Author Topic: Why does everyone dislike The Garden Tomb? (Read 9788 times)

Rawrlolsauce! · « **on:** December 10, 2010, 11:16:20 PM »

It isn't that good. If it pre block ignored you, yeah, it'd be bad. But it doesn't, so it isn't very good.

Quote from: REG

Type: Fortress • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: If opponent has a redeemed Lost Soul, then Salome, Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Peter, John, and Mary the mother of James ignore all evil brigades that do not have at least two Characters in play. • Identifiers: Empty! • Verse: Mark 16:1 • Availability: Rock of Ages booster packs (None)

Quote from: REG

An opponent is any other player in the game. However, the word opponent can be specific or general: “Opponent”, “your opponent’”, or “opponent's” means the other player whose character is fighting your character in battle. However, “an opponent”, “any opponent”, “one opponent”, “opponents' ”, or “each opponent” is any player in the game other than you.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #1 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:18:26 PM »

On a side note this also stops CTB somewhat.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #2 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:20:24 PM »

I'd say the opponent is also the guy you're RA'ing against.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #3 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:21:09 PM »

The REG says their character has to be fighting my character, which doesn't occur until they block.

adotson85 · « **Reply #4 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:38:42 PM »

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on December 10, 2010, 11:16:20 PM

It isn't that good. If it pre block ignored you, yeah, it'd be bad. But it doesn't, so it isn't very good.

Quote from: REG
Type: Fortress • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: If opponent has a redeemed Lost Soul, then Salome, Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Peter, John, and Mary the mother of James ignore all evil brigades that do not have at least two Characters in play. • Identifiers: Empty! • Verse: Mark 16:1 • Availability: Rock of Ages booster packs (None)
Quote from: REG
An opponent is any other player in the game. However, the word opponent can be specific or general: “Opponent”, “your opponent’”, or “opponent's” means the other player whose character is fighting your character in battle. However, “an opponent”, “any opponent”, “one opponent”, “opponents' ”, or “each opponent” is any player in the game other than you.

Yeah I wouldn't worry about TGT. It only ignores, provides CBN banding and has some of the best characters in the game.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #5 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:39:49 PM »

But it doesn't pre-block ignore. <3. If you want to give me infinite init via in battle ignore or srs init by numbers, that is OK with me.

adotson85 · « **Reply #6 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:40:59 PM »

How is it not pre-block?

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #7 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:41:59 PM »

I bolded the important parts.

adotson85 · « **Reply #8 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:43:49 PM »

The " means the other player whose character is fighting your character in battle" is referring to the term "opponent's" only.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #9 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:45:20 PM »

How do you get that?

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #10 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:47:02 PM »

Why do you say that? It is a list. It is pretty clear it is referring to all objects in the list.

“Opponent”, “your opponent’”, or “opponent's” means the other player whose character is fighting your character in battle.
That does not mean that only "opponent's" is the char vs char

Real Life: "Andrew", "Scott", or "Jason" will win the tournament tomorrow.
That does not mean only "Jason" can win the tournament tomorrow.

adotson85 · « **Reply #11 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:50:17 PM »

I see what you are getting at, but this is a fight you will not win. I promise. The wording in the REG is old and out of date. No one will rule in your favor on this.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #12 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:52:32 PM »

Scenario One: I'm right, and I nerfed TGT better than the makers. This is a win for me.
Scenario Two: I'm right, and they quickly change it. This is a win for me

.
Scenario Three: I'm allegedly wrong, and they claim that ignore has had a different definition for 4 year.s This is a loss for everyone, and I complain for a month. Beings I like complaining, this is also a win for me.

So yes. No matter what, I win.

adotson85 · « **Reply #13 on:** December 10, 2010, 11:55:17 PM »

Scenario Four: You are wrong because the REG is knowingly flawed during this day and time. Everyone agrees and continues to play TGT as it has always been played.

The Schaef · « **Reply #14 on:** December 11, 2010, 01:07:02 AM »

Garden Tomb works exactly as it always has, and there is no difference in the way ignore has worked for the last ~~four~~ 15 years.

It takes about half an ounce of common sense to understand that your opponent is the guy you're fighting, even if at a particular moment during the battle he happens not to have a character in the Field of Battle. You have no reason to complain because there is no issue here except one you are inventing by attempting to split hairs, and so I would not recommend attempting it just for spite.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #15 on:** December 11, 2010, 01:19:00 AM »

"Common sense" is way too subjective to be basing rules off. For example, when there was broo-ha-ha about Reheboam's ability "in territory" meaing "in a territory" or "in the state of being in a territory," both sides were claiming common sense in their arguments. Yes, in this case the answer is pretty clear, but that doesn't change the overall problem of REG errors rendering the whole document suspect. If we are to use our individual common sense to sift out what is and isn't valid in the REG, how can any of it be trusted? Maybe as a tournament Judge, someone's common sense may dictate that a Converted Salome can use TGT because TGT just says "Salome," not "the Hero Salome who was at TGT," while another's common sense would say that, while TGT doesn't specify, it's implied, while a third judge would rule that Mary Christmas Promo can use TGT since she's (probably) the same Mary and TGT refers to the person, not the card title. Which, come to think of it, why does TGT refer to the card title when listing MoJ but to the person when listing Salome?

Master KChief · « **Reply #16 on:** December 11, 2010, 01:20:33 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on December 11, 2010, 01:19:00 AM

Which, come to think of it, why does TGT refer to the card title when listing MoJ but to the person when listing Salome?

common sense.

adotson85 · « **Reply #17 on:** December 11, 2010, 01:25:00 AM »

Urban Dictionary Defintion:

Common sense is what -I- think others should know.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #18 on:** December 11, 2010, 01:29:03 AM »

Quote from: The Schaef on December 11, 2010, 01:07:02 AM

Garden Tomb works exactly as it always has, and there is no difference in the way ignore has worked for the last ~~four~~ 15 years.

We've, as a community, played things wrong before (IE: Doubt). That doesn't mean "hey, lets just leave it".

Quote from: The Schaef on December 11, 2010, 01:07:02 AM

It takes about half an ounce of common sense to understand that your opponent is the guy you're fighting, even if at a particular moment during the battle he happens not to have a character in the Field of Battle.

Really? Common sense, for me at least, would tell me to do one of two things: consider all players my opponents at all times (like I would if I didn't know Redemption defined "opponent" or any variations) or follow the specific definition provided by the PTB.

It takes half an ounce of common sense to realize Split Altar was supposed to shuffle all artifacts, but that doesn't happen...

Quote from: The Schaef on December 11, 2010, 01:07:02 AM

You have no reason to complain because there is no issue here except one you are inventing by attempting to split hairs, and so I would not recommend attempting it just for spite.

I feel something is being played incorrectly. I think that meets the criteria for an issue. If you disagree, thats fine, but I feel claiming I'm doing this out of spite is baseless.

The Schaef · « **Reply #19 on:** December 11, 2010, 01:51:29 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on December 11, 2010, 01:19:00 AM

"Common sense" is way too subjective to be basing rules off.

Come on, Dan, you know who your opponent is.

Quote

I feel something is being played incorrectly. I think that meets the criteria for an issue. If you disagree, thats fine, but I feel claiming I'm doing this out of spite is baseless.

Let's be clear. I didn't say you were making the claim out of spite. I said you were making the claim because you thought you could be cute and split hairs about a definition to get an outcome you wanted, even though you know - YOU KNOW - how something this basic to the game works. What I asked is that you don't follow through on your threat to complain for a month, just to spite a ruling that you know is logical and consistent with how the game has been played since day one.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #20 on:** December 11, 2010, 02:17:43 AM »

I know who my opponent is. I also know what "in territory" means. Turns out, it actually means something else.

Why do you try so hard to defend the REG? You're usually at the front of the parade waving the flag in admitting that it's defunct, but then when someone else says so you counter with a "nuh-uh" argument. The REG is not reliable. Why won't you admit this fact?

I AM DANIEL · « **Reply #21 on:** December 11, 2010, 02:24:09 AM »

will everybody stop talking about the reg? i am not taking sides. i feel just as annoyed as every player out there. the reg needs to be updated. this is a fact that everyone knows. the people behind the scenes are working as hard as they can because they have lives outside of redemption like all of us do. we need to stop telling them what they already know. they see the problem and are working hard trying to fix it. we need to be patient and wait for the updates. they will come.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #22 on:** December 11, 2010, 02:46:41 AM »

See, the problem is, we've been awaiting a new REG for two years. Still no new REG. There are like three people working on it. You know what would happen in the business world if there were two people working on a crucial, time-sensitive project and hadn't finished it in two years? More people added to the team or current people fired and replaced. In redemption world? Same people, no new people.

We know that the problem is being worked on. We are dissatisfied with the lack of results, the amount of time taken, and the unwillingness to fix the system.

The Schaef · « **Reply #23 on:** December 11, 2010, 02:51:51 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on December 11, 2010, 02:17:43 AM

Why do you try so hard to defend the REG?

What makes you think I am defending the REG? All I said was this particular argument has no legs.

Quote

The REG is not reliable. Why won't you admit this fact?

You need to make up your mind if your grateful that I acknowledge this or frustrated that I refuse to do so. You've said both in the same day.

The Guardian · « **Reply #24 on:** December 11, 2010, 04:07:35 AM »

I'm in a multi-player game and I make a rescue attempt.
There is no Evil Character in battle at the moment I move my Hero into the Field of Battle, and if that means I have no opponent, then how exactly do we determine who is going to give me the Lost Soul?

Oh that's right, we determine that based on who I am attacking because by attacking someone, that makes them my opponent.

Yes, the REG has some outdated wording, we've established that approximately 3,578 times over the past couple of years. Some things do need to be added or clarified because the ruling is not overly clear (such as a converted 6/6 Salome not working with TGT or Matthew not being able to recur AoCP), but other things really are just common sense and whilst they will eventually be clarified to the umpteenth degree, we (speaking for Elders) would encourage people to not lose sleep wondering if Damsel with Spirit of Divination was actually a guy...

News:

Author Topic: Why does everyone dislike The Garden Tomb? (Read 9788 times)

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

Lamborghini_diablo

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

Warrior_Monk

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

The Schaef

Rawrlolsauce!

The Schaef

I AM DANIEL

The Schaef