City In A Bottle vs proxies

[Pern]

Any thoughts on what we should do
when City In A Bottle meets
a proxied Bazaar Of Baghdad?

What about a proxied City Of Brass?

There was a DCI judge discussion some time ago
as to the legality of taking a non-game action
to remove the set symbol from a card before playing it,
but I don't believe it was officially resolved.

[Clariax]

The simple answer to this is that it's a non-issue.  Proxies aren't allowed in DCI Sanctioned tournaments.

Were I, as a judge, to issue a proxy for a sanctioned tournament for legitimate reasons, the proxy would function exactly as whatever it is it was replacing, so for a bazaar of baghdad, it would be affected by city in a bottle.  Were it a City of Brass, if it were an AN or CH one, it would be affected, any other version not.

The question you're more likely hinting at (though didn't ask) is how to deal with it in a proxy-legal tournament.  I could tell you how I think that should work, and others likely will do so, but once you step out of the realm of DCI's rules, it's really entirely up to whoever is in charge of the specific tournament.  So, should this be relevant (I'm guessing it's really just theoretical) for a specific tournament, your best course of action would be to bring up the question with whoever is in charge of that tournament.

[Pern]

Not theoretical, and yes, of course I'm asking about unsanctioned tournaments.
Say, for instance, the upcoming (tourney formerly known as) Waterbury.

My take on it is, as in sanctioned, that the proxy is
an exactly functional representative of an actual card.
In this case, it could only be a Bazaar with the AN symbol,
and therefore it would be affected by City In A Bottle.
If it was a graphically printed proxy of a City Of Brass,
then the answer is obvious. Otherwise, I guess you'd
have to ask the player what edition, but that seems sketchy.

Obviously there's no official body to rule on this.
There are, however, many people on ths site who judge these tourneys.
I just thought it was an interesting question,
and wondered what the other judges' opinions were.

[Toad]

As Clariax said, this is not a DCI issue because DCI doesn't allow the use of proxies. So, basically, do whatever you want, you can decide what to do here since the tournament is not held under the DCI rules but your own ones.

[Nazdakka]

The answer which immediately occurred to me is to assume that any proxy has every possible expansion symbol for that card. So any proxied City of Brass is assumed to be from AN (as well as 7E, 8E, etc.), any Shops are from AQ, etc.

That fulfils the need that there to be no advantage to be gained from using proxies, while still being easy to implement and explain.

[silvernail]

Well, how many often played cards are from the AN  set AND have not been reprinted in another set?

IMO, if the card is only in Arabian Nights, any proxy of that card MUST be considered as an Arabian Nights card.
However if the card has been reprinted in any other legal set, then I would say that the proxy of said card is from the most recent set it has seen print in.

Mind you I'm not a judge, but I think that is fair method of ruling this question. Player X shouldn't have to worry about some one using City in a Bottle on his City of Brass proxy because City of Brass has been repinted in various sets, and in all likelyhood, most players will not have the AN version of the card.

[Pern]

Well, how many often played cards are from the AN  set AND have not been reprinted in another set?

If the reprint was Chronicles, City In A Bottle still works.

I think Nazdakka's answer makes sense.
Clearly, with City In A Bottle on the stack, given the option,
your City Of Brass is a proxy of some other set.
That just feels wrong.
I like it when rules are not subject to interpretation
or to on-the-spot decisions.

C'mon, if someone's going to be goofy enough to play the card,
it at least ought to work every time it can.

[silvernail]

I still think ruling that a proxy is from the latest set the card has been printed in is fair, because AFAIK no card has had more than one expansion symbol on it at one time so saying a proxy does just comes off as counterintuitive.

On the soapbox however, I'll go on record as saying that a limited use card like City in a Bottle being allowed to effect proxies would be counterproductive to the concept of allowing proxies in the first place. Allowing proxies opens up deck possiblities to people that don't have tons of cash to throw around, and ruling that they get owned by City essentially because they are poor, is very, very bad judgement and exceedingly unfair.

Now that is not just the po' folk complainin about being kept down . I, for the most part, have most cards I'd need for a vintage deck - my proxies are usually just P9 and / or Mana Drains. Thusly, such silliness doesnt really effect me negatively.

[OfficeShredder]

On the soapbox however, I'll go on record as saying that a limited use card like City in a Bottle being allowed to effect proxies would be counterproductive to the concept of allowing proxies in the first place. Allowing proxies opens up deck possiblities to people that don't have tons of cash to throw around, and ruling that they get owned by City essentially because they are poor, is very, very bad judgement and exceedingly unfair.

So.... you're punished for running a real city of brass instead of a proxy?

[Toad]

You are already punished for playing pimp Mint expensive AN City of Brass over Played white bordered 7th Ed. ones, so whatever?

Since every single Magic card has an Expansion symbol, you can also require that proxies mention an Expansion on them. Solves everything.

[Nazdakka]

Since every single Magic card has an Expansion symbol, you can also require that proxies mention an Expansion on them. Solves everything.

The trouble is with that idea is that everyone has to remember to do it, plus the judges have to enforce it, which is a pain in the ass for all concerned.

Silvernail: Assuming that it's the latest printing works too. Mostly all that's needed is a simple, fair rule which everyone can remember and which doesn't require any extra work. The only thing you have to remember is that a proxy should never, ever be better than a real card, because then people who don't need to use proxies are incentivised to use them, and that's bad.

[silvernail]

On the soapbox however, I'll go on record as saying that a limited use card like City in a Bottle being allowed to effect proxies would be counterproductive to the concept of allowing proxies in the first place. Allowing proxies opens up deck possiblities to people that don't have tons of cash to throw around, and ruling that they get owned by City essentially because they are poor, is very, very bad judgement and exceedingly unfair.

So.... you're punished for running a real city of brass instead of a proxy?

Yes, if you you play an Arabian Nights City of Brass then you must deal with the unfortunate effect of City in a Bottle destroying your city of Brass.

This whole arguement is kind of ridiculous though, because you wind up either being unfair to the haves or the have-nots.

I don't really see it as being unfair to the haves however because, if you have enough money to buy an Arabian Nights City of Brass, I'm pretty sure you can walk over to a dealer at a tournement and pick up a more recent version of COB if you happen to scout out that some person is actually using City in a Bottle.

The thing is , there are not many cards that this ruling would effect, no matter how you rule it.

I feel it is completely fair to "punish" the haves for running AN cards over proxies or later edition copies, because the City in a Bottle explicitly destroys AN cards. Many times when players run expensive versions of the cards, its to show off the fact that they can afford them. If card X happens to hose that version of a card, then the "Elitist" player has to run the risk of getting hosed if he wants to run his "pimptastic" cards.

I mean picture this: some newbie to type 1 makes a tendrils deck with proxied City of Brass lets say. He gets to his first match and draws 2 of those COB as his only lands, and keeps his hand. His opponent manages to hold him off for a few turns, and plays Cit in a Bottle and mana screws him.

That is an example of being blatantly harsh on proxy users. Given the player had some cash to use , it is more likely that he would buy newer city of brass instead of expensive AN versions, but because he cant afford them he ends up getting hosed by City in a Bottle.

[Pern]

I mean picture this: some newbie to type 1 makes a tendrils deck with proxied City of Brass lets say. He gets to his first match and draws 2 of those COB as his only lands, and keeps his hand. His opponent manages to hold him off for a few turns, and plays Cit in a Bottle and mana screws him.

You're talking about someone being owned by City In A Bottle.

OK, I'm picturing it.
Yes, it makes me laugh every time.

[parallax]

Since the proxied City of Brass has no expansion symbol, it's obviously a proxy of a 5th Edition City of Brass, and therefore unaffected by City in a Bottle.

[Pern]

Since the proxied City of Brass has no expansion symbol, it's obviously a proxy of a 5th Edition City of Brass

So what edition is the proxied Bazaar Of Baghdad?
Why would they be different?

Here's an idea I like.
Perhaps the edition of a proxie should be from the first time it was printed.

[Toad]

First expension makes the most sense to me.

[Anusien]

The answer which immediately occurred to me is to assume that any proxy has every possible expansion symbol for that card. So any proxied City of Brass is assumed to be from AN (as well as 7E, 8E, etc.), any Shops are from AQ, etc.

That fulfils the need that there to be no advantage to be gained from using proxies, while still being easy to implement and explain.

Since the only expansion symbol caring cards are hosers, I'd just do it that way.  If you don't specifically choose to avoid that, then you get hit by it.

[silvernail]

So what edition is the proxied Bazaar Of Baghdad?
Why would they be different?

Here's an idea I like.
Perhaps the edition of a proxie should be from the first time it was printed.

I believe the only set Bazaar was printed in was Arabian Nights, and therefore any proxy of it would be assumed to be an Arabian Nights card.

The reason I suggested the most recent edition of a card, is because we use the most recent edition of its oracle rules text, so going with the most recent seems more intuitive to me.

Situations like this will almost never matter, because people dont play City in a Bottle on any kind of regular basis. Also the range of cards it will hose is pretty small.

[The Atog Lord]

Here's an idea. A proxy is supposed to replace a particular card. Why not just indicate the set on the proxy itself, by drawing a little expansion symbol or writing the set name. The default, I believe, should be the most recent printing.

City in a Bottle should hit a proxied Bazaar. The proxy is "pretending" to be a Bazaar, a card from AN. Therefore, for it to be a proxy in a meaningful way, it must function exactly as an actual Bazaar.

[herbig]

Now, what would happen if I were to physically erase or marker over the expansion symbol?  Modifying cards isn't generally against the rules.  Does this change whether or not the card has an expansion symbol?

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

Now, what would happen if I were to physically erase or marker over the expansion symbol?  Modifying cards isn't generally against the rules.  Does this change whether or not the card has an expansion symbol?

Does erasing text on a card alter what it does?  Of course not.  Altered cards function the same way as other cards, so there is no reason why erasing/colouring over the expansion symbol should change anything; it's still considered part of the card.

I'm in agreement with most people that a proxied Bazaar should certainly be destroyed.  As for something like City, I think that making the most recent reprinting of the card as the default for proxies makes sense (so it would 8th Edition for City of Brass, 9th for Kird Ape, etc)

[Pern]

The default, I believe, should be the most recent printing.

Why?

I think the default should be the original printing.
You can play a real card from a later set if you don't like the default.

[parallax]

(1) If the card was printed in only one set, then obviously it has that sets expansion symbol.
(2) If the proxy has an expansion symbol written on it from a set the card was printed in, then it has that expansion symbol.
(3) If the proxy has no expansion sybmol and was printed in a set with no expansion symbol, then it has no expansion symbol.
(4) Otherwise, use the first set or the last set the card was printed in. There's really no good reason to choose one or the other, so it's pretty much up to the head judge.

[Nazdakka]

(1) If the card was printed in only one set, then obviously it has that sets expansion symbol.
(2) If the proxy has an expansion symbol written on it from a set the card was printed in, then it has that expansion symbol.
(3) If the proxy has no expansion sybmol and was printed in a set with no expansion symbol, then it has no expansion symbol.
(4) Otherwise, use the first set or the last set the card was printed in. There's really no good reason to choose one or the other, so it's pretty much up to the head judge.

Exactly.

The choice between assuming first or last printings is basically arbitrary. What's important here is a) that everyone understands what the rule is, and b) that no extra work is required on the part of anybody to enforce it.

[xycsoscyx]

I think wanting to enforce a rule like this without forcing a LITTLE extra work is counter intiutive.  If you actually expect people to use something like City in a Bottle, then I think it's quite reasonable to enforce writing of editions on the proxies.  This ISN'T a lot of work to do, some people are spending hours on pictures alone, so an expansion symbol is quite reasonable.  This is easily checked during deck check, as well, since most tournaments (should) enforce that prior to starting, and all proxies must be clearly marked anyways.  In the case of City of Brass, there's no reason to put down the AN expansion symbol if you seriously expect a City in the Bottle, and players that actually have the card would be knowingly going into the match with them.

[vroman]

so this is debate is only relevent for antiquities (golgothian sylex), arabian nights, and homelands (apocalypse chime)
since there are ZERO permanents from homelands that will ever hit play, apocalypse chime is irrelevent.
golgothian sylex costs 4+1 to play and use, plus is only 1 time effect, so is far, far less efficient than city in a bottle. which costs only 2, and is a CIP trigger, plus gobal static ability.
City in a bottle is actually in theory a very powerful efficient card. If there were a functionally idential CiaB for every expansion... lets just stop there, since people actually play limited now.
playable arabian nights cards that have been reprinted:
city of brass
kird ape
flying men
mountain

[Godder]

This didn't need to be dredged up.

Locked.