Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: adotson85 on February 02, 2010, 08:55:59 AM

Title: A couple fortress questions
Post by: adotson85 on February 02, 2010, 08:55:59 AM
1). If Image of Jealousy is placed on my Zerubbabel’s Temple can it still hold a temple artifact?


2). If I attack with a Teal hero can I use Jehoiada's Strength to band in a hero who is in my opponent's Judge's Seat?


Zerubbabel’s Temple
Type: Fortress • Brigade: Multicolor • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Protect your Zerubbabel’s Temple Priests from capture, conversion, and removal from the game. Only one good Temple or Tabernacle may be in a player’s territory. • Identifiers: Holds one Temple artifact, except Ark of the Covenant and Tables of the Law

Image of Jealousy
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Brown • Ability: 1 / 3 • Class: Territory • Special Ability: on a Hero or good Fortress. While this card remains, negate the special ability on that card. • Attributes: False Religious Practice

Jehoiada's Strength
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Teal • Ability: 5 / 2 • Class: None • Special Ability: Interrupt the battle and band any number of O.T. human Heroes into battle. All Heroes are immune to brown brigade.

Judge's Seat
Type: Fortress • Brigade: Multicolor • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Each upkeep phase, you may discard an Evil Character with toughness greater than X. Opponent may discard a card of matching brigade from hand or territory instead. • Attributes: Holds one good gold brigade Judge, X = the strength of the Judge here

Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Cameron the Conqueror on February 02, 2010, 09:37:32 AM
1.  Currently, yes. 

2.  Hmmm, interesting.  I don't see why not.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: BubbleBoy on February 02, 2010, 09:42:25 AM
+1
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: 3-Liner And Bags Of Chips on February 02, 2010, 10:56:37 AM
Here is where me and my friend have another question. What would happen to the hero after banded in from JS? Would it go to territory or to Judge's Seat?
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Professoralstad on February 02, 2010, 11:07:11 AM
Here is where me and my friend have another question. What would happen to the hero after banded in from JS? Would it go to territory or to Judge's Seat?

Territory.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on February 02, 2010, 11:38:21 AM
1.  Currently, yes. 
Currently, No.

http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=19614.0 (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=19614.0)
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: BubbleBoy on February 02, 2010, 11:41:25 AM
I think we need the new REG as soon as possible, because having to scavenge the boards for answers is inconvenient and often inconclusive.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Cameron the Conqueror on February 02, 2010, 11:52:22 AM
1.  Currently, yes. 
Currently, No.

http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=19614.0 (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=19614.0)

I thought that ruling was going into effect with the new REG.  The current REG agrees with my initial comment.

My argument. (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=19614.msg307045#msg307045)
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Professoralstad on February 02, 2010, 12:01:12 PM
1.  Currently, yes. 
Currently, No.

http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=19614.0 (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=19614.0)

I thought that ruling was going into effect with the new REG.  The current REG agrees with my initial comment.

My argument.
 (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=19614.msg307045#msg307045)

I agree with Cameron. While I guess I understand the soon to be instituted ruling (though I really don't like it) I also remember it becoming official when the new REG comes out. Everything about "holds" being a special ability is only defined in the new REG, which isn't yet official. Until then, identifiers shouldn't be able to be negated.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on February 02, 2010, 12:03:56 PM
Wait, I'm confused. I specifically asked in that thread was it in effect now or not.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Cameron the Conqueror on February 02, 2010, 12:19:09 PM
Wait, I'm confused. I specifically asked in that thread was it in effect now or not.
See?  That's exactly the problem!  People are making rulings in threads, the REG is not updated, and then we have 2 REGs, one that is official/out of date and one that is ahead of it's time/not official.

IMHO, a rule is not changed until the REG portion concerning that change is added/edited/removed, regardless how many people rule for/against something.  The REG (along with the rulebook) is the ONLY place rules are kept, and unless an official notice is made that it is no longer, I will get my rulings from the REG, not from threads.

The only exception to this would be an official announcement from Rob (like with the new turn/deck rules) and maybe official playtester announcements (like what Justin has done before).  This does not include multiple playtests agreeing on a thread.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: SirNobody on February 02, 2010, 03:44:37 PM
Hey,

The whole Holds thing was hashed out by Mike, Bryon, and myself over a year ago as an independent endeavor from the new REG.  The holds page could have (and should have) been put in the current REG a long time ago but it slipped through the cracks somehow.  Bryon has, on multiple occasions, implied that the new holds rules are in effect, but as we all know it's not in the current REG.

I believe it would be appropriate for a judge to invoke the following:

Quote from: current REG
Local tournament hosts should always defer to the 10th Anniversary Rulebook and Exegesis Guide.  However, if they wish to cite a new ruling on a newsgroup prior to update in the Exegesis Guide, then do so.

This would definitely qualify as a new ruling on the newsgroup that a judge could cite despite it not being in the current REG.  Something to keep in mind is that the Judge, not the REG is ultimately the final say on rulings at a tournament.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: BubbleBoy on February 02, 2010, 03:48:54 PM
Something to keep in mind is that the Judge, not the REG is ultimately the final say on rulings at a tournament.
I can't wait to host a tournament and make up completely ridiculous rules to confuse everyone while I win with a Deacon deck, thus proving how powerful Deacons can be.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Professoralstad on February 02, 2010, 03:51:08 PM
Something to keep in mind is that the Judge, not the REG is ultimately the final say on rulings at a tournament.
I can't wait to host a tournament and make up completely ridiculous rules to confuse everyone while I win with a Deacon deck, thus proving how powerful Deacons can be.

You are not allowed to judge a category in which you are playing, even if you are the host.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: BubbleBoy on February 02, 2010, 03:52:18 PM
Something to keep in mind is that the Judge, not the REG is ultimately the final say on rulings at a tournament.
I can't wait to host a tournament and make up completely ridiculous rules to confuse everyone while I win with a Deacon deck, thus proving how powerful Deacons can be.

You are not allowed to judge a category in which you are playing, even if you are the host.
You underestimate my power...;)
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Red on February 02, 2010, 04:31:26 PM
so now gotith's armor and such can now be negated?that is so stupid
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: SirNobody on February 02, 2010, 04:41:48 PM
Hey,

so now gotith's armor and such can now be negated?that is so stupid

Not as stupid as a Musician's Chambers that allows musicians to play enhancements from it but has no way of getting enhancements onto it.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Bryon on February 03, 2010, 02:02:25 PM
THIS COMMENT REMOVED BY R.O.S.E.S.

(Royal Order for the Secrecy of Expansion Sets)
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Red Dragon Thorn on February 03, 2010, 02:03:01 PM
Hah, I loled.

QUICK SOMEONE CALL ROSES!!! BRYON IS SPOILING THINGS!!!
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: lightningninja on February 03, 2010, 02:06:44 PM
No one's gonna care when they hear that Peter is gonna be warrior-class.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on February 03, 2010, 02:07:42 PM
peter 10/10 green hero.
Lop off your opponent's ear. If you can't reattach it give them a lost soul.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Red Dragon Thorn on February 03, 2010, 02:08:19 PM
Ouch. Bad peter.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: lightningninja on February 03, 2010, 02:09:52 PM
peter 10/10 green hero.
Lop off your opponent's ear. If you can't reattach it give them a lost soul.
Actually he's gonna be white for TGT, but how did you get this info?
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on February 03, 2010, 02:37:34 PM
I have my ways. I also know there may or may not be CARDS in the new set.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: lightningninja on February 03, 2010, 07:51:22 PM
I have my ways. I also know there may or may not be CARDS in the new set.
Core
Arsenals of
Really
Destructive
Set-asides

Yeah, exactly. The set-asides are gonna be crazy! Here's one:

Peter
10/10 White/Purple Warrior-Class Hero
"If any character is set aside while peter remains in play, set aside another character of matching brigade for the rest of the game. If there is no character of matching brigade, discard 3 characters in play. Cannot be negated or laughed at, cause this is legit."
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Professoralstad on February 03, 2010, 10:02:25 PM
Yeah, exactly. The set-asides are gonna be crazy! Here's one:

Peter
10/10 White/Purple Warrior-Class Hero
"If any character is set aside while peter remains in play, set aside another character of matching brigade for the rest of the game. If there is no character of matching brigade, discard 3 characters in play. Cannot be negated or laughed at, cause this is legit."

Hah--

*World explodes*
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: lightningninja on February 03, 2010, 11:16:19 PM
Wait till you see Steven. For however many seconds you can stare at God sitting in heaven, you get to set aside a character for the game.
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: Bryon on February 04, 2010, 03:38:42 AM
Tries.  Dies.  End game.  Does that count as a forfeit?
Title: Re: A couple fortress questions
Post by: lightningninja on February 04, 2010, 01:36:56 PM
Tries.  Dies.  End game.  Does that count as a forfeit?
Well if you stared for long enough, and discarded all of your opponent's characters locking him out of both offense and defense, we'll call it  a tie. If you didn't stare long enough... well then that just stinks. But you DID get to look at God, so that's a plus.

The worst is when your opponent immediately blocks with King of Tyrus from hand...
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal