The card states if you WINin rock paper scissor you then you play again if you DON"t WINyou do not play again. The only time you play RPS again under roshambo is if you win its confusing but that would me the most reasonable reasoning for it working like this. The card doesn't care if you tie it only checks for a win if theres no win then u don't play again.

Oy, this is crazy. Let me see if I can see the main points of both sides.

Playing RPS requires winning, and therefore, when two people throw the same thing, they keep going until they throw different things.

You play a single "engagement" and are done, no matter what.

I have stated my point, so you know which side I am on. My question to people that are saying the second thing I listed is: Why do you think that you have only a single engagement in RPS? Where does it say that? To me, it looks like the card says "Play rock, paper, scissors against an opponent." and not "Play a single engagement of rock, paper, scissors against an opponent." Playing an engagement of RPS can result in a stalemate, but playing RPS does not.

Play rock paer scissor if you win exhaust a character and play again. If you don't win then you don't play again. It's written on the card the rules of Rock papers scissor doesn't apply to the functioning of this card. If you win you play again. Not if you throw the same thing.

The argument is you haven't actually **PLAYED** RPS if you don't have a winner (which means re-throwing ties).

If UDE really wanted something to be a 1 in 3 odds... they would have said roll a 6-sided, if you roll a 1 or 2, exhaust a character and roll again.

First off, why would the rules of RPS not apply to this card? Second, what erick said, in that you haven't played RPS is you don't have a winner. I believe I understand what you are saying, but you did not answer my question well.
Even forgetting official rules (which should apply), when you challenge someone to RPS, do you stop after the first throw. Let's look at this scenario:
There is one slice of pizza left and both me and my friend want it. I say, "Rock, paper, scissors you for it." He agrees. We both throw paper. Does the game stop there and we throw the pizza away because neither of us has won? No, we keep throwing until one of us wins.

I think a problem is that people keep looking at the outcome before the game is finished. Forget that it says "If you win..." Now, when something says to play RPS, you play until there is a winner. Look at it out of the context of the card. Look at it as playing RPS to determine whether or not something happens. When you do that, there is a winner.

According to the rules of VS, you must complete (or attempt to complete) one step of an effect before moving on to the next.

A completed game of Rock/Paper/Scissors has a winner. The effect then checks to see if it's you, then finishes resolving.

How is this even a debate, again?

But the card doesn't stay that the outcome has to be a winner. It just says you have to win other wise you fail the requirement for the card.

BWAH-HA-HA-HA!

Not only do I love this thread, I know just the guy(s) I would have this argument with in my hobby league.

Let's look at the flavor of the card for a second (because without flavor, no matter the gameplay, VS. would not exist). How many times did you and your buddy RPS for the right to talk to the hot chick first, only to tie, leave the bar and play WoW? How about playing to clean the vomit out of the car? Do you really want to leave THAT in a tie? Hell, in simple VS terms (in case you don't talk to girls, go to bars or own a car), what rules do you follow if you RPS for initiative? If you tie, you skip the game?

No, the card does not. RPS does. Playing RPS requires a winner, card or not.

Only in the playoffs. We have shoot-outs now.

And tennis has cuter skirts.

but thats outside the realms of the card.

This has been one of the funniest threads to read in a while, kudos to all involved.

To play rock, paper, scissors, you have to throw until one of you wins. Until somebody wins, you're still in that RPS game and aren't finished with the effect yet.

Didn't I say that?

Or is it because HC says it, it's now more true?

Man... I call rules-ism... all you guys are rules-ists.

Best.Thread.Ever.

Too bad HC had to come in and ruin all the fun.... :P

I'm not believing HC until he quotes from the CRD!

But seriously, I would find this card a little more fun if the effect was closer to the card name ...

"... I'll go first"
"Arhhhhh!"