Tempest's Sacrifice and La Capitain

We ran into an odd sort of situation the other night.

 

Playing against La Capitain, she had grabbed various cards, stacked them under herself and flipped over. Tempest was his promo version and we were curious that with the way his ability is worded, you could potentially interpret that as letting him destroy one of "his" cards that was under her. Do they cease to be his cards at that point or can he knock out from under her and draw 3 at the same time?

My understanding is that the cards under her are textless. Without the text how would you know which one was his?

Does she actually say the cards lose their text? I don't have La Capitain sitting in front of me to check. I think they just "go facedown" which still lets you know which are Tempest's. 

 

https://greaterthangames.com/forum/topic/savage-mana-bee-bot-double-bee-bot-2597

 
https://greaterthangames.com/forum/topic/omnitron-x-vs-la-capitan-3193

 

So I found rulings that agree that they do not have the card text

 

But it also indicated they retain their types (ongoing/enviroment etc).
 
For example, if for some reason Tempest had a blank ongoing in it's deck, he could drop it and Sacrifice it. And if the game still knows that the card types, it seems very possible they would still know the "original owner" of the cards.
 
So sadly, the cards being blank still doesn't quite answer my question.
 
Also, it amuses me to imagine Tempest seeing her using something of it's own possession being used against it and deciding to sacrifice it before she ever gets to it in a kind of time paradox.

I would say that you cannont "Sac" a card under her. She stole it. It is no longer in your possesion to sacrifice. I would be surprised if there was a ruling to the contrary here.

I can see it making sense that mechanically it would work, but it is a little strange. We do know if a hero is incapped and she has their cards they would be removed from under her, thus the cards do still belong to the hero. I'll probably continue playing that it doesn't work until we hear otherwise.

You actually "Destroy" the card, which is the same thing she does when the damage trigger goes off.

 

Here's Tempest's power wording

Power: Destroy 1 of your cards. If you do, draw 3 cards.

Hmmm. OK. Fair point. Trust me, I do not mind being proven wrong in this case.

The only potential hitch is to define "your." Does it mean "in front of you in your play area," or does it mean, "a card belonging to your deck?"

I think there's a fair argument to be made either way.

Well, it would have to be more specific than "in front of you in your play area" as their are villian cards that end up there and cards of yours that end up in the villian play area.

 

I suppose that Tempest could potentially not be allowed to use Sacrifice on Vicious Cyclone.

Personally I've always found it ridiculous that a face down card or a card underneath another card could be considered in any way to be 'in play'.  However the official rulings have repeatedly been on the side that they are.

So unless they want to reverse that, it seems pretty clear that Tempest can destroy cards under La Capitan.  (Though tactics like that wouldn't fly at my game table)

My interpretation is that cards under La Capitan are hero cards and without text, so it doesn't differentiate between Legacy's cards or Tempest's cards. They're simply hero cards.

So, I say Tempest cannot sacrifice cards under La Capitan.

I agree with ketigid.  The cards retain their type (hero/villain/enviro) but nothing else, so there's nothing to make a card Tempest's when it's under La Capitan, IMO.

But you would still count them as Tempest's cards if he became incapacitated right?  That is what you have in your clarifications.