Should players play cards from the Un-Sets as they stand, or should errata be applied to remain consistent with rules and Oracle updates? In the case that the general question is too broad, opinion-based, or otherwise not a suitable question for Stack, I provide the following, much more specific, question.
Desert Twister, Northern Paladin, Red Elemental Blast, and many other tournament legal cards received similar errata that changed the phrase "card in play" to "permanent". The Cheese Stands Alone did not receive this errata, and so still contains the phrase "If you control no cards in play". How should the card play?
- Play the card as if the Oracle text were "If you control no permanents ..."
- Play the card as it stands. The state-based triggered ability of Cheese contains the word "card", so rule 108.2a applies. It reads, "In the text of spells or abilities, the term "card" is used only to refer to a card that's not on the battlefield or on the stack". This means that an Elvish Mystic on the battlefield is not a card.
- Play the card as it stands, but ignore rule 108.2a and instead interpret "card" to mean something totally different, perhaps because of
- old rules text, an unofficial ruling from a judge, an article by Wizards staff, etc., or
- because "card in play" means something different than "card"
Which situation is correct? Feel free to wander outside of my three proposed situations. I am by no means claiming that any of them are correct. The rules appear to point to the second option, but the result - The Cheese Stands Alone can win without standing alone - seems odd.