Check out our Event Calendar! View birthdays, holidays and upcoming tournaments!
EDIT: Actually, found the new ruling. Its odd, because Covs/Curses can do follow DAE rules for the most part, but the last line in the ruling makes it weird since "they are still always targetable as a Covenant/Curse," would imply that, even as the neutral card type artifact, they are still also a card type that is good or evil once played. I think this is an odd ruling, but it would mean covs/curses played as artifacts are both neutral and good/evil, and ones played as enhancements are just good or evil. from ProfA
Rob has officially ruled that Covenants/Curses are treated similar to DAEs:"A Covenant/Curse is both an Enhancement and an Artifact, and can be targeted as either (in hand, deck, or discard pile) until it is played, held, activated, or placed in Artifact pile as one or the other. A Covenant/Curse that is played or held as an Enhancement can no longer be targeted as an Artifact, and a Covenant/Curse that is activated or placed in the Artifact pile can no longer be targeted as an Enhancement. They are still always targetable as a Covenant/Curse." This ruling will be posted in an REG update thread, and now that the REG can be updated more easily, it will be added to the REG in the next update.
It's not that the Covenant and Curse card types have alignments, they just signify the way to play the cards (as an enhancement or an artifact). The alignments come from the respective other card types that they embody (artifact and HE/EE). Much like DAE is only a card type that tells you how to play the card (as either a HE or an EE) not an alignment in itself.
I do NOT think that it means that a curse in the artifact pile is both evil AND neutral. I don't think it is possible for a card to have multiple alignments, therefore I think the above ruling is the better way to choose to see things. I understand why some people might have been confused though, so thanks for bringing this to people's attention.
Based on rulings on the past, my understanding is that when activated as an art, they are both neutral and evil at the same time. If there is a disagreement from an elder please correct me.
I think that last line is simply saying that if you have a card that "discards a curse" that you can still target a curse if it is activated in the artifact pile.I do NOT think that it means that a curse in the artifact pile is both evil AND neutral. I don't think it is possible for a card to have multiple alignments, therefore I think the above ruling is the better way to choose to see things. I understand why some people might have been confused though, so thanks for bringing this to people's attention.
EDIT: Actually, found the new ruling. Its odd, because Covs/Curses can do follow DAE rules for the most part, but the last line in the ruling makes it weird since "they are still always targetable as a Covenant/Curse," would imply that, even as the neutral card type artifact, they are still also a card type that is good or evil once played. I think this is an odd ruling, but it would mean covs/curses played as artifacts are both neutral and good/evil, and ones played as enhancements are just good or evil.
Last I knew they still counted as good/evil and their brigade was still "in play".
Actually I meant in play. I agree that a DAE is both good and evil in the draw/discard pile, or hand. However once it enters play, it has to become only one or the other.If I had to rule on this today, I would say that a curse in an artifact pile is only evil (not neutral), and a covenant in the artifact pile is only good (not neutral).
Actually I meant in play. I agree that a DAE is both good and evil in the draw/discard pile, or hand. However once it enters play, it has to become only one or the other.
Quote from: theselfevident on May 31, 2013, 07:42:29 PM as stated here by ProfAQuoteEDIT: Actually, found the new ruling. Its odd, because Covs/Curses can do follow DAE rules for the most part, but the last line in the ruling makes it weird since "they are still always targetable as a Covenant/Curse," would imply that, even as the neutral card type artifact, they are still also a card type that is good or evil once played. I think this is an odd ruling, but it would mean covs/curses played as artifacts are both neutral and good/evil, and ones played as enhancements are just good or evil.
If I had to rule on this today, I would say that a curse in an artifact pile is only evil (not neutral), and a covenant in the artifact pile is only good (not neutral).
Quote from: theselfevident on June 02, 2013, 01:49:42 PMQuote from: theselfevident on May 31, 2013, 07:42:29 PM as stated here by ProfAQuoteEDIT: Actually, found the new ruling. Its odd, because Covs/Curses can do follow DAE rules for the most part, but the last line in the ruling makes it weird since "they are still always targetable as a Covenant/Curse," would imply that, even as the neutral card type artifact, they are still also a card type that is good or evil once played. I think this is an odd ruling, but it would mean covs/curses played as artifacts are both neutral and good/evil, and ones played as enhancements are just good or evil.Stop saying ProfA said things he didn't say. I said that.As for what you said from Gabe, the ruling is quite clear that their brigade is not "in play," when they are played as arts.
I resurrected the discussion about covenants/curses on the elder's board. Thus far everyone is in agreement with ProfU's statement.Quote from: Prof Underwood on June 02, 2013, 01:50:26 PMIf I had to rule on this today, I would say that a curse in an artifact pile is only evil (not neutral), and a covenant in the artifact pile is only good (not neutral).
