Clear Card Text?

[3XXXDDD]

Would you consider this an example of clear and or unclear card text. Why or why not?

[Typherion]

It looks pretty clear to me.

The only potential problems I can see are:
The definition for "banished" isn't on the card, but would be clear if I had read the rules.
Does the player get to draw a card if the first part of the effect doesn't happen, for example if the opponent is unable to discard? I would say yes.

While I know that most people probably like keywords, I'm not personally a fan. For me they often seem to come into conflict with the flavour of the card.

[3XXXDDD]

My main problem with this card was that it didn't declare whose hand the discard from one. I figured it was your opponent but I still believe "from their hand" would of been good inclusion. It got it even more confused with the next effect because it made it sound like it was cyclical.

[Vase]

This is extremely unclear in my opinion.  "...chooses and discards a card..." has no specificity at all.  According to this text, my opponent would be able to choose and discard a card that is in play under either player's control, in either player's deck or decks, in either player's hand, in either player's discard pile, and any other place where a card may be.  If the card really is granting all those options, then IMO it should say so since it seems so unlikely. 

[Trevor]

Everything looks clear when you make it big. Try cropping out the border and see how visible it looks at around 200 pixels wide.

[Kevashim]

Generally, you can only discard cards from hand and I would expect the associated rulebook to be consistent in its use and definition of the word "discard" so as to remove any confusion there. Indeed the rulebook could even have a definition included such as:

"When a player is made to discard a card by any means, they select a card from their hand and place it into their discard pile."

It is not immediately clear if a player would draw a card if their opponent had no card to discard, I would imagine the card would need revision to correct this or it would need rules errata to be correctly interpreted. The use of a full-stop is suggestive that the card draw is a separate action, however it is still reliant upon the banishment event. In summary, not 100% clear just from the card.

I guess if you want grammar nazi attack, it should read "Then, you may draw a card.".

My only real issue is the use of "Specter" instead of "Spectre"

[Typherion]

I believe it uses the words "chooses and discards a card" because it's trying to make sure that players know the discard isn't random.

I agree that the action of discarding itself is pretty clear. Players never discard cards from another player's hand - instead they would make that player discard from their own hand. Business as usual imo.

[Dragoon]

The watermark should be more see-through. Otherwise it's pretty clear. No idea what bandished is, but I guess that has to do with the game.

[yudencow]

Why do cards need watermarks?

[Dragoon]

Why do cards need watermarks?

Because it associates with a faction and it looks cool. No real reason though.

[yudencow]

Is that like the pyramid eye in yugioh?