Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Redemption® Resources and Thinktank => Topic started by: Daniel TS RED on September 15, 2010, 07:24:42 PM
-
Both players D8. 1 player draws the Luke 13:25 Lost Soul. The other doesn't draw any LS's but gets GOYS. If he slaps down his GOYS before the other player slaps down his LS, does that keep the LS on the table and not count against playing a dom?
Type: Lost Soul • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: If an opponent plays a good Dominant, you may place this Lost Soul beneath owner's deck. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Luke 13:25 • Availability: Disciples booster packs ()
Another question: If Mayhem is drawn on d8 and ls's are drawn, can you slap that down as well to void the d8?
Daniel
;D
-
Both players D8. 1 player draws the Luke 13:25 Lost Soul. The other doesn't draw any LS's but gets GOYS. If he slaps down his GOYS before the other player slaps down his LS, does that keep the LS on the table and not count against playing a dom?
Type: Lost Soul • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: If an opponent plays a good Dominant, you may place this Lost Soul beneath owner's deck. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Luke 13:25 • Availability: Disciples booster packs ()
Another question: If Mayhem is drawn on d8 and ls's are drawn, can you slap that down as well to void the d8?
Daniel
;D
I might know if I knew what d8 was. So, what id d8? ???
-
Draw 8 cards.
Daniel
:thumbup:
-
Lost Souls must be put in play then replaced before doms can be played
-
Alrighty, thanks for the info man.
Daniel
;D
-
Even more specifically (yeah what now Sauce?!), you can't play doms or ANYTHING until the draw phase is complete. You can't play son of god, for example, when your opponent draws a ls but before he replaces it.
-
Even more specifically (yeah what now Sauce?!), you can't play doms or ANYTHING until the draw phase is complete. You can't play son of god, for example, when your opponent draws a ls but before he replaces it.
so, in other words, Lost Souls must be put in play then replaced before doms can be played
-
And unfortunately if you play Reach, draw 3 (one being a lost soul), you have to draw a fourth card before you can play an enhancement >:c.
-
And, as Sauce failed to mention (again), you can't play dominants before the enhancement is played.
Sauce, you're losing.
-
And, as Sauce failed to mention (again), you can't play dominants before the enhancement is played.
Sauce, you're losing.
um, that wasn't the question. Sauce was explaining that game rule overrides abilities (like draw 3 and play the next enhancement).
-
What you're failing to mention in your post is the fact that Sauce is losing our game of Redemption knowledge. Psh.
-
What you're failing to mention in your post is the fact that Sauce is losing our game of Redemption knowledge. Psh.
what you're failing to mention in your posts is the fact that you are losing the game of what this thread is about. which has nothing to do with random stuff you add to increase post count.
noob. ;)
-
You're accusing ME of trying to increase my post count?
-
You're accusing ME of trying to increase my post count?
Sorry, I couldn't resist. But I will now.
-
wow. so apparently you're more blind to posts then I thought.
I nominate lightningninja for pulling me into a pointless argument that is increasing both of our post counts for no apparent reason other then the fact LN has been gone a long time and wants to be back where he would be.
-
I really have to start being more lighthearted on these boards... I make one joke of a thread and I get accused of post-racking.... Despite the endless pages of spam and jokes that get +1 like a badgillion times. Oh well. :)
-
I really have to start being more lighthearted on these boards... I make one joke of a thread and I get accused of post-racking.... Despite the endless pages of spam and jokes that get +1 like a badgillion times. Oh well. :)
I was half joking. serious about your pointless posts which the only purpose would be to increase post count, and joking about the part where I said you're blind to posts. I know you were joking, but it was totally unrelated to the thread.
-
Aren't like 90% of threads that go off topic with jokes?
-
Aren't like 90% of threads that go off topic with jokes?
Why did the chicken cross the road?
So Lightningninja could tell him he can't play dominants while other abilities are resolving!
-
See what I mean? ;)
-
What's this about increasing postcount?
Also: Doesn't DON interrupt?
-
Also: Doesn't DON interrupt?
No dominant interrupts.
-
Also: Doesn't DON interrupt?
No dominant interrupts.
false. DoN negates, which is equivalent to an interrupt. however, it only does this after it's discarded, so the artifact doesn't continue through the phase.
-
Why is after it's discarded important?
-
Why is after it's discarded important?
can't target lampy.
-
oooh. That makes sense.
-
Also: Doesn't DON interrupt?
No dominant interrupts.
true. DoN negates, which is equivalent to an interrupt. however, it only does this after it's discarded, so the artifact doesn't continue through the phase.
Fix'd. Equivalent =/= the same as.
-
half true. :P
-
half true. :P
I only mention it because there apparently is a distinction between negate and interrupt/prevent. I don't really understand what that is, but it exists and has affected rulings in the past. I don't mean to be disagreeable.
-
News to me. I've always thought that Negate, by definition, was "interrupt and prevent".
The more I learn about this game, the harder it gets to teach.
-
News to me. I've always thought that Negate, by definition, was "interrupt and prevent".
That's how it used to be, apparently it's not anymore.
-
im pretty sure 'negate' is being defined a bit differently in the new reg, something along the lines of 'cancel'.
-
News to me. I've always thought that Negate, by definition, was "interrupt and prevent".
The more I learn about this game, the harder it gets to teach.
I believe interrupt + prevent=negate, but negate =/= interrupt + prevent.
-
News to me. I've always thought that Negate, by definition, was "interrupt and prevent".
The more I learn about this game, the harder it gets to teach.
I believe interrupt + prevent=negate, but negate =/= interrupt + prevent.
I believe, my good sir, that you are correct. Though why the converse is true and the inverse isn't is beyond me...