Author Topic: Bethlehem vs Wages  (Read 2154 times)

Offline Master Q

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Onward...
    • -
    • Midwest Region
Bethlehem vs Wages
« on: February 13, 2020, 11:42:54 AM »
0
New Bethlehem: "If opponent plays a multi-brigade evil card, you may draw 1 (or reserve your Hero to negate that card this turn)."

Provided you have a Hero in play to reserve, this can negate things like Wages/Confusion/Invoking/etc, right?

Bethlehem

Spoiler (hover to show)

For reference, the evil cards in Q all remove themselves from play:

Wages
Spoiler (hover to show)

Confusion
Spoiler (hover to show)

Invoking
Spoiler (hover to show)
If you were to go on a trip... where would you like to go?

Offline Gabe

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10558
  • From Moses to the prophets, it's all about Him!
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • Land of Redemption
Re: Bethlehem vs Wages
« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2020, 12:13:39 PM »
0
Targets must be in play at the time the negate attempts to target them. With the examples you provide they could all be out of play making this ineligible targets for Bethlehem's negate.
Have you visited the Land of Redemption today?

Offline Bobbert

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1752
  • The player formerly known as Thomas Hunter
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Bethlehem vs Wages
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2020, 01:28:09 PM »
0
I'm not sure I follow that. Not being able to play a negate like Woes against those cards makes sense, but given that "negate last" still works on cards that remove themselves from play, why wouldn't a triggered ability that specifically targets that card? To my mind the fact that it's specifically "that card" would allow it to still be a valid target.
ANB is good. Change my mind.

Offline RedemptionAggie

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3070
    • -
    • South Central Region
Re: Bethlehem vs Wages
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2020, 01:47:11 PM »
0
I think the logic is "this card" doesn't override the default targeting of in play (Overcome! and the like), so "that card" doesn't either. "Negate last" is kind of a one-off for targeting out of play.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2020, 01:49:23 PM by RedemptionAggie »

Offline Sean

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3818
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: Bethlehem vs Wages
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2020, 02:14:15 PM »
0
I think the logic is "this card" doesn't override the default targeting of in play (Overcome! and the like), so "that card" doesn't either. "Negate last" is kind of a one-off for targeting out of play.
Is it an option to eliminate the one off in favor of consistency?  Just thinking out loud, I've no idea what positive or negative effects this would have.
May you prosper greatly!
Daniel 4:1b

Offline Master Q

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Onward...
    • -
    • Midwest Region
Re: Bethlehem vs Wages
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2020, 03:40:48 PM »
0
It just seems more intuitive to me that you would have some kind of window to insert Bethlehem's negate, since it is a triggered ability, and since it does (to me) implicitly imply that it is targeting the evil card in Q regardless of where it ends up. But it does make sense regarding the defaulting to play why you would not be able to do that.

I'm pretty sure I was thinking of how Dust and Ashes works regarding Job, in that since it references him by name it doesn't matter if he's in play or not to carry out that optional trigger (to me, in Bethlehem's case 'that card' is shorthand for 'specific name of the card that triggered this ability'). But, D&A is also an instead ability, so that's likely got something to do with it too.
If you were to go on a trip... where would you like to go?

Offline TheJaylor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2807
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Bethlehem vs Wages
« Reply #6 on: April 09, 2020, 02:13:31 PM »
0
Sorry, I missed this when it was brought up initially, but does this mean that Bethlehem would not be able to negate any Territory Class EE played outside of battle that doesn't place itself somewhere in play? The REG states that TC enhancements played outside of battle "are discarded when their abilities are complete". And then under Effects, "the completion of an effect includes carrying out the effect on the targets, if that has not already been done". Plus, it looks like Negate can only target abilities that are active or complete and only ongoing abilities can be active without completing right away.

It does look like Instead has the clarification that a triggered Instead ability can insert itself before the completion on another effect, but I don't think Negate has the same clarification.
Fortress Alstad

Offline RedemptionAggie

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3070
    • -
    • South Central Region
Re: Bethlehem vs Wages
« Reply #7 on: April 09, 2020, 02:46:03 PM »
0
Bethlehem can't negate TC EEs that are no longer in play. Negate doesn't have the same clarification as instead, because it undoes (or stops, in the case of ongoing abilities) abilities, instead of replacing them like an instead.

Offline TheJaylor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2807
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Bethlehem vs Wages
« Reply #8 on: April 09, 2020, 07:55:22 PM »
0
Darn. Guess I should've worded it differently, but it's fine. Mourn and Weep got banned anyway and it's still pretty good.
Fortress Alstad