properly documented (it gets tricker the more cards are errata’d, I’ll give you that)

Sorry, in 1) "anything" should have been "any thinking".

For 2), most cards games I have played don't start using an errata until after a fundamental rule change caused a card that previously worked to stop working, and then it is only to make it continue working the way it always had

This ruling is pretty great

In that it causes people who doesn't know this ruling to think you're a moron (and other similar words) for even suggesting it would work that way.

Then you pull it up on your phone, and then they feel that keyforge has the dumbest rules possible.

Happened to literally 3 players to me yesterday, with one of them not believing me so hard that he thought I faked the FAQ as he pulled up on his phone the 1.0 Rules.

17 hours ago, Palpster said:

There are multiple triggers that make me do something on my opponent’s turn, most involve either “fighting” or “destroyed” triggers. So 1) isn’t true for this game. It’s only true for making choices. I can’t do that on my opponents turn and that is precisely why this thread was spawned. Biomatrix Backup is the only card that I can play, but my opponent can decide wether to use it’s ability or not and that makes it weird, but it fits the rules.

as for “2)”, most card games use errata. I don’t see why that would be a problem if properly documented (it gets tricker the more cards are errata’d, I’ll give you that)

Do you dislike my solution, or do you just dislike the reasons why they chose the current solution?

3 minutes ago, Revert said:

Do you dislike my solution, or do you just dislike the reasons why they chose the current solution?

I don’t particularly agree with the three points in your premise. Your solution still is A solution and works, even though I feel it’s wording could still be pretty confusing to people. I personally still prefer an errata to the card to where it just says: “ this creature gains Destroyed: archive this creature.”

New rules update erratas this card. It removes the word "may" entirely. Debate over.

No, no! New debate! Where did the "may"s all go? Can we make useful home handcrafts with them? Is FFG collecting them and storing them in a warehouse somewhere? We must solve the Mystery of the Mays!

3 hours ago, Suttkus said:

No, no! New debate! Where did the "may"s all go? Can we make useful home handcrafts with them? Is FFG collecting them and storing them in a warehouse somewhere? We must solve the Mystery of the Mays!

They're looking for April showers so they can bring May flowers. And what do May flowers bring? Pilgrims! 😛

On ‎1‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 11:11 PM, Suttkus said:

No, no! New debate! Where did the "may"s all go? Can we make useful home handcrafts with them? Is FFG collecting them and storing them in a warehouse somewhere? We must solve the Mystery of the Mays!

Must... refrain... from making Brexit/ Prime minister May jokes.