So let's say Nuu attacks with Leave no Witnesses and in reactions pitches a chi to activate Mask of Recurring Nightmares. The defending hero chooses to banish a red card from their hand. Does Nuu complete the contract and gain a silver since the mask is what caused the defending hero to choose and banish a card?
#Contract and Mask of Recurring Nightmares
midnight vault
torpid tree
The defending hero is the one who banished the card, not Nuu, so the contract is not completed
midnight vault
Alright that's kind of what I was thinking with the wording on mask just wanted to be sure
modest blade
The defending hero is the one who banished the card, not Nuu, so the contract is...
So wait Mask of Recurring Nightmares does not cause your opponent to banish from your own effect, they just "choose to banish"? Mask does say target defending hero banishes a card from their hand? Is it because the effect is applied to the hero? But no then that would also conflict as Surgical on hit would apply to the hero's hand and the hero's deck.
Also the language in the 8.5.39a would indicate that "if another player performs the actions... they..." they is referencing the other player who is not the bearer of the contracted condition would not be able to complete the contract producing silver for themselves. Least that is how the setup of the commas and sentence structure indicates.
solemn roost
So wait Mask of Recurring Nightmares does not cause your opponent to banish from...
Who picks the card from hand to be banished from Surgical? Who picks from Mask?
torpid tree
Mask causes them to banish a card, it does cause you to banish a card. Your effect banishes the card, but they're the one picking and banishing
modest blade
Interesting so because the opponent has a choice of what they possibly could banish to it, it fails to complete the contract. Despite them being under your effect and you inflicting them with the condition, or regardless of it being the only subsequent option remaining in hand.
torpid tree
Yes, the effect instructs Nic to banish a card from their hand, contracts are looking for Tyler to banish a card of Nic's, but if Nic is the one banishing a card then it wasn't Tyler who banished it
modest blade
Hmmm maybe, I'd like them to have included a rules reprise or explanation of this in the release notes as presently it's not simple.
torpid tree
8.5.39a explains it already. If the player who is contracted performs the actions specified by the contract, they complete the contract. This directly implies that if they don't perform the action they do not complete the contract from that action being performed.
modest blade
Well hopefully the rules reprise so it can properly explained. They did it with Tokens being considered cards for the purpose of making Maxx playable.
torpid tree
That was a change to the rules. The rules on contract have not changed
modest blade
A clarification would be nice then lol. I'm not arguing that Kano off the top doesn't trigger contract. Because Kano can't play contract nor are they contracted to banish cards. Mask seems like it needs a statement they've done it in the past Maxx was simply the first example I could think of
Also presently this is counter to nasty surprise interaction with pummel or codex inertia/frailty too