Author Topic: ANB causing problems again...  (Read 6699 times)

The Schaef

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #50 on: July 16, 2010, 02:14:30 AM »
0
Agreed, I thought you were only asking about them trying to remove the hero.

I find this strange, as I made it a point in each of the two examples to spell that out and pluralize "scenarios".

Quote
But that still proves nothing about why they can't both be seen as Protection.

You don't see why two things which you acknowledge are different can't be treated like they are the same?

Prevent, interrupt and negate are all types of a class of special ability that cancels out the effects of cards.  But they function differently, therefore I will not attempt to equate interrupt with negate.  Similarly, ignore, immune and protect are all types of a class of special ability that limits targets.  But they function differently, therefore I will not attempt to equate immune with protect.

Offline Cousin It

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
  • You know you love 'em
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #51 on: July 16, 2010, 02:19:20 AM »
0
Immunity and Protects are completely different and there's no way you'd be able to combine them.   :2cents:  Now for why.   :P

"X is Immune to Y."  So when you're playing, if I play X and target Y, nothing happens because the Immunity stops it.

Say the same thing is Protected.  "X is Protected from Y."  Now I play X.  This time it's different because I can't even target Y.  Protect doesn't stop the ability of Y from harming X, it stops Y from targeting X altogether.  Does that make more sense?

This is why Cannot be Negated can be used on a Immune card (because Y still targets X but the immunity can't stop it) but doesn't work on Protected cards (because Y can't target X at all).

This is how I learned it, but I'm not even sure where anymore.  I've been looking for REG quotes to back but so far no luck.  If I'm just crazy, let me know.  :P

*EDIT*

Quote from: REG > Ongoing Abilities > Protect > Default Conditions

You cannot target something that is protected (e.g., a Hero in Goshen, etc).


Quote from: REG > Ongoing Abilities > Immune > Default Conditions

You cannot target something that is immune. Therefore, if Shoes of Peace is played on a Hero that is blocked by Prince of this World, then the opponent cannot target the immune character. If another valid target exists then it must be targeted instead; if there is no valid target, Shoes of Peace does nothing.


This seems to kill what I just said except it doesn't make any sense with how we've been playing....  How can a CBN work against an immune but now protect if neither can be targeted?

I'm kind of inclined to think the Quote from the immune default condition is just way WAY old tho because of the card examples given.  They say Shoes of Peace do nothing because it can't target PotW even though SoP should really target the player, not PotW at all.  :P
« Last Edit: July 16, 2010, 02:30:14 AM by Cousin It »

Offline Prof Underwood

  • Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8597
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #52 on: July 16, 2010, 02:41:20 AM »
0
I find this strange, as I made it a point in each of the two examples to spell that out and pluralize "scenarios".
What can I say, it's late at night, I missed it.  I'm sorry.

You don't see why two things which you acknowledge are different can't be treated like they are the same?

Prevent, interrupt and negate are all types of a class of special ability that cancels out the effects of cards.  But they function differently, therefore I will not attempt to equate interrupt with negate.  Similarly, ignore, immune and protect are all types of a class of special ability that limits targets.  But they function differently, therefore I will not attempt to equate immune with protect.
First of all Prevent, Interrupt, and Negate do all do the same thing.  They all cancel special abilities.  Prevent is a subset of canceling that cancels SAs before they are played.  Negate is a subset of canceling that cancels SAs before and after they are played.  Interrupt is a subset of canceling that temporarily cancels a SA so that you can do something else.

Similarly, immunity is a subset of protection that protects characters from special abilities of certain characters and/or enhancements.  So of course there are differences between that and other types of protects, but the overall function is the same.  They stop something from being affected by something else.

The Schaef

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #53 on: July 16, 2010, 02:45:03 AM »
0
First of all Prevent, Interrupt, and Negate do all do the same thing.

No, they do not.  A card that says "prevent the last Enhancement" does not do the same thing as "negate the last Enhancement".  They do SIMILAR things but they have DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS.

Quote
Prevent is a subset of canceling that cancels SAs before they are played.
Similarly, immunity is a subset of protection

So why do you call immune - a special ability - a subset of protect - another special ability, but you call prevent a subset of this-general-description-of-the-kind-of-things-the-different-cards-do-similarly?

Offline Prof Underwood

  • Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8597
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #54 on: July 16, 2010, 03:02:15 AM »
0
I think we're just getting into semantics at this point, and it's late.

The main point as far as this thread is concerned is figuring out what happens to Garrison if Habbakuk plays ANB on him.  And I think we all agree that (based on the ruling that Hab does NOT cancel Garrison's immunity), Garrison does NOT get shuffled, and does NOT get discarded.  Is that right?

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #55 on: July 16, 2010, 03:18:30 AM »
0
I'd agree that Immune and Protect are in the same vein, like Negate, Interrupt and Protect are. But I'd say that, as Interrupt, Prevent and Negate are subsets of canceling, Protection and Immunity are subsets of restricting.
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

Offline stefferweffer

  • Trade Count: (+17)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1775
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #56 on: July 16, 2010, 07:56:32 AM »
0
I agree on the whole ANB thing.

But can someone please explain to me when an "After the battle..." card takes effect?  It would seem to me that if we no longer have cards in battle, that the special abilities of the characters that WERE in battle are no longer in effect.  It just seems odd to me that we would allow Hab to destroy Garrison after the battle if they were sitting in opp's territory and had not been used to block, but not if they were used to block, because during the battle they WERE immune.

I guess I just always read "After the battle" to mean that there are no cards in battle anymore and that the surviving cards have returned to territory.  Apparently though you can have cards still "in battle" "after the battle"?  Try explaining this to an 8 year old in our playgroup :)

Thanks again.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2010, 09:41:58 AM by stefferweffer »

The Schaef

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #57 on: July 16, 2010, 08:35:53 AM »
0
I'd agree that Immune and Protect are in the same vein, like Negate, Interrupt and Protect are. But I'd say that, as Interrupt, Prevent and Negate are subsets of canceling, Protection and Immunity are subsets of restricting.

Exactly.  They are of a similar type, but one is not a type of the other.

Offline Prof Underwood

  • Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8597
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #58 on: July 16, 2010, 08:58:38 AM »
0
But can someone please explain to me when an "After the battle..." card takes effect?
I am suggesting that "After the battle" or "Following the rescue attempt" cards would take effect as the last step of Battle Resolution.  As for explaining that to an 8 year old, I would say that part of the battle is deciding at the end who gets to go home and who get discarded or whatever.  But those characters returning home is still part of the battle phase, so if someone was immune during that phase, then they still are.

I'd agree that Immune and Protect are in the same vein, like Negate, Interrupt and Protect are. But I'd say that, as Interrupt, Prevent and Negate are subsets of canceling, Protection and Immunity are subsets of restricting.
Again, semantics mostly.  But that also makes sense.  It still seems like Immune is a subset of Ignore, since all effects of Immune are also found in Ignore.  Basically Ignore gives immunity to the player who has it, but also gives it to their ignored opponent, and also restricts ignored characters from entering battle.  So Ignore does things that Immune doesn't, but Immune doesn't do anything that Ignore doesn't.

The Schaef

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #59 on: July 16, 2010, 09:33:11 AM »
0
That "also" is the reason why they are different abilities with different functions and different definitions.  If you start saying that immune is a subset of ignore (apparently in addition to a subset of protect) then look at all the questions you start getting.  Does a search for an ignore card let you grab an immune card?  Does negating immunity also negate ignore?  Or does it maybe negate the immunish parts of ignore but leave the "cannot enter battle" and other portions intact?  And this is to say nothing of breaking down the established system of writing the abilities to do what we want them to do simply, when they can be mixed and matched and juxtaposed at will.

OR... we can say ignore is ignore, immune is immune, and protect is protect, and cards that refer to those abilities are specific to each one.  It takes five seconds to explain, every reasonable human being can understand it instantly, and there is no gray area whatsoever about whether this card affects that card.

Offline Cousin It

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
  • You know you love 'em
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #60 on: July 16, 2010, 11:17:05 AM »
0
OR... we can say ignore is ignore, immune is immune, and protect is protect, and cards that refer to those abilities are specific to each one.  It takes five seconds to explain, every reasonable human being can understand it instantly, and there is no gray area whatsoever about whether this card affects that card.

+1

But can someone please explain to me when an "After the battle..." card takes effect?  It would seem to me that if we no longer have cards in battle, that the special abilities of the characters that WERE in battle are no longer in effect.  It just seems odd to me that we would allow Hab to destroy Garrison after the battle if they were sitting in opp's territory and had not been used to block, but not if they were used to block, because during the battle they WERE immune.

I'm still confused about this along with steffer.  I believe Hab should be able to discard Garrison and not because Hab negates his Immune (because he doesn't).  In all the parts of <a href="http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/default.htm?turl=battleresolution1.htm">Battle Resolution</a> in the REG, it says:

1. Both people pass Inish
2. Characters Return
3. Enhancements discarded
4. LS is/isn't given

I believe Abilities triggered by "after the battle" should kick in during Enhancements being discarded or LS being (not being) given.  How can the battle be over if the fighters are still there looking at each other?  And since Garrison has gone back to his terr, why would his ability still be kicking in?  Because it's still the battle phase?  That just doesn't make sense to me.  Also, under <a href="http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/default.htm?turl=diagramofaturn.htm">Diagram of a Turn</a> it actually lists Battle Resolution separately from the Battle Phase.  A different phase all together!?  Who knows!  (None of us apparently.  ::))

Offline Prof Underwood

  • Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8597
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: ANB causing problems again...
« Reply #61 on: July 16, 2010, 11:41:16 AM »
0
And since Garrison has gone back to his terr, why would his ability still be kicking in?  Because it's still the battle phase?
Yes, ongoing special abilities (like immunity) continue until the end of the phase unless they are interrupted or negated.

Also, under <a href="http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/default.htm?turl=diagramofaturn.htm">Diagram of a Turn</a> it actually lists Battle Resolution separately from the Battle Phase.  A different phase all together!?
I once thought they might be a different phase, too.  However, Battle Resolution is actually part of the Battle Phase.  I do agree with you that it's a little confusing to have it pulled out and listed separately in the Diagram of a Turn.  Maybe it won't be in the next rulebook :)

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal