Author Topic: Cap Question (Read 5175 times)

megamanlan · « **on:** April 02, 2012, 12:09:02 AM »

Does Captain of the Host Negate TC cards in territory?

Captain of the Host (Wa)
Type: Hero Char. • Brigade: Silver • Ability: 10 / 10 • Class: None • Special Ability: Interrupt and prevent all special abilities except banding. Fight by the numbers. • Play As: Negate all special abilities on Characters and Enhancements (except banding and Captain’s special abilities). • Identifiers: OT Male Angel, Prophet • Verse: Joshua 5:14 • Availability: Warriors booster packs (Rare)

Redoubter · « **Reply #1 on:** April 02, 2012, 12:22:24 AM »

I believe that most people are proposing that at some point it was stated that it defaults to battle...long way of saying "I'm pretty sure no, but I can't find you proof

".

I've only ever seen it ruled as negating what's in battle, but I know that a literal interpretation would say otherwise. If I find you some proof, I'll give it to you

megamanlan · « **Reply #2 on:** April 02, 2012, 12:32:25 AM »

I'm just looking at the card and the Errata. It doesn't seem to not Negate TC Enhancements in territory...

Redoubter · « **Reply #3 on:** April 02, 2012, 01:01:00 AM »

Quote from: megamanlan on April 02, 2012, 12:32:25 AM

I'm just looking at the card and the Errata. It doesn't seem to not Negate TC Enhancements in territory...

Don't think of it as "ignore play-as disguised as errata", but...that is not an errata. Some of the play-as are wrong. They were intended to increase readability of old abilities, but they added wording that wasn't there before in some cases.

The play-as changes the card's wording. It should not be taken as truth unless accompanied by an official errata ruling (which there is none, I just checked for you

).

megamanlan · « **Reply #4 on:** April 02, 2012, 01:05:36 AM »

Okay, so it does Negate TC Enhancements?

Redoubter · « **Reply #5 on:** April 02, 2012, 01:08:00 AM »

Quote from: megamanlan on April 02, 2012, 01:05:36 AM

Okay, so it does Negate TC Enhancements?

At this point, the consensus is "no", if by TC enhancements you mean enhancements placed in territories before the battle. Only CWD really can stop TC enhancements outside of battle.

I'm being told that this is the ruling, but again, I am trying to find proof. Right now, it looks like it only negates what is in the battle (and that is under discussion too...).

megamanlan · « **Reply #6 on:** April 02, 2012, 01:13:48 AM »

Well, what about TSA?

Redoubter · « **Reply #7 on:** April 02, 2012, 01:28:47 AM »

Quote from: megamanlan on April 02, 2012, 01:13:48 AM

Well, what about TSA?

Again, you're asking good questions that I cannot find proof for. I just did a search and reviewed a couple dozen threads, didn't find anything.

Though, please expound on your question for people to answer it. I think you meant that, since TSA states all special abilities on characters and enhancements, that "all" should include those outside of battle. Again, good question.

Can we get some help on this, either from the REG or a previous ruling, as to why these should only target battle?

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #8 on:** April 02, 2012, 02:34:04 AM »

CotH and TSA should both negate Enhancements in territory. Their play-as needs to be properly labeled as errata. Currently, FbtN Heroes negate everything ever.

Praeceps · « **Reply #9 on:** April 02, 2012, 09:47:04 AM »

I thought Placed enhancements couldn't be negated after the phase in which they were placed as long as they stayed out of battle?

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #10 on:** April 02, 2012, 03:58:15 PM »

That's a common misconception (somehow). The place part becomes CBN the phase after it's placed, but the ability after the colon remains fully negatable unless it was CBN when played.

megamanlan · « **Reply #11 on:** April 02, 2012, 04:03:48 PM »

I think it's the Draw/Searchs that is limited to the Phase (ie. You cant make an Opponent put the card back that they drew by 7yoP if TSA is in Battle) But I'm not sure if this is correct. I know that it stops Continuous effects, (ie. Simon the Zelot) but not triggers if it was outside of that Phase.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #12 on:** April 02, 2012, 04:15:47 PM »

You're kind of on the right track. ALL abilities become CBN the phase after they are played unless they are ongoing abilities. So TSA (who needs to be properly errata'd) would negate Simon Zealotes (who has an ongoing ability) for one phase, but not Seven Years of Plenty as it was an instant ability that completed in a previous phase.

megamanlan · « **Reply #13 on:** April 02, 2012, 04:49:10 PM »

Okay. One more Question: On Simon's effect, does it have to go back into Battle to regain his Protect or does he get it back after battle?

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #14 on:** April 02, 2012, 05:07:05 PM »

He gets it back after the phase. The trigger (him having been in battle) was already met on a previous phase, so after the negate is removed the protection comes back.

megamanlan · « **Reply #15 on:** April 02, 2012, 05:51:57 PM »

Okay so only an ongoing Negate (ie Satan's Seat, etc) would keep his effect from being utilized then?

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #16 on:** April 24, 2012, 12:53:55 AM »

I was just made aware of this thread, and just want to state that FBN characters (Moses, TSA, CotH, etc.) have always been understood and played to only negate abilities in battle. I don't think this status quo will be changing. But if it were to, there would be an announcement from the elders about it.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #17 on:** April 24, 2012, 12:43:44 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on April 24, 2012, 12:53:55 AM

I was just made aware of this thread, and just want to state that FBN characters (Moses, TSA, CotH, etc.) have always been understood and played to only negate abilities in battle. I don't think this status quo will be changing. But if it were to, there would be an announcement from the elders about it.

Uh-oh...AFAIK, FBTN characters negate all characters and enhancements in play, including placed enhancements. I see no reason why that would not be the case, but since it seems to be a prevailing opinion that it's not, we'll probably have to have a discussion about it on the Elders board.

Wings of Music · « **Reply #18 on:** April 24, 2012, 02:31:21 PM »

Per the wording on the actual card I would say that FBTN negate outside of battle. I'm not sure if that's best for the game though.

megamanlan · « **Reply #19 on:** April 24, 2012, 02:31:38 PM »

I'm good as long as a consensus comes. Because its just confusing to me.

Redoubter · « **Reply #20 on:** April 25, 2012, 12:24:56 PM »

Quote from: megamanlan on April 24, 2012, 02:31:38 PM

I'm good as long as a consensus comes. Because its just confusing to me.

Agreed, and since there is a slight disagreement now between elders, will this be one of those "we'll be back with a ruling" things?

That's all we want, is consistency.

Praeceps · « **Reply #21 on:** May 06, 2012, 03:05:23 PM »

So how are we supposed to rule this until you get back to us?

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #22 on:** May 07, 2012, 02:36:43 AM »

Quote from: Praeceps on May 06, 2012, 03:05:23 PM

So how are we supposed to rule this until you get back to us?

Based on the discussion so far, I would recommend ruling that FBN characters DO negate characters and enhs anywhere in play (and that CotH will probably get an errata limiting him to characters and enhs as well).

It could end up differently, but that's my best guess on the conclusion at this point. And with State tourneys coming up you deserve something to use for now

megamanlan · « **Reply #23 on:** May 07, 2012, 03:41:37 AM »

Okay, thx

christiangamer25 · « **Reply #24 on:** May 07, 2012, 06:33:40 PM »

interesting so my moses just got a power boost

News:

Author Topic: Cap Question (Read 5175 times)