Author Topic: Battle Prayer (Read 9346 times)

Mr.Hiatus · « **Reply #50 on:** July 13, 2009, 11:33:21 AM »

Quote

I know I already asked you in person last year at Nationals, Mike, and I know the answer, unless things have changed very recently.

What was the answer when you asked last year at nationals? If it was no then you knew it was no and was trying to get your deck to be ruled in your favor which I think is wrong. If it was yes it works then I think you are completely fine by having proof it works. Either weay you are a great player and even better person. But if you knew the answer was a no and still did this then I think that is wrong.

Quote

So, I assume Mr. Hiatus would just write off this post as non-official, since it's not in the REG?

Actually, yes I would. Rob himself told me at NC state that anything on the board is not official and to go by the REG. So until the REG is changed I would rule Michael+Angel's Sword works over any other enhancement. And this is my reasoning behind my ruling for that at a tournament until it is changed...not every player is on the boards! How is it fair that a ruling on the boards by the creator but yet is not in the REG is fair to players not on the board? I could not tell them, oh yeah sorry that does not work that way because of a ruling on the forums that is not official but the creator ruled it on the boards. No that does not work like that, if it is changed by the creator then it should be changed in the REG.
And to anyone coming to my tournaments go ahead and play Michael+Angel's Sword, you will probably win and I will rule in that favor because it has never been changed. And if anyone gets mad at me they can get over it and get mad at the people not changing the REG over important issues. ESPECIALLY DURING TOURNAMENT SEASON.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #51 on:** July 13, 2009, 11:42:41 AM »

He knew the answer was yes. He got the email for clarification for the mentioned players. He's already said this.

Mr.Hiatus · « **Reply #52 on:** July 13, 2009, 12:04:34 PM »

In that case the reg is wrong and Kirk did the right thing.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #53 on:** July 13, 2009, 12:11:56 PM »

Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on July 13, 2009, 11:33:21 AM

And to anyone coming to my tournaments go ahead and play Michael+Angel's Sword, you will probably win and I will rule in that favor because it has never been changed. And if anyone gets mad at me they can get over it and get mad at the people not changing the REG over important issues. ESPECIALLY DURING TOURNAMENT SEASON.

Let me ask you this then, since the previous ruling is flawed. This is the example I used that brought about the change in the first place:

Mike + AS vs assyrian archer with 2kh on him. Does AS activate before Assyrian archer can band, since Weapon Class enhs activate before banding does.

I'm not trying to start that AS Vs 2kh debate again, but rather asking how you would rule that, since the current REG says NOTHING about how that is ruled.

Mr.Hiatus · « **Reply #54 on:** July 13, 2009, 12:18:57 PM »

I already said why I would rule it the way I would. It is only fair to people that are not on the boards. A ruling on the board is not official until it is in the REG. If the REG is updated before my tournament this weekend I will rule it that way, but I will NOT rule it if the REG has not been changed since the ruling has been made on the boards. It is simply not fair to players that do not know of the ruling that was made on the board.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #55 on:** July 13, 2009, 12:22:34 PM »

So you would let AS play before the archer can band... remind me not to play at your tournament because that rule is flat out flawed.

I bet everyone who plays there will use silver now!

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #56 on:** July 13, 2009, 12:38:22 PM »

Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on July 13, 2009, 12:18:57 PM

I already said why I would rule it the way I would. It is only fair to people that are not on the boards. A ruling on the board is not official until it is in the REG. If the REG is updated before my tournament this weekend I will rule it that way, but I will NOT rule it if the REG has not been changed since the ruling has been made on the boards. It is simply not fair to players that do not know of the ruling that was made on the board.

Since I asked the question originally, thank you for your answer. I haven't ruled this way in the past, but I appreciate the consistency of your position and the reasons behind it.

Two open questions for the PTB (and anyone else who would like to chime in)...

Is this how judges are supposed to handled non-REG PTB approved rulings?

Would it be possible to create a simple online REG page that simply included recent ruling that haven't been properly incorporated into the REG? I'm thinking of something along the lines of a one line summary and a link to the post with the final ruling? That would be completely separate from the REG proper so the main work could be farmed off to someone other the Mike and Tim even if they end up posting the final file.

The Guardian · « **Reply #57 on:** July 13, 2009, 12:41:55 PM »

You mean like this one?

http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=6537.0

sk · « **Reply #58 on:** July 13, 2009, 12:50:41 PM »

Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on July 13, 2009, 12:18:57 PM

A ruling on the board is not official until it is in the REG.

Since when?

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #59 on:** July 13, 2009, 12:58:01 PM »

Wow, Miraculous Hankerchiefs is officially changed, I didn't catch that. I knew it was going to eventually be changed, but thats good to know its official now. Thanks for posting the link to that thread, Justin!

Couldn't another moderator edit Mike's post there to reflect recent changes? Therefore, once a final decision is made, someone like Tim could edit the thread Justin referenced and that could be official for tournament use?

Kirk

Mr.Hiatus · « **Reply #60 on:** July 13, 2009, 12:58:21 PM »

The Angel's Sword ruling is not on there. There is an issue that needs to be fixed ASAP. Inconsistent rulings/confusion. This can all be fixed by updating the REG. Also this needs to be done before nationals! Also lambo, how can I rule something that was said on the board to someone who has the REG and argues that the ruling is in there? That is not fair to pretty much ruin the player's deck because he was not aware of a ruling on the boards.

Quote

Since when?

Is this a serious question?
It is people like you that think, oh it is on the boards that means it is in the REG and ruled that way. If it is on the boards it is NEVER official. Ask the creator of the game and other top players/playtester, I would hope they agree with me, I know Rob Anderson will. The boards is not used to make rulings, but it can be used to post new rulings that have been made in the REG. It can be used to let everyone know what is going and get discussion about things that might get changed and get input. But the final result is never official. The only thing official is the rulebook/REG.

Korunks · « **Reply #61 on:** July 13, 2009, 01:06:09 PM »

Sounds like what everyone desires is a shorter cycle between forum rulings, and REG updates. Maybe we could invest some of our energy in finding a solution to that and maybe make everyone happy? Maybe set up an official thread/category, that would override the REG. In that case the REG would be the authority, unless something in that one specific thread/category overrules it? That would seem to solve it nicely, the REG is still the main source for rules, unless something has changed and those changes can be in one easy to find place. What do you guys think?

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #62 on:** July 13, 2009, 01:11:29 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on July 13, 2009, 12:41:55 PM

You mean like this one?

http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=6537.0

Yeah, only with regular updates and an agreement that it is official. It also wouldn't need to be as formal, just a list of "major" (whatever that means) rulings and a link back to the decision itself.

Decisions that should definitely (IMHO) be included...

Stan's Folly cannot be played out of battle.

Protection of Angels vs. Twelve-Fingered Giant

Battle Prayer (wa)

Angel's Sword vs. the Horsies

Korunks · « **Reply #63 on:** July 13, 2009, 01:15:33 PM »

All we would need is an established order of operations and some member of the PTB to "bless" the rulings and update the one thread for all of our enjoyment! We might even be able to get this in place before Nationals. I'll even Volunteer to manage the Update Thread if no one else is desired by all. I just would like to see a conclusion to this issues that has been around for a while.

sk · « **Reply #64 on:** July 13, 2009, 03:41:24 PM »

Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on July 13, 2009, 12:58:21 PM

The Angel's Sword ruling is not on there. There is an issue that needs to be fixed ASAP. Inconsistent rulings/confusion. This can all be fixed by updating the REG. Also this needs to be done before nationals! Also lambo, how can I rule something that was said on the board to someone who has the REG and argues that the ruling is in there? That is not fair to pretty much ruin the player's deck because he was not aware of a ruling on the boards.
Quote
Since when?
Is this a serious question?
It is people like you that think, oh it is on the boards that means it is in the REG and ruled that way. If it is on the boards it is NEVER official. Ask the creator of the game and other top players/playtester, I would hope they agree with me, I know Rob Anderson will. The boards is not used to make rulings, but it can be used to post new rulings that have been made in the REG. It can be used to let everyone know what is going and get discussion about things that might get changed and get input. But the final result is never official. The only thing official is the rulebook/REG.

New rulings are almost always made on the boards, and the REG is updated to reflect those rulings. Again, if the thing has obvious errors, it is obviously not a completely accurate authority on some issues, so outside rulings should be followed for the instances that the PTB say it is in error.

The only reason that the REG is considered official, and not just a 'guide' as the name implies, is because Rob said it is. His authority is higher than the REG's, and should be respected more than the outdated guide he approved.

Quote from: Korunks on July 13, 2009, 01:15:33 PM

All we would need is an established order of operations and some member of the PTB to "bless" the rulings and update the one thread for all of our enjoyment! We might even be able to get this in place before Nationals. I'll even Volunteer to manage the Update Thread if no one else is desired by all. I just would like to see a conclusion to this issues that has been around for a while.

I agree that we need this, but it needs to be updated by a mod/playtester so that it will be taken seriously.

Korunks · « **Reply #65 on:** July 13, 2009, 03:54:13 PM »

I don't care who does it, but it (or something like it) needs to happen, and since I always try to "put my money where my mouth is", I volunteered. I am thankful for all the work that mike has done, and is doing on the REG, but the community seems to have grown quickly and it requires more frequent "tending" too. If any of the playtester/mods see this, feel free to weigh in. If this idea is junk I would like to know, so I don't waste anymore of peoples time with it.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #66 on:** July 13, 2009, 04:46:15 PM »

One way or another, sooner rather than later, the REG needs to be updated more regularly. Mike cannot be expected to do it all by himself.

lightningninja · « **Reply #67 on:** July 13, 2009, 05:03:17 PM »

WOW... Stamp hasn't posted yet... he's always the first to argue for good/evil gold being the same when printed on cards.

frisian9 · « **Reply #68 on:** July 14, 2009, 10:58:16 PM »

The REG was intended to be a way of keeping the game played consistently from one group to another. The main description sections were meant to provide enough guidelines to make rulings consistent, without necessarily having to include any rulings in the REG itself. It simply fills in guidelines that are more specific than the rulebook, clarifying what is gray or not addressed in the rulebook. Since we have moved farther and farther from the REG being a "rulings" archive, I don't see it going back there again. You may like to have rulings in the REG, but I can tell you it only leads to confusion, obsolete entries, and contradictions. At present there are really very few changes I see that are necessary - we simply need to use these discussion boards to understand how to interpret the guidelines.

I can look through the threads and come up with a list of minor mods that may need to be made, but they will not come out before nationals. My guess is that most will be updated "play as" in the card section, with few changes in the guidelines section.

I am sorry that I haven't posted updates to the REG in a while - the software I use (DocToHelp if any of you wonder what I use) doesn't compile it properly, so I am in the middle of a major rebuild of the base documents. I expect to have it done after nationals (ok, but not the day after). Understand that the REG as a document and online web page is thousands of pages of code and takes hours to compile - when it works. I have no time to go and modify the 3,000+ indvidual HTML files generated. Nobody has that kind of time.

I take your comments as constructive, and am thankful you all care. I'll be active in looking and listening and responding in the fall when the changes won't effect major tournaments.

Mike

frisian9 · « **Reply #69 on:** July 14, 2009, 11:21:30 PM »

One last note - the REG entry for Battle Prayer was official for a long time ("good" was meant to be operative). The recent private email from Rob didn't go through regular approval channels, but instead came directly from Rob. That was irregular, but it was official. Hence, what Kirk stated was correct. Until I hear otherwise, I am going to change that particular entry in hte online REG to reflect what Rob's ruling was. It will be there shortly (if I can upload then changed files from my hotel room). I think it was an oversight that Rob didn't post something online for us all to see - Rob is very prompt at bringing rulings out publicly. When he does so publicly, it gives us all a chance to ask further questions as to the rationale for the change in ruling. Often we are all as interested in "why" as "what" and we all benefit from seeing it.

By the way, I thought there was a lot of "heart" in this thread and no personal put-downs. It's okay to call things into question that are a question. I am only sorry there wasn't much word from other playtesters (including myself). My apology for not seeing this as it developed.

Mike

Gabe · « **Reply #70 on:** July 14, 2009, 11:33:40 PM »

Mike, it's good to have you back.

Your knowledge and wisdom about this game have been missed!

frisian9 · « **Reply #71 on:** July 14, 2009, 11:42:43 PM »

Thanks Gabe.

I don't have enough "stuff" in the hotel to fix the Battle Prayer online. Hard to believe when I take so much stuff along with me when I'm out of town

I'll do it when I'm home this weekend.

Mike

STAMP · « **Reply #72 on:** July 15, 2009, 10:54:50 AM »

Quote from: lightningninja on July 13, 2009, 05:03:17 PM

WOW... Stamp hasn't posted yet... he's always the first to argue for good/evil gold being the same when printed on cards.

Good gold demons CAN be redeemed. Evil gold demons cannot.

Wait. What?

SirNobody · « **Reply #73 on:** July 16, 2009, 12:50:45 AM »

Hey,

First a comment about the REG. It is ALWAYS up to the judge to interpret the REG, and the judge always has the final say. But it is the judge's responsibility to make rulings in accordance with the REG to the best of his knowledge and ability. The REG is the guidebook, but the judge is the end all be all of what is "official."

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on July 13, 2009, 12:38:22 PM

Two open questions for the PTB (and anyone else who would like to chime in)...

Is this how judges are supposed to handled non-REG PTB approved rulings?

Would it be possible to create a simple online REG page that simply included recent ruling that haven't been properly incorporated into the REG?

To answer your second question, that sort of thing has been tried a couple times, but it has always ended up just as poorly updated as the REG. I am working with Mike much more on the new REG than I have on REG updates in the past, so hopefully between the two of us we will be able to do something like that once the new REG is up and running.

To answer your first question, the REG says, "[T]ournament 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." That quote gives hosts permission to use non-REG PTB approved rulings at tournaments, and considering how outdated the "current" REG is, I would say that any host that is not utilizing that permission to implement some of the rule changes made since May 2007, is doing a disservice to the players that attend their tournaments.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #74 on:** July 16, 2009, 04:16:08 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on July 16, 2009, 12:50:45 AM

I would say that any host that is not utilizing that permission to implement some of the rule changes made since May 2007, is doing a disservice to the players that attend their tournaments.

Even if that host is not online and has never heard of the Message Boards?

News:

Author Topic: Battle Prayer (Read 9346 times)

Lamborghini_diablo

Lamborghini_diablo