On 5/20/2019 10:31 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:> On 5/20/2019 8:59 AM, James Cook wrote:>> I can't see anything other than the third>> paragraph of R1586 implying that a generic entity is destroyed when>> its defining rule goes away, and I don't think it applies in this case>> since this isn't an amendment.
Also, I think this particular bit isn't correct - the ruleset as a whole is being amended such that the rule containing the definition has "no force or effect", therefore it loses the "effect" of defining a term. If we respected the definition, it would be having an effect on the game contrary to the assertion that it does not.
