Talk:Targeting Synchronizer/@comment-174.208.19.234-20170208015159/@comment-454133-20170221162216

I made my reply about 2 weeks ago, before this battle over wording broke out, and I'd like to not be involved. My thoughts continue this ambivalence:

1) This clearly needs a FAQ, if it's creating this level of consternation and confusion over the basic usage of the card.

2) FFG is notoriously bad at wording cards.  Just when you think there's a vague pattern, they release Bossk (Crew) to throw it all to hell, and then release a FAQ correcting the interpretation of the wording, not the wording itself.  For me this borders on infuriating, and I wish they'd get their act together; maybe have their game designers and writers meet each other even once a month.  While I don't miss playing MTG, I do miss the generally precise wording that went through lots of stages of editing and review (at least back when I played, around Kamigawa and Ravinica).  Maybe I'm remembering MTG with rose-tinted glasses, but FFG's crazy wording antics are enough to drive a person mad.

3) Honestly I don't think it's clear-cut either way, and I understand both sides' interpretations, so I'm not going to condemn either as of yet.  If you want a better answer, you might ask on the FFG forums and see if some of the guys there have gotten a direct answer from FFG; or you could try e-mailing FFG directly.  Be prepared, as you run the gambit of crazy-balls self-contradictory answers that are worse than anything you came up with here.  FFG and WOTC are quite similar, in that regard.

Ima wait for the FAQ, personally. ^_^