Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: sepjazzwarrior on February 27, 2011, 09:17:26 PM
-
1) if i draw a hopper LS while i have the FBTN LS in play, is the hopper negated and it goes to my territory?
2) does priestly preastplate work as intended where you can activate in on a priest or does it have to be activated from artifact pile every turn?
3)was there ever an official ruling on if protection from evil cards means you cannot be discarded by the numbers?
-
1. Yes it stays in your territory.
2. You can activate it on a Priest and then activate another artifact in your artifact pile, this works like Magic Charms, and other artifacts being activated on fortresses.
3. I believe you can always be discarded by the numbers, but not sure on this one.
-
2. I assume cards work as they are intended with a few special exceptions. coughanbsplitaltarcough ;D
-
1.) Yes
2.) It counts as your artifact activation for the turn
3.) You can be discarded by the numbers.
-
1.) Yes
2.) It counts as your artifact activation for the turn
3.) You can be discarded by the numbers.
I agree with one and two and I think three is correct.
-
1. Yes it stays in your territory.
2. You can activate it on a Priest and then activate another artifact in your artifact pile, this works like Magic Charms, and other artifacts being activated on fortresses. incorrect
3. I believe you can always be discarded by the numbers, but not sure on this one.
-
RTSManiac is correct. Priestly Breastplate must be activated on the artifact pile (eating up your activation slot there). Then it can be placed.
There was some discussion a while back as to whether Priestly Breastplate must be reactivated every turn or whether it would stay active while on a Priest. I do not believe this was ever resolved one way or the t'other, however.
-
The difference between Breastplate and Charms is that Charms ability to be activated on a Magician is an identifier, whereas Breastplate is a special ability.
-
Ah! Duly noted!
-
Why is this stickied?
-
Because these questions come up every month or so. Once we add them to the FAQ we'll unsticky this and provide a link to the FAQ in it.
-
Are we sure on number three? I thought I remember Gabe saying Thad protects from numbers at the t2 only, but I was so tired I can't be sure.
-
Are we sure on number three? I thought I remember Gabe saying Thad protects from numbers at the t2 only, but I was so tired I can't be sure.
There is not a consensus on whether or not general protection (Thad, Protection of Angels) will protect from losing by the numbers. Some of the elders, including myself, believe that it does. Others do not. Honestly, this is one of the last major things we have to work out for the new REG.
-
So that means that you're close? Also, what do we lowly hosts rule it as?
-
protect should only protect from special abilities not numbers in my book.
-
protect should only protect from special abilities not numbers in my book.
+1, Thad is already powerful enough, to say he can't even be discarded would be rediculous.
-
So that means that you're close? Also, what do we lowly hosts rule it as?
You should do whatever you prefer, but announce how that's you would rule it before the tournament.
-
So that means that you're close? Also, what do we lowly hosts rule it as?
You should do whatever you prefer, but announce how that's you would rule it before the tournament.
That kind of inconsistency is problematic. "Protect" is officially defined as "protection from specified special abilities" in the Glossary. No host should rule otherwise until an official announcement from the Elders overrules this.
-
Hey,
For the record, Bryon and I have been discussing the Thaddeus issue and are currently leaning towards saying he can lose by the numbers.
So that means that you're close? Also, what do we lowly hosts rule it as?
You could go with the current leaning as stated above. You could go with what your players expect (if everyone who shows up to the tournament expects it to be ruled one way it doesn't make much sense to rule it the other way). Or you could go with whatever argument makes the most sense to you personally. The most important thing is to make it clear to your players before the tournament starts which way you will be ruling.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
have we come up with a final ruling on these questions?
-
1.) Still a yes.
2.) Counts as your activation for the turn and unsure if you have to activate it every turn.
3.) Most-likely yes but could be ruled differently if people at the tournament have the opposite idea and it's being debated in the REG.
-
"Protect" is officially defined as "protection from specified special abilities" in the Glossary. No host should rule otherwise until an official announcement from the Elders overrules this.
The Glossary is outdated. Count this part as official: the above should read:
"protection from specified effects"
If protect only protects from special abilities, then how do you "protect a lost soul from rescue by a hero"? Would that only protect against Primary Objective? Clearly, it protects against the rescue effect that heroes are credited for when they win a rescue attempt.
-
So protection of angels and thaddeus protect against numbers?
-
Given the above, yes.
-
"Protect" is officially defined as "protection from specified special abilities" in the Glossary. No host should rule otherwise until an official announcement from the Elders overrules this.
The Glossary is outdated. Count this part as official: the above should read:
"protection from specified effects"
What are the "specified" effects, then?
I realize that this is too much to ask, but when can we expect to have any official documents that are not outdated? All I ever hear people say is to "check the boards." That's not good enough anymore. I spend too much time online as it is. I have a wife and kids that need my time, as well as my job(s). If the expectation is that hosts will have to be constantly online to know the rules and exceptions, then hosting just may no longer be for me.
-
If the expectation is that hosts will have to be constantly online to know the rules and exceptions, then hosting just may no longer be for me.
Been there; said that.
-
I'd love to have an "on call" Elder, and not hold a game while we wait for someone to respond to a post.
-
If the expectation is that hosts will have to be constantly online to know the rules and exceptions, then hosting just may no longer be for me.
Been there; said that.
I know that you have, and I did not disagree with you back then. However, I held out hope that REG changes were imminent, regardless of the jokes I cracked otherwise. But now the humor has faded and I share your fatigue with the current system. From this point on, I will echo your sentiments.
-
"Protect" is officially defined as "protection from specified special abilities" in the Glossary. No host should rule otherwise until an official announcement from the Elders overrules this.
The Glossary is outdated. Count this part as official: the above should read:
"protection from specified effects"
What are the "specified" effects, then?
The effects specified on the card with the protect ability.
If it says "protected from capture" then it protects from all capture effects (in this case, all such effects are special abilities).
If it says "protected from discard" then it protects from all discard effects (from special abilities OR from discard effects of game rules such as zero toughness, losing by numbers, etc.).
If it says "Protected from evil cards" then it protects from all effects of evil cards (from special abilities OR other effects of those evil cards, such as if one wins by numbers.)
If it says "protected from rescue by heroes" then it protects them from all rescue effects heroes can give (from rescue special abilities on enhancements like Primary Objective, and from rescue effects that heroes give by game rule when they win a rescue attempt).
-
then how is protection different from immunity? If protection protects your from being killed by the numbers, what is the different between th two now?
-
at a certain point it just becomes easier to make thad illegal.......
-
Immunity is specific to characters.
-
Also, immune characters can be targeted. While this usually doesn't matter, if you use Zeal with Mechizedek and the only 3 characters in play are your opponent's Grey EC, your opponent's Black EC in battle holding Goliath's Armor, and your Black EC, you could target the Grey EC and the one with Goliath's Armor. Zeal simple wouldn't do anything to the latter. If, however, the only three EC's in play are your opponent's Grey EC in battle, his Assyrian in territory with Camp, and your Pale Green EC, you'd have to target the one in battle and your own.
-
If it says "Protected from evil cards" then it protects from all effects of evil cards (from special abilities OR other effects of those evil cards, such as if one wins by numbers.)
So... Thadd cannot be killed by numbers?
If that's true, then I'm disappointed with this ruling.
-
If it says "Protected from evil cards" then it protects from all effects of evil cards (from special abilities OR other effects of those evil cards, such as if one wins by numbers.)
So... Thadd cannot be killed by numbers?
If that's true, then I'm disappointed with this ruling.
Protection of Angels would also have the same result.
-
I need to know if this is the final ruling, there are several very important tournaments coming up. If I end up judging I need to know how to rule this.
-
"Protect" is officially defined as "protection from specified special abilities" in the Glossary. No host should rule otherwise until an official announcement from the Elders overrules this.
The Glossary is outdated. Count this part as official: the above should read:
"protection from specified effects"
What are the "specified" effects, then?
The effects specified on the card with the protect ability.
If it says "protected from capture" then it protects from all capture effects (in this case, all such effects are special abilities).
If it says "protected from discard" then it protects from all discard effects (from special abilities OR from discard effects of game rules such as zero toughness, losing by numbers, etc.).
If it says "Protected from evil cards" then it protects from all effects of evil cards (from special abilities OR other effects of those evil cards, such as if one wins by numbers.)
If it says "protected from rescue by heroes" then it protects them from all rescue effects heroes can give (from rescue special abilities on enhancements like Primary Objective, and from rescue effects that heroes give by game rule when they win a rescue attempt).
This'd be the ruling.
-
But that doesn't answer the question for Thaddeus, or Protection of Angels.
Thaddeus (Di)
Type: Hero Char. • Brigade: Purple • Ability: 8 / 8 • Class: None • Special Ability: Protect all cards in play, set-aside area, Artifact piles, hands, and decks from Evil Characters with toughness X or less. Cannot be interrupted.
Protection of Angels (Pi)
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Silver • Ability: 2 / 3 • Class: None • Special Ability: Interrupt the battle and protect all Heroes in play and set aside areas from evil cards until end of turn. • Play As: Interrupt the battle and protect all Heroes in play and set aside areas from evil special abilities until end of turn.
The way I read the ruling then, is that Thaddeus CAN be discarded by the numbers, because the evil character is not doing the discarding, A game rule is. The game rule is effecting Thaddeus, not the Evil Character. Likewise for Protection of angels, although I am not sure where that play as came from.
-
The way I read the ruling then, is that Thaddeus CAN be discarded by the numbers, because the evil character is not doing the discarding, A game rule is. The game rule is effecting Thaddeus, not the Evil Character. Likewise for Protection of angels, although I am not sure where that play as came from.
Then until an official ruling is announced you should rule that way at your tournament(s). Let your players know in advance that is how you will be ruling so nobody is caught by surprise during a game.
This question is being discussed by the elders and Rob but it's not as quick and simple as it might appear to some. We will let you know when we come to an official decision.
-
The way I read the ruling then, is that Thaddeus CAN be discarded by the numbers, because the evil character is not doing the discarding, A game rule is. The game rule is effecting Thaddeus, not the Evil Character. Likewise for Protection of angels, although I am not sure where that play as came from.
If you rule that way at your tournament, then be prepared to say that Belshazzar's Banquet doesn't protect lost souls from rescue by a hero, since the lost souls are only rescued by a game rule, and not by a hero. Also, be prepared to rule that High Priests' Palace does not protect Sadducees from discard by decrease by Crown of Thorns, since the Sadducee is discarded by game rule, and not by a discard ability.
Or, maybe you should just rule that "protect" includes protecting from the effects of game rules.
-
Regarding protection and discard by numbers, I've always played that only "protected from discard" would stop death by numbers...
-
If Thaddeus cannot be discarded by an Evil Character's "specified effect", doesn't that mean that an enhancement card would be able to discard him since it's not a evil character and has its own effect?
-
The way I read the ruling then, is that Thaddeus CAN be discarded by the numbers, because the evil character is not doing the discarding, A game rule is. The game rule is effecting Thaddeus, not the Evil Character. Likewise for Protection of angels, although I am not sure where that play as came from.
If you rule that way at your tournament, then be prepared to say that Belshazzar's Banquet doesn't protect lost souls from rescue by a hero, since the lost souls are only rescued by a game rule, and not by a hero. Also, be prepared to rule that High Priests' Palace does not protect Sadducees from discard by decrease by Crown of Thorns, since the Sadducee is discarded by game rule, and not by a discard ability.
Or, maybe you should just rule that "protect" includes protecting from the effects of game rules.
So I should rule that Thaddeus protects from discard by numbers? I guess if I didn't then I would have to rule the other cards the way you described to be consistent. I just have a hard time ruling that Thaddeus can not be killed by the numbers, since he does not specifically state that he is protected from Discard. I don't see how the High Priest's Palace ruling fits into this since that ruling has little to do with the source of the discard, it seemed more concerned with the scope of the protect. This issue I believe has to do with source of the effect, and I guess it all comes down to what is the source of an effect in Redemption? For cards like Belshazzar's Banquet the Game Rule that rescue's the Lost Soul is triggered by a hero winning the battle and BB stops that, so I guess it makes sense to say that if an evil character wins the battle then the game rule performing the discard was triggered by the evil character and Thaddeus would stop that as well. I guess in retrospect I agree, Thaddeus has to protect from discard by the numbers, or we need to change rulings on other protect cards to be consistent.
-
You are correct that the heart of the issue seems to be the source of the effects.
That is under debate by playtesters right now.
I've always understood that an enhancement used by a character is credited as the character performing that action. For example, if Lot's Wife uses Net, then she gets credit for the capture for purposes of Raiders' Camp. If I am protected from the character, then I am protected from anything done by that character.
-
You are correct that the heart of the issue seems to be the source of the effects.
That is under debate by playtesters right now.
I've always understood that an enhancement used by a character is credited as the character performing that action. For example, if Lot's Wife uses Net, then she gets credit for the capture for purposes of Raiders' Camp. If I am protected from the character, then I am protected from anything done by that character.
That's always how immunity has worked as well.
-
You are correct that the heart of the issue seems to be the source of the effects.
That is under debate by playtesters right now.
I've always understood that an enhancement used by a character is credited as the character performing that action. For example, if Lot's Wife uses Net, then she gets credit for the capture for purposes of Raiders' Camp. If I am protected from the character, then I am protected from anything done by that character.
Wait, does this mean that your ruling is not official?
-
Can we just ban Thaddeus? That's so much easier to explain.
-
Can we just ban Thaddeus? That's so much easier to explain.
Then how are we noobs supposed to compete?
-
They could always just use TGT.
-
You are correct that the heart of the issue seems to be the source of the effects.
That is under debate by playtesters right now.
I've always understood that an enhancement used by a character is credited as the character performing that action. For example, if Lot's Wife uses Net, then she gets credit for the capture for purposes of Raiders' Camp. If I am protected from the character, then I am protected from anything done by that character.
Isn't the definition you provided for protect simmilar to the default to in play rule?
Thadd protects from evil characters, and his protection defaults to only ecs since he doesn't specify otherwise.
Protection of angels would protect from both since it says evil cards.
-
Out of curiosity, why does my region say "East Central?"
-
Its a setting you can change in your profile, the base option is set to East Central.
-
the base option is set to East Central.
Because we're so welcoming to everyone regardless of where they really live :)
-
could we at least eratta thaddues so that his ability wasn't "cannot be interrupted"? that would at least give people a chance to kill him
-
They really can't do that mid tournament season.
-
They really can't do that mid tournament season.
Yeah, usually it's either Rob's way (no banning) or the Highway.
-
could we get this un-stickeyed? most all of the questions asked have been answered
-
I think that's the point. They stickied this thread because it has questions and answers to things people consistently ask frequently. That way people will hopefully read this and see the answer before posting a thread with the same question(s).
-
If that's the case, then edit the first post so that the subject is "Frequently Asked Questions."
-
If that's the case, then edit the first post so that the subject is "Frequently Asked Questions."
I would if I could but I can't so I shan't.
-
I thought that the current consensus is that Just place on a Character (like Charms and Iron Pan) are automatically noted as identifiers, since that wasn't put into the Identifer until TeXP. The same w/ 2 & 3-liners. They're Abilites are actually Identifers and would have no effect if reprinted today. Wouldn't that be the same w/ Priestly Breastplate?
-
I thought that the current consensus is that Just place on a Character (like Charms and Iron Pan) are automatically noted as identifiers, since that wasn't put into the Identifer until TeXP. The same w/ 2 & 3-liners. They're Abilites are actually Identifers and would have no effect if reprinted today.I can absolutely guaranteed you they'd have a special ability. Wouldn't that be the same w/ Priestly Breastplate?Nope. Do you have an Elder/REG quote that says otherwise?