Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: TheHobbit13 on April 10, 2013, 01:13:23 PM
-
1) If I have Crown of Thorns active and my opponent block with uzzah does uzzah get a chance to activate before he is discarded by Crown?
2) I have Thaddeus in play giving me a total of 9 disciples. I make a rescue attempt with Crown of Thorns up and my opponent block with ASA. Are my sites/forts and aritfacts protected from discard or does the decrease happen after ASA activates his special ability? Does the answer change if ASA army comes from in play as opposed to in hand? Or what if Crown of Thorns only said in battle, would that change anything?
3) Can Covenant with Noah negate Dou or Bellshazzar's Banquet?
-
1) If I have Crown of Thorns active and my opponent block with uzzah does uzzah get a chance to activate before he is discarded by Crown?
2) I have Thaddeus in play giving me a total of 9 disciples. I make a rescue attempt with Crown of Thorns up and my opponent block with ASA. Are my sites/forts and aritfacts protected from discard or does the decrease happen after ASA activates his special ability? Does the answer change if ASA army comes from in play as opposed to in hand? Or what if Crown of Thorns only said in battle, would that change anything?
3) Can Covenant with Noah negate Dou or Bellshazzar's Banquet?
1. Yes if Uzzah came from hand (or territory if protected somehow - although I am not sure how he could be off the top of my head).
2. If ASA is in territory everything is protected as he is at 9 defense. From hand I am not completely sure - I will defer to someone else.
3. Yes (based on new ruling from past summer regarding negates).
Kirk
-
3. Yes (based on new ruling from past summer regarding negates).
Kirk
What's the new ruling regarding negates?
-
3. Yes (based on new ruling from past summer regarding negates).
Kirk
What's the new ruling regarding negates?
This thread (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/ruling-questions/rule-changeclarification-negates/) outlines the change. Thanks for making me think twice - the ruling change only affects special initiative in that you can negate the card removing you from battle regardless of where the card is located provided you have a negate that can target the card type removing you.
The rule change wouldn't apply to DoU/Belshazzar's so I am wrong on that count. Not sure about the answer to #3 now.
Kirk
-
(or territory if protected somehow - although I am not sure how he could be off the top of my head)
SWS swapped for Uzzah out of KotW or Uzzah off of The Darkness.
-
I think Covenant of Noah could only interrupt/discard DoU/Banquet if the battle was in mutual or stalemate - the EC played the last enhancement, so the hero would have regular initiative to interrupt, but couldn't play anything other than interrupt (or negate) until DoU/Banquet had finished.
-
1. Agree that Uzzah activates, as has been ruled.
2) I have Thaddeus in play giving me a total of 9 disciples. I make a rescue attempt with Crown of Thorns up and my opponent block with ASA. Are my sites/forts and aritfacts protected from discard or does the decrease happen after ASA activates his special ability? Does the answer change if ASA army comes from in play as opposed to in hand? Or what if Crown of Thorns only said in battle, would that change anything?
2. If ASA is in territory everything is protected as he is at 9 defense. From hand I am not completely sure - I will defer to someone else.
Even if played from hand, when he hits battle his toughness is immediately decreased because the ongoing ability of CoT updates during the ability of ASA, as does the ongoing protection of Thaddeus. In the case of smaller characters that would be discarded, they are actually at */0 or less when their abilities are going off (like with Uzzah), but those abilities must complete before a discard by game rule (which cannot insert itself between abilities, unlike the ongoing CoT and Thaddeus). So it does not matter whether ASA were protected from CoT in territory or if it bocked from hand, it is still decreased in battle and the protection applies.
3) Can Covenant with Noah negate Dou or Bellshazzar's Banquet?
3. Yes (based on new ruling from past summer regarding negates).
Not so, unfortunately:
My initial response is that Covenant with Noah can be used during special initiative and cannot be used to negate Death of Unrighteous and the like.
This is how I would rule on this matter as well.
Considering that SirNobody, Gabe, and I all see this the same way then I think we can now declare this official. I expect that Covenant of Noah and Unsuccessful will be ruled at Nats to be allowed to affect "special initiative" (but not cards like DoU that never switch initiative at all).
This was after the Rule Change/Clarification. Also, that post referenced was limited to Special Initiative, and would not apply to DoU that does not switch initiative (as confirmed by the Elders).
-
What if it is mutual or a stalemate and the blocker plays DoU? Since it's still mutual/stalemate, doesn't the hero now have initiative (since they didn't play the last enhancement) to interrupt the battle?
-
What if it is mutual or a stalemate and the blocker plays DoU? Since it's still mutual/stalemate, doesn't the hero now have initiative (since they didn't play the last enhancement) to interrupt the battle?
... DoU kills the ECs, can't be a mutual or stalemate after that.
-
What if it is mutual or a stalemate and the blocker plays DoU? Since it's still mutual/stalemate, doesn't the hero now have initiative (since they didn't play the last enhancement) to interrupt the battle?
... DoU kills the ECs, can't be a mutual or stalemate after that.
Precisely. Unless one or more EC survive (which might happen with protection, but not immunity), there will never be a stalemate condition. And given the way the card is used, you won't see people leaving EC around in battle after it goes off ;)
-
While it's true that once Uzzah enters battle his ability will still activate, first he become 3/-1 and is immediately discarded. Since Uzzah's ability requires that he discard himself, you won't be able to complete it.
-
While it's true that once Uzzah enters battle his ability will still activate, first he become 3/-1 and is immediately discarded. Since Uzzah's ability requires that he discard himself, you won't be able to complete it.
So the ongoing decrease ability of Crown, which was already active before Uzzah entered battle, takes effect before Uzzah's SA begins.
-
While it's true that once Uzzah enters battle his ability will still activate, first he become 3/-1 and is immediately discarded. Since Uzzah's ability requires that he discard himself, you won't be able to complete it.
Gabe, this ruling goes against all previous rulings we have had regarding Uzzah. Also, when the new decrease rules first came out for the 2011-2012 season, you yourself posted:
Those are legit questions and something the elders probably still need to talk through just to ensure we are ruling it the same. My assumption is that a characters ability has to complete once they enter battle, then they will be discarded if their toughness is */0 or less. Feel free to rule that way today and I'll get back to you once we've had a chance to talk it through in more detail.
Prof A and Bryon also agreed:
I agree with Gabe's assumption. AFAIK, no game action or trigger can take place during the completion of an active special ability.
This is correct. I answered that exact question at nationals (after I explained what the new rule would be). The "check" for 0 toughness happens after special abilities complete.
This ruling has continued and been the standard since. Further, it is in keeping with the ruling on whether events/abilities insert into other abilities (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/redemption-official-rules/rule-clarifications-additions-and-edits/msg477552/#msg477552). As posted by the Elders in the thread referenced above and confirmed by the abilities ruling, discard by game rule cannot insert into other abilities while ongoing decrease and protection can insert.
So CoT's decrease inserts and reduces the toughness of the EC as soon as they enter battle, Thaddeus's protection inserts and protects accordingly (and also once CoT's decrease takes place), but the discard by game rule cannot insert and cause the character to be discarded. Uzzah would complete, ASA would be protected against, etc.
-
And there you have it. Redoubter is the king of searching. I couldn't find any of those threads in my search. I was basing my comment on this REG entry.
If the toughness of a character is decreased to a value of zero or less, that character is discarded immediately.
-
And there you have it. Redoubter is the king of searching. I couldn't find any of those threads in my search. I was basing my comment on this REG entry.
If the toughness of a character is decreased to a value of zero or less, that character is discarded immediately.
Thanks Gabe, I'm just glad I wasn't crazy :D
However, while I do see how that REG entry could result in the confusion, I think it is actually worded correctly (I know you aren't used to me saying that ;)), so long as the player knows to combine it with the concepts regarding insertion of abilities. Then it is worded just fine, because "immediately" just means the first opportunity is to complete, which cannot happen while other abilities are completing.
Thanks for responding though :)
-
Well I'm glad we got that cleared up. ;D
My next query deals with this quote from one of Redoubter's posts:
My initial response is that Covenant with Noah can be used during special initiative and cannot be used to negate Death of Unrighteous and the like.
This is how I would rule on this matter as well.
Considering that SirNobody, Gabe, and I all see this the same way then I think we can now declare this official. I expect that Covenant of Noah and Unsuccessful will be ruled at Nats to be allowed to affect "special initiative" (but not cards like DoU that never switch initiative at all).
My question is why Unsuccessful would be ruled the same as Covenant of Noah? Unsuccessful says "Negate Last," while CoN says "Negate an." I can see why CoN is limited in its ability to negate an enhancement in the Discard Pile, but I thought Unsuccessful could target an enhancement that it is negating no matter where it ended up. Am I seeing this incorrectly?
-
My question is why Unsuccessful would be ruled the same as Covenant of Noah? Unsuccessful says "Negate Last," while CoN says "Negate an." I can see why CoN is limited in its ability to negate an enhancement in the Discard Pile, but I thought Unsuccessful could target an enhancement that it is negating no matter where it ended up. Am I seeing this incorrectly?
The way I have read these rulings, the reason is more because of when the card can be activated, not based on where the card ends up. That is, they seem to have ruled that you can only use those cards when you have initiative, and not outside of the normal rules thereon.
However, it could definitely use some Elder input. That's just how I'm interpreting what they've said so far.
-
Off hand, I can't think of any reason why Unsuccessful wouldn't work if it was active as an Artifact. Obviously you don't get initiative to play it as an Enhancement in those situations.
-
I thought that when we changed the way negates work with special initiative (so that they can target something regardless of where it sends itself), that we also simplified the "negate" abilities so that we no longer worried about the special functions of "negate last". But I could totally be remembering that wrong.
Anything that would back up this idea "search king" (ie. Redoubter) :)
-
Mark, that would be news to me. Especially since there's at least one card in the starter decks that says "negate last" and not a single elder, including yourself, made any effort to correct that if it's wrong verbiage. ;)
-
Am I wrong in thinking that Unsuccessful can be used as an optional-use artifact, so initiative would not be required?
-
I'm reviving this thread because the REG and Gabe's post need to be addressed. Card abilities shouldn't be allowed to insert between uzzah's effect and entering play.
-
I'm reviving this thread because the REG and Gabe's post need to be addressed. Card abilities shouldn't be allowed to insert between uzzah's effect and entering play.
I'm glad you brought it up, actually, since my question just before your post was never answered.