Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Warrior_Monk on April 27, 2011, 02:20:49 PM

Title: Blue Tassels
Post by: Warrior_Monk on April 27, 2011, 02:20:49 PM
Is the "Prevent Unholy Writ" part a clarifier?

"Protect all characters from capture abilities. Prevent Unholy Writ."
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: Gabe on April 27, 2011, 04:22:09 PM
It looks like a separate ability to me.  If I had a card active that said "negate all protect abilities" Blue Tassels would still prevent Unholy Writ.
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: TheHobbit13 on April 27, 2011, 06:53:01 PM
It was defenetly intended to be a clarifier back in the days of redundant wordings. But as Gabe pointed out it would function as separate abilities, although there is really no reason it should other then its botched wording.
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: SirNobody on April 27, 2011, 10:46:08 PM
Hey,

It is a separate ability. Albeit an almost entirely trivial one.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: EmJayBee83 on April 28, 2011, 08:30:49 AM
How do we determine--if we don't have a couple of elders around to ask--whether the second sentence of two (in an old-timey card) is a separate special ability or clarifying text?
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: Minister Polarius on April 28, 2011, 12:19:02 PM
The rule of thumb being used is that all cards through Apostles with two sentences lose the second sentence unless it is conditional upon the first sentence. Imo that's overly-complicated and we should just get rid of the notion of "clarifying text" and let the cards work as written. Nothing would be broken and it would make the game just that extra bit more simple.
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: Lamborghini_diablo on April 28, 2011, 01:15:20 PM
The rule of thumb being used is that all cards through Apostles with two sentences lose the second sentence unless it is conditional upon the first sentence. Imo that's overly-complicated and we should just get rid of the notion of "clarifying text" and let the cards work as written. Nothing would be broken and it would make the game just that extra bit more simple.

I agree. It'd give a little extra punch to some of the older cards as well.
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: Warrior_Monk on April 28, 2011, 01:33:44 PM
The rule of thumb being used is that all cards through Apostles with two sentences lose the second sentence unless it is conditional upon the first sentence. Imo that's overly-complicated and we should just get rid of the notion of "clarifying text" and let the cards work as written. Nothing would be broken and it would make the game just that extra bit more simple.
Except for Angry Mob, since it'd grab all the heroes in their deck and flip them face down, plus he'd be able to discard a hero in battle.
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: RTSmaniac on April 28, 2011, 01:46:51 PM
Angry Mob (Ap)
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Brown • Ability: 7 / 8 • Class: None • Special Ability: Spin card sideways (two full rotations to count). Top of card must be facing a player over halfway to count. If not, spin again. Targeted player turns all Heroes not in battle upside down and then mixes them up. Pick one hero to discard. • Errata: Spin card sideways (two full rotations to count). Top of card must be facing a player over halfway to count. If not, spin again. Targeted player turns all Heroes in territory and set-aside upside down and then mixes them up. Discard one of those Heroes. • Identifiers: Generic NT Genderless Human • Verse: Acts 14:19 • Availability: Apostles booster packs (Ultra Rare)

Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: browarod on April 28, 2011, 01:52:15 PM
Angry Mob has an errata, so I don't think it would be teh broken by the "nothing is clarifying, treat everything as an ability" idea.
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: EmJayBee83 on April 28, 2011, 02:34:17 PM
Angry Mob has an errata, so I don't think it would be teh broken by the "nothing is clarifying, treat everything as an ability" idea.
So you wouldn't think it is broken if you turned all of your heroes face down and then left them that way?
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: browarod on April 28, 2011, 02:51:05 PM
Technically speaking, it already does that whether or not the rule under discussion is changed.
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: EmJayBee83 on April 28, 2011, 10:22:43 PM
No, it doesn't even though it should. It was ruled all the stuff about turning upside down and so on and so forth was just clarifying text.  So the heroes all get turned face up after the battle.
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: Red Dragon Thorn on April 28, 2011, 11:19:19 PM
Yep... Been there, tried that ;)
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: Minister Polarius on April 29, 2011, 01:31:07 AM
Angry Mobs does not have clarifying text, it has a poorly worded SA. I believe it has an errata to say "Spin this card. Discard a card at random from the territory it is pointing to."
Title: Re: Blue Tassels
Post by: EmJayBee83 on April 29, 2011, 08:43:45 AM
Angry Mobs does not have clarifying text, it has a poorly worded SA. I believe it has an errata to say "Spin this card. Discard a card at random from the territory it is pointing to."

You would have thought that the PtB would have done so, but...

• Errata: Spin card sideways (two full rotations to count). Top of card must be facing a player over halfway to count. If not, spin again. Targeted player turns all Heroes in territory and set-aside upside down and then mixes them up. Discard one of those Heroes.

The PtB gave Angry Mob an errata so that it wouldn't work the way that Lampstands was ruled to work. Why they decided to issue an errata and then tell us *not* to play the card directly as the errata states is beyond me.
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal