Post by spiller on Nov 18, 2006 13:48:41 GMT -5
Using the current wording, I think Q's first suggestion of errata would be correct. I would also go so far to suggest adding a new rule/definition in the comprehensive rules.
"Whenever a card it is removed from play, any effects on that card are removed. "
It may also be important to add a rule that states that a card mentions a card it only applies to that card and not every card with the same name. I know that sounds foolish but for example. I use a Frost Sorceress to tap down a card to keep it frozen, if that Frost Sorceress is killed but I have another Frost Sorceress in play, there is nothing stating that it wouldn't stay engaged (under possible new errata). Thus the following rule may need to be added.
"When a card mentions a card, it applies to *that* card and not every card with the same name."
"Whenever a card it is removed from play, any effects on that card are removed. "
It may also be important to add a rule that states that a card mentions a card it only applies to that card and not every card with the same name. I know that sounds foolish but for example. I use a Frost Sorceress to tap down a card to keep it frozen, if that Frost Sorceress is killed but I have another Frost Sorceress in play, there is nothing stating that it wouldn't stay engaged (under possible new errata). Thus the following rule may need to be added.
"When a card mentions a card, it applies to *that* card and not every card with the same name."