Inherited Border Guard and the Lantern

Previous topic - Next topic

pezjoker

Inherited Border Guard cards don't respect the Lantern artifact in Dominion Online.  At first I thought it was a bug, but now I am wondering if it might be the actual rule.

For the Horn artifact, i get that that the wording probably means you don't get to top deck an Estate that is an Inherited Border Guard:
"Once per turn, when you discard a Border Guard from play, you may put it onto your deck."
Based on the similar ruling for Crossroads which says that because the card says "If this is the first time you played a Crossroads this turn, +3 Actions." and an Estate is still an Estate even if it is an Inherited Crossroads, then the +3 Actions don't apply, I think it makes sense that you're discarding an Estate, not a Border Guard, and therefore cannot top deck it with Horn.

I think the same thing might apply to the wording of Lantern, however i feel like it may not really be the intention to not have inherited Border Guards reveal 3 cards when you have the Lantern...
"Your Border Guards reveal 3 cards and discard 2."

What do others think?  Should an Inherited Border Guard reveal 3 cards when you have the Lantern?

markus

"intention" is not really what matters. As you say, the card text is relatively clear. You play an Estate and not a Border Guard, so it doesn't reveal 3 cards.

jeebus

Quote from: markus on 01 August 2019, 07:26:16 AM
"intention" is not really what matters. As you say, the card text is relatively clear. You play an Estate and not a Border Guard, so it doesn't reveal 3 cards.

An Inherited Border Guard should reveal 3 cards when you have the Lantern.

It's true that you play an Estate, not a Border Guard. But Donald has ruled that Lantern actually changes the on-play ability of all your Border Guards. This includes the Border Guard that you set aside with Inheritance, which all your Estates are copying. (This is different from Horn, which just tells you what happens when you discard a Border Guard.)

markus

sorry, I was too quick to respond, assuming it was implemented correctly  :P