Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jeebus]

I found it strange that Throning Quartermaster would not be like Throning Archive, keeping two sets of cards. Each play of Quartermaster is resolved as a separate ability that doesn't know anything about the other. Cards that are set aside are only known to the ability that set them aside. I guess that the explanation is that the Quartermaster card itself creates a zone, like a mat - very similar to the Native Village mat?

Then this must be different from all other cards that say to set aside "on this" or "under this"?

It also makes it seem like the cards on Quartermaster are actually in play, but of course the card text makes it clear that they are "set aside". It's just weird that they are set aside at the same time as they are literally placed in a zone that is in the "in play" zone.

[GendoIkari]

Then this must be different from all other cards that say to set aside "on this" or "under this"?

Why? Is there another card for which it doesn't make sense to say that "on this" is its own zone?

[Donald X.]

I found it strange that Throning Quartermaster would not be like Throning Archive, keeping two sets of cards. Each play of Quartermaster is resolved as a separate ability that doesn't know anything about the other. Cards that are set aside are only known to the ability that set them aside. I guess that the explanation is that the Quartermaster card itself creates a zone, like a mat - very similar to the Native Village mat?

Then this must be different from all other cards that say to set aside "on this" or "under this"?

It also makes it seem like the cards on Quartermaster are actually in play, but of course the card text makes it clear that they are "set aside". It's just weird that they are set aside at the same time as they are literally placed in a zone that is in the "in play" zone.

As usual it's just me trying to figure out what should happen based on card texts and rulebook entries (rather than, phrasing the cards to try to make it go one way or another). Archive refers to the three cards you set aside with it; so, separate sets. Quartermaster refers to cards set aside with it, and it's the same copy of Quartermaster.

[Jeebus]

Then this must be different from all other cards that say to set aside "on this" or "under this"?

Why? Is there another card for which it doesn't make sense to say that "on this" is its own zone?

In a zone like the Native Village mat, or the trash pile, or Quartmaster, the cards are interchangeable. On the other hand, abilities that set aside cards, set them aside separately from other such abilities. Each creates a different zone. When you Throne Haven, the two cards get set aside in different zones. This is clear with Archive; although it doesn't say "on this" (yet), it works exactly the same way as Haven. If Crypt were Thronable (which is perfectly possible with a theoretical Night Throne) it would certainly create two different, non-interchangeable zones like Archive.

These cards are technically set aside, meaning outside your play area. ("On this" and "under this" must have been added just as reminders, not because set aside cards technically are on or under the cards in play - which I think is confusing for abilities that care about cards in play.)

You can't claim that "set-aside land" is one zone either, because then Quartermaster would set aside cards in the same zone as Haven, so Quartermaster's zone wouldn't be distinct, so it would be impossible for a Throned Quartermaster to work the way the rulebooks says.

[GendoIkari]

This almost seems like a blue dog thing to me. Haven uses "it", so we have to look back at the previous text to figure out what "it" means in "put it into your hand". And it seems to be best defined as "the card that you set aside when performing the first part of the instruction". In MTG terms, they are linked abilities. Archive is similar... "put one into your hand" is short for "put one of them into your hand", so what is "them"? "Them" seems to be "the 3 cards you set aside as part when performing the first part of the instruction."

Quartermaster doesn't use a pronoun to refer to the card you put into your hand. It simply says "a card from this". There could be a good argument that "from this" sounds like "from this ability" instead of "from this card", I suppose. But "from this card" is the interpretation the ruling works for.

[Jeebus]

Reading closer, I actually figured out the difference now. It's that Quartermaster specifically refers to putting a card "on this" and then taking "a card from this". It does not say to take "one of the set-aside cards". In that case it would presumable have worked like Archive.

This is the first time it has mattered that set-aside cards are in a particular zone, so that they can be referenced by other abilities; except with actual mats.

Before now, I thought that "on this" or "under this" was only used for convenience, not because the set-aside cards were technically placed on cards that are in play, since the set-aside cards are not in play. But now that we know that that is (somehow) possible, the following occurs to me:

Archive doesn't include the phrase "on this", but if it had, it wouldn't be clear how it would work. It just says "put one"; would that mean "one of the set-aside cards" or "one of the cards on this"?

Crypt already has this ambiguity. Does "any" mean "any of the set-aside cards" or "any of the cards under this"? Since Crypt isn't Thronable though, I don't think it matters in practice.

[GendoIkari]

Reading closer, I actually figured out the difference now. It's that Quartermaster specifically refers to putting a card "on this" and then taking "a card from this". It does not say to take "one of the set-aside cards".

That's exactly what Kingreaper, Donald, and myself all said...


At least to me, it takes a stretch to read either Crypt or Archive-with-on-this as saying to put a card "from this" into hand like Quartermaster does. "Put one into your hand" or "put one of them into your hand" both to me clearly refer to the set of cards you put there from the first instruction. Imagine if they both only worked with a single card instead of 3/any number of cards. They would say "put it into your hand". Just because the card you set aside went "on this", I don't see how you can then say that "it" would mean "a card on this" instead of "the card that you set aside on this".

I don't think the pronoun is ambiguous here. Quartermaster is different because it doesn't use a pronoun, it refers to a set of cards different than anything that the card had referred to so far.

[Jeebus]

Reading closer, I actually figured out the difference now. It's that Quartermaster specifically refers to putting a card "on this" and then taking "a card from this". It does not say to take "one of the set-aside cards".

That's exactly what Kingreaper, Donald, and myself all said...

You did say that, but I happened to have seen it myself before I read your reply. Sorry for not mentioning it. I don't see that Donald said that. And I don't see any reply from Kingreaper.

At least to me, it takes a stretch to read either Crypt or Archive-with-on-this as saying to put a card "from this" into hand like Quartermaster does. "Put one into your hand" or "put one of them into your hand" both to me clearly refer to the set of cards you put there from the first instruction. Imagine if they both only worked with a single card instead of 3/any number of cards. They would say "put it into your hand". Just because the card you set aside went "on this", I don't see how you can then say that "it" would mean "a card on this" instead of "the card that you set aside on this".

I don't think the pronoun is ambiguous here. Quartermaster is different because it doesn't use a pronoun, it refers to a set of cards different than anything that the card had referred to so far.

"Put one of them into your hand" on Crypt refers to the cards that remain defined in the previous clause, and is not the relevant phrase. The relevant phrase is "while any remain".

Of course if it were "it", then that interpretation would be impossible. That's why I didn't mention cards like Haven or Gear.

If Quartermaster came out first, and then Crypt or Archive (with "on this") second, I don't anybody would be sure that "one" or "any" referred to only the cards set aside by the current play of the card. There just isn't enough information in those words.
I mean... Crypt: Set aside cards under this. While any remain, put one into your hand. How can you say that this couldn't mean "while any cards remain under this"?

[Jeebus]

So since Quartermaster refers to cards on itself, no matter how they were placed there, what happens when you play it with Overlord? I assume you technically have to place the set-aside cards on the Quartermaster pile (although for convenience you'd place it somewhere else). And if you then play the same Quartermaster again with Overlord, the cards go in the same stack. Come to think of it, any player who plays that Quartermaster in the supply would add to the same stack! And what would happen if that Quartermaster were gained?

I mean, that can't be the intended way it works, so I guess "from this" can't really mean "from this card" after all?

[Ingix]

The current ruling as I understand it is that those playings form different "pools" of cards, so you get 2 different pools for Quatermaster cards, unlike Throning one (which gives you one pool that gets affected twice at each start of turn). Because the Quatermaster played is not in play, we do not remember the identity of the played card, so consider it new each time.

The precedent is how it works with Durations cards. Play Overlord --> Gear (set nothing aside), then play another Overlord --> Gear (set something aside). The first Overlord leaves play at end of turn, even though it played the same Gear card as the second Overlord, which stays in play.

[Jeebus]

The current ruling as I understand it is that those playings form different "pools" of cards, so you get 2 different pools for Quatermaster cards, unlike Throning one (which gives you one pool that gets affected twice at each start of turn). Because the Quatermaster played is not in play, we do not remember the identity of the played card, so consider it new each time.

The precedent is how it works with Durations cards. Play Overlord --> Gear (set nothing aside), then play another Overlord --> Gear (set something aside). The first Overlord leaves play at end of turn, even though it played the same Gear card as the second Overlord, which stays in play.

Hmm. It is similar to that weird "cards that play a card while leaving it" rule. I guess in both cases there's an underlying rule that players can't identify cards in the supply.

[Donald X.]

The current ruling as I understand it is that those playings form different "pools" of cards, so you get 2 different pools for Quatermaster cards, unlike Throning one (which gives you one pool that gets affected twice at each start of turn). Because the Quatermaster played is not in play, we do not remember the identity of the played card, so consider it new each time.

The precedent is how it works with Durations cards. Play Overlord --> Gear (set nothing aside), then play another Overlord --> Gear (set something aside). The first Overlord leaves play at end of turn, even though it played the same Gear card as the second Overlord, which stays in play.

That all sounds good.