Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Korunks on April 05, 2010, 03:41:05 PM
-
My opponent RA's with Phineas, I block with Fallen Warrior. I play Bringing Fear, Overwhelmed by Philistines, he then responds with Zeal for the Lord. What happens?
Overwhelmed by Philistines
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 3 / 3 • Class: None • Special Ability: used by a warrior class Philistine, discard all Heroes in battle. Cannot be negated if a purple Hero is in battle. • Identifiers: None • Verse: I Samuel 31:6 • Availability: Thesaurus ex Preteritus booster packs ()
Bringing Fear
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 3 / 3 • Class: None • Special Ability: If used by a Philistine, negate all special abilities on characters and good Enhancements. Cannot be negated. • Identifiers: OT, Depicts a Weapon • Verse: I Samuel 17:11 • Availability: Faith of Fathers (Set 6)
Fallen Warrior
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 2 / 2 • Class: Warrior • Special Ability: Fallen Warrior gains the cumulative abilities (*/*) of each Hero he successfully blocks. • Play As: Fallen Warrior gains the cumulative abilities (*/*) of each Hero he successfully blocks (stalemate or defeat). • Identifiers: Generic OT Male Human, Philistia, Fought Earthly Battle • Verse: Isaiah 9:5 • Availability: Kings booster packs (Common)
Phinehas, son of Eleazar
Type: Hero Char. • Brigade: Teal • Ability: 12 / 8 • Class: Warrior • Special Ability: Protect this Hero from capture and conversion. Protect Heroes in your territory and set-aside area from discard abilities. • Identifiers: OT Male Human, Tabernacle High Priest (House of Eleazar) • Verse: Numbers 25:7 • Availability: Priests booster packs (Rare)
Zeal for the Lord
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Teal • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Interrupt the battle and discard two Evil Characters of different brigades. Cannot be negated if used by Phinehas, son of Eleazar. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Numbers 25:11 • Availability: Priests booster packs (Rare)
-
pretty sure that zeal works
the cbn status means that something like benniah snatches a spear can;t negate the negate all specail abilities. the Can't be negated on zeal stops the battl by numbers of bringing fear, so it still works.
thats my opinion so its porbably worth 1 cent :)
-
Overwhelmed by Philistines is CBN, so Zeal cannot interrupt it. Phineas Dies. you don't even need to play Bringing Fear. my answer to Overwhelmed by Philistines was Covenant with Phineas. I got confused somewhere on the other thread.
EDIT: oops, read Overwhelmed wrong. it is negatable... ok. sorry. got confused on this thread.
-
My opponent RA's with Phineas, I block with Fallen Warrior. I play Bringing Fear, Overwhelmed by Philistines, he then responds with Zeal for the Lord. What happens?
CBN can't be negated.
So...
You block with FW. You play Bringing Fear. The battle is FBTN. You then play Overwhelmed. They play Zeal (which is CBN on Phineas and Overwhelmed isn't CBN against Phineas), you die (if they so chooses).
-
Ironica is right, except that BF only negates characters and GEs.
Result: Overwhelmed is interrupted by Zeal, and ECs are discarded.
Bringing Fear tries to negate abilities on characters and GE's. It negates Fallen's ability, as well as Phinny's protection ability. It doesn't negate EE's, so Overwhelmed works. However, when Zeal is played on Phinny, it cannot be negated by Bringing Fear, so Zeal is able to interrupt Overwhelmed's ability and discard Fallen & another EC.
-
Overwhelmed by Philistines is CBN, so Zeal cannot interrupt it. Phineas Dies. you don't even need to play Bringing Fear. my answer to Overwhelmed by Philistines was Covenant with Phineas. I got confused somewhere on the other thread.
Psst....your missing something:
Overwhelmed by Philistines
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 3 / 3 • Class: None • Special Ability: used by a warrior class Philistine, discard all Heroes in battle. Cannot be negated if a purple Hero is in battle. • Identifiers: None • Verse: I Samuel 31:6 • Availability: Thesaurus ex Preteritus booster packs ()
-
I read it as isn't. haha.
-
Psst....your missing something:
you are too. Bringing Fear does not Negate Evil Enhancements only Good ones. You cannot CBN Discard you are already dead. You cannot interrupt me because the prevent is CBN.
Bringing Fear
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 3 / 3 • Class: None • Special Ability: If used by a Philistine, negate all special abilities on characters and good Enhancements. Cannot be negated. • Identifiers: OT, Depicts a Weapon • Verse: I Samuel 17:11 • Availability: Faith of Fathers (Set 6)
-
Why does Zeal's CBN status trump the CBN status of Bringing Fear?
-
Psst....your missing something:
you are too. Bringing Fear does not Negate Evil Enhancements only Good ones. You cannot CBN Discard you are already dead. You cannot interrupt me because the prevent is CBN.
I edited my post (didn't read Bringing Fear correctly).
-
@Ironica. Bringing Fear doesn't negate evil enhs. So...
Block with FW. Bringing Fear (CBN) is played, good enhs (except CBN enhs) are negated.
Overwhelmed tries to d/c Phin. Overwhelmed is NOT CBN because Phin =/= purple.
Zeal (CBN) is played, interrupts Overwhelmed, and FW is discarded.
So Zeal works and Hero wins the battle CBN. Zeal doesn't need to interrupt Bringing Fear, it only interrupts Overwhelmed. A CBN negate cannot negate a CBN ability.
-
Why does Zeal's CBN status trump the CBN status of Bringing Fear?
it's not interrupting it. Bringing Fear just doesn't affect Zeal.
-
Bringing Fear's ability is never negated.
-
Bringing Fear's ability is never negated.
Exactly. It just doesn't do anything in this case. :)
-
look at it like this
A child is born (can't be negatved) vs Kot (negate all specail)= A child is born wins,
Overwhelmed can be negated or intrupted so trumpet beats overwhelmed. then its CBN status via its sa, so it oevercomes bringing fear.
actually, ACiB is cannot NOT be negated, so that's irrelevant.
and your example is flawed because KoT is not CBN.
-
I still Disagree. You are indirectly negating the prevent portion of Bringing Fear. And by game rule if you cannot interrupt or negate what is causing you to lose by removal you are removed. Zeal's interrupt is not CBN. Only the Discard is. If you cannot interrupt the discard, you lose. The CBN discard is irrelevant, you are already dead.
Even if the Whole thing was CBN, you are causing an indirect negation of Bringing fear by interupting and discarding the card it was played on, and that is a violation of the CBN rule.
-
Zeal's interrupt is not CBN. Only the Discard is.
That is simply incorrect. Zeal's entire ability is CBN.
I still Disagree. You are indirectly negating the prevent portion of Bringing Fear.
No, you aren't. Bringing Fear is a negate so it negates everything that isn't CBN. Bringing Fear is CBN itself, but it doesn't matter at all in this example. Zeal interrupts the battle. Because Zeal is an interrupt & CBN, nothing except CBN protect/immune/ignore can stop it.
Zeal doesn't interrupt Bringing Fear, but it doesn't matter since Zeal's CBN > Fear's Negate. Zeal then interrupts ObP and wins the battle.
-
In the case described, Bringing Fear is not negated, directly or indirectly. It's like rock vs. rock: they can't affect each other, but if you're holding a rock and someone throws a rock at your head, you could still wind up dead (and would probably drop your rock). That's kind of what's happening here, where the rocks are Bringing Fear and Zeal, and the person holding the rock who gets hit in the head is Fallen Warrior (which seems fairly appropriate given the card art).
-
It is an indirect negate, you would be interrupting the CBN prevent(even that makes no sense, you cannot interrupt a non interruptable ability), and Discarding the card it was playing making it like Bringing fear was never played(that's how interrupt and discard are played ie. Devourer). You cannot negate a CBN.
-
i would like this post to end this thread. i am giving the scenario, and having read this thread, the rulebook, (10th anniversary), and the exegetical guide, here is my thoughts. here is how this works. bringing fear can't stop zeal. bringing fear is not cuasing me to loose by removal. ovbp is. i interupt overwhelmed with zeal. (which the whole ability is cbn) you die and unless you do something w/ cm or unkown nation, i win the lost soul. I AM NOT NEGATING BRINGING FEAR!!!!!!!!!!! I AM INTERUPTING OVERWHELMED. phinehas wins unless overwhelmed somehow becomes cbn.
-
i would like this post to end this thread.
You must not understand the honored tradition of forum debate... ;)
Your thoughts are correct; it's what I have been saying. However, it won't stop anything. :D
-
i would like this post to end this thread.
You must not understand the honored tradition of forum debate... ;)
I'm not sure I'd say tradition, but in memory of Colin, no, we will not let it drop. this thread must go on!
-
i would like this post to end this thread. i am giving the scenario, and having read this thread, the rulebook, (10th anniversary), and the exegetical guide, here is my thoughts. here is how this works. bringing fear can't stop zeal. bringing fear is not cuasing me to loose by removal. ovbp is. i interupt overwhelmed with zeal. (which the whole ability is cbn) you die and unless you do something w/ cm or unkown nation, i win the lost soul. I AM NOT NEGATING BRINGING FEAR!!!!!!!!!!! I AM INTERUPTING OVERWHELMED. phinehas wins unless overwhelmed somehow becomes cbn.
This is wrong, it is an indirect negate. For those of you who disagree what is your definition of indirect negate? You are have to interrupt my prevent to interrupt Overwhelmed by Philistines. You cannot interrupt my prevent, this makes no logical sense. And I will continue to argue untill we come to a logical conclusion. How can something that cannot be interrupted be interrupted?
-
Phinehas enters battle.
Fallen Warrior Blocks.
Fallen Warrior has initiative, so he plays Bringing Fear, ALL of which is unnegatable. Phinehas' and FW's abilities are negated, and all characters and good enhancements from now on will be negated, but there are no other immediate effects.
Fallen Warrior still has initiative, so he plays Overwhelmed by Philistines, which is not negated by Bringing Fear but ALL of which is still negatable because there is no purple hero in battle.
Phinehas is now being removed from the battle by an opponent, and so has initiative to play a negate or interrupt. Most of the things he plays will be negated by Bringing Fear. However, Zeal for the Lord (ALL of it) is CBN on Phinehas, and so he plays that. It cannot be negated, so Bringing Fear does not negate it, because CBN trumps negate. At this point in battle, the only enhancement that can be interrupted is Overwhelmed, as Bringing Fear is CBN, and so Overwhelmed is interrupted and Bringing Fear is not. Bringing Fear remains functional as Fallen Warrior is discarded by Zeal's ability, which remains CBN.
The end.
I don't see how there could be any more confusion on the matter. Bringing Fear was never negated, directly or indirectly. It's ability never stopped being active. It's just that Zeal was essentially protected from its ability.
-
1. Can a negate card negate a CBN? No, so Bringing Fear cannot negate Zeal.
2. Can an interrupt card interrupt a non-CBN ability? Yes, so Zeal can interrupt ObP.
You cannot interrupt my prevent, this makes no logical sense.
Yes, you can interrupt a prevent with a CBN interrupt.
For those of you who disagree what is your definition of indirect negate?
It doesn't exist...
You are have to interrupt my prevent to interrupt Overwhelmed by Philistines.
Zeal does not have to interrupt the prevent. It is CBN. Overwhelmed tries to prevent Zeal, but it cannot because Zeal CBN. So Zeal takes effect.
The outline BB just posted is very good; if you still disagree, read that.
-
i would like this post to end this thread. i am giving the scenario, and having read this thread, the rulebook, (10th anniversary), and the exegetical guide, here is my thoughts. here is how this works. bringing fear can't stop zeal. bringing fear is not cuasing me to loose by removal. ovbp is. i interupt overwhelmed with zeal. (which the whole ability is cbn) you die and unless you do something w/ cm or unkown nation, i win the lost soul. I AM NOT NEGATING BRINGING FEAR!!!!!!!!!!! I AM INTERUPTING OVERWHELMED. phinehas wins unless overwhelmed somehow becomes cbn.
This is wrong, it is an indirect negate. For those of you who disagree what is your definition of indirect negate? You are have to interrupt my prevent to interrupt Overwhelmed by Philistines. You cannot interrupt my prevent, this makes no logical sense. And I will continue to argue untill we come to a logical conclusion. How can something that cannot be interrupted be interrupted?
Wow, so by your logic, Benaniah snatches a spear should stop any CBN enh. Good to know you can negate CBN enhancements as long as your negate is cbn! Wait... that isn't right.
-
Korunks, You have a completely false idea of indirect negate.
Indirect negation is if you negate something that caused something else to occur. Example, I negate a banding card, the special ability on the hero that got banded in is negated. THAT is indirect negation.
simply bypassing a card is NOT indirect negating. Its a very simple thing that happens:
Bringing Fear, which is CBN, attempts to prevent Zeal for the Lord, which is CBN. The negate fails because zeal is CBN. Zeal never does ANYTHING to Bringing Fear, it just interrupts Overwhelmed by Philistines.
According to you, just playing a CBN enhancement during a battle with someone like TSA in battle would be "indirectly negating" the heroes fbtn. That is simply not true.
Cannot be Negated means Cannot be Negated. A CBN negate is NOT able to negate another CBN card, period.
-
Korunks, I consider you my best friend. I mean no offense by this what so-ever, I do not want anything (especially a thread) to come be tween us.
This is wrong, it is an indirect negate. For those of you who disagree what is your definition of indirect negate? You are have to interrupt my prevent to interrupt Overwhelmed by Philistines. You cannot interrupt my prevent, this makes no logical sense. And I will continue to argue untill we come to a logical conclusion. How can something that cannot be interrupted be interrupted?
I do not understand why my response was not a logical conclusion.
-
Korunks, I consider you my best friend. I mean no offense by this what so-ever, I do not want anything (especially a thread) to come be tween us.
I have no idea why you would think this thread is an issue between us. However if you are concerned about that please PM me, I prefer to discuss personal things privately.
Korunks, You have a completely false idea of indirect negate.
Indirect negation is if you negate something that caused something else to occur. Example, I negate a banding card, the special ability on the hero that got banded in is negated. THAT is indirect negation.
simply bypassing a card is NOT indirect negating. Its a very simple thing that happens:
Bringing Fear, which is CBN, attempts to prevent Zeal for the Lord, which is CBN. The negate fails because zeal is CBN. Zeal never does ANYTHING to Bringing Fear, it just interrupts Overwhelmed by Philistines.
According to you, just playing a CBN enhancement during a battle with someone like TSA in battle would be "indirectly negating" the heroes fbtn. That is simply not true.
Cannot be Negated means Cannot be Negated. A CBN negate is NOT able to negate another CBN card, period.
I must have been taught incorrectly when I started and it has taken until now for me to run into a situation which exposed it. I understand I may have a false idea of Indirect Negate, but that is irrelevant since the consensus is against me, even though to me it seems illogical I'll just have to file it under things about Redemption I dislike and move on. This isn't the first time I have disliked how the game is played, and with the direction the game seems to be going, I doubt it will be the last.
-
If negation worked as you thought it did, the words "cannot be negated" on anything would be practically meaningless.
Just curious, how would you handle a situation where a CBN negate was trying to negate another CBN negate?
-
If negation worked as you thought it did, the words "cannot be negated" on anything would be practically meaningless.
Just curious, how would you handle a situation where a CBN negate was trying to negate another CBN negate?
which ever came in first, I'm guessing.
I must have been taught incorrectly when I started and it has taken until now for me to run into a situation which exposed it. I understand I may have a false idea of Indirect Negate, but that is irrelevant since the consensus is against me, even though to me it seems illogical I'll just have to file it under things about Redemption I dislike and move on. This isn't the first time I have disliked how the game is played, and with the direction the game seems to be going, I doubt it will be the last.
I'm not sure how it's illogical, but this has been the way it is since the beginning. I agree though, lately there have been some pretty outrageous rulings. *mutters about abilifiers...
-
CBN means CBN so if you play bringing fear to negate good enhancements. And then they play zeal, zeal would go through because it is cbn and you cannot negate a cbn. Zeal isn't in any way negating bringing fear. It is discarding the character not the enhancement after the interruption.
-
which ever came in first, I'm guessing.
That is correct, that is what I feels should happen because to ME it is more logically correct that an uninterruptable prevent should stop all even other CBN. If Zeal was played First I feel that any other CBN Interrupt and discard would also not work.
CBN means CBN so if you play bringing fear to negate good enhancements. And then they play zeal, zeal would go through because it is cbn and you cannot negate a cbn. Zeal isn't in any way negating bringing fear. It is discarding the character not the enhancement after the interruption.
I know I was wrong, I think it should be otherwise but I know I'm wrong :).
I'm not sure how it's illogical, but this has been the way it is since the beginning. I agree though, lately there have been some pretty outrageous rulings. *mutters about abilifiers...
I won't rehash my logic because that part of this conversation does not need to continue. Abilifiers have not officially been ruled on, I still rule all abilifiers as Identifiers. Until an official answer comes or the CURRENT REG is updated that is how it should be ruled.
-
which ever came in first, I'm guessing.
That is correct, that is what I feels should happen because to ME it is more logically correct that an uninterruptable prevent should stop all even other CBN.
If a CBN prevent cannot be interrupted, a CBN battle winner cannot be prevented, right? If Zeal cannot be prevented, what is stopping it from working as normal?
If Zeal was played First I feel that any other CBN Interrupt and discard would also not work.
This is absolutely true. If the battle involved a purple hero (say King David used Unified Kingdom to bring in Phinehas) then Overwhelmed by Philistines would be CBN and Zeal could not interrupt it. But ObP was not CBN/CBI in this case, so that is all that Zeal is interrupting. It's not interrupting Bringing Fear, but Bringing Fear is also not preventing it, so it works.
CBN means CBN so if you play bringing fear to negate good enhancements. And then they play zeal, zeal would go through because it is cbn and you cannot negate a cbn. Zeal isn't in any way negating bringing fear. It is discarding the character not the enhancement after the interruption.
I know I was wrong, I think it should be otherwise but I know I'm wrong :).
So just to better understand your position:
If I block your Michael with Twelve-Fingered Giant, you believe that you should not be able to play The Second Seal to bring in all of your heroes, since that would be effectively negating my negate? If that is what you believe, I guess I don't see how that is more logical than the way it is.
-
If I block your Michael with Twelve-Fingered Giant, you believe that you should not be able to play The Second Seal to bring in all of your heroes, since that would be effectively negating my negate? If that is what you believe, I guess I don't see how that is more logical than the way it is.
No Because Michael entered battle first. You would not be interrupting any form of prevent, you were there first.
-
If I block your Michael with Twelve-Fingered Giant, you believe that you should not be able to play The Second Seal to bring in all of your heroes, since that would be effectively negating my negate? If that is what you believe, I guess I don't see how that is more logical than the way it is.
No Because Michael entered battle first. You would not be interrupting any form of prevent, you were there first.
But according to your logic, if I go out with Spy, then you block with TFG, then I play Wheel within a Wheel to exchange for Joshua the High Priest, it is a different situation when I play Jehoiada's Strength?
-
I see where your confusing is coming from.
Say I RA with a FBTN hero, then you block and play a CBN discard enhancement. You see this as interrupting the prevent?
Thats not how it works. The status of CBN works more like a protect ability. It says "This card is protected from being interrupted, prevented, or negated"
While CBN is not classified as a protect, it works very similarly by protecting the ability from being prevented, interrupted, or negated.
-
But according to your logic, if I go out with Spy, then you block with TFG, then I play Wheel within a Wheel to exchange for Joshua the High Priest, it is a different situation when I play Jehoiada's Strength?
That is how I would view it.
I see where your confusing is coming from.
Say I RA with a FBTN hero, then you block and play a CBN discard enhancement. You see this as interrupting the prevent?
Thats not how it works. The status of CBN works more like a protect ability. It says "This card is protected from being interrupted, prevented, or negated"
While CBN is not classified as a protect, it works very similarly by protecting the ability from being prevented, interrupted, or negated.
I understand that now, but I still don't like it. :)
-
I do have a question, wouldn't bringing fear negate everything befor zeal was played, thusly negating zeal?
*facepalm*
-
I do have a question, wouldn't bringing fear negate everything befor zeal was played, thusly negating zeal?
This has been said a hundred times. Zeal cannot be negated.
-
I understand that now, but I still don't like it. :)
You see, the reason we keep arguing this point is that if you really did understand it, you would probably like it just fine, as all of us do. :)
-
You see, the reason we keep arguing this point is that if you really did understand it, you would probably like it just fine, as all of us do. Smiley
I am not sure about that, I am a weird person. :)
-
Abilifiers have not officially been ruled on, I still rule all abilifiers as Identifiers. Until an official answer comes or the CURRENT REG is updated that is how it should be ruled.
the current REG is not going to be updated.
official answer: "Holds" is a special ability, regardless of where it appears on a card.
Definitions of */* abilities are identifiers, regardless of where they appear on the card.
-
That is not official Bryon later stated in that same thread:
I like Schaef's idea that, when "Holds" appears on the identifier line of a fortress, the placement of the card into the fort is an action allowed by the game rule for fortresses, and not a special ability. But it is still a manually-triggered action, and not an instant ability that is now-or-never at the moment it is played.
emphasis mine, but that was after several long pages of discussion. We need a clear cut ruling now, not some post from the beginning of a discussion where the decision was changed.
-
That is not official Bryon later stated in that same thread:
I like Schaef's idea that, when "Holds" appears on the identifier line of a fortress, the placement of the card into the fort is an action allowed by the game rule for fortresses, and not a special ability. But it is still a manually-triggered action, and not an instant ability that is now-or-never at the moment it is played.
emphasis mine, but that was after several long pages of discussion. We need a clear cut ruling now, not some post from the beginning of a discussion where the decision was changed.
he said he likes the idea, not that that's the way it is.
-
And I remain unconvinced that statement is the be all end all response. I need a clear concise ruling not a grab from the middle of a discussion. I will stand by the old rulings until there is a CLEAR answer from the PTB.
-
it was Bryon. Schaef didn't agree at all.
the rules only change once a year. after nationals.
-
it was Bryon. Schaef didn't agree at all.
the rules only change once a year. after nationals.
Except, apparently, in TEAMS, where three changes were recently made--two of which will have a major impact on both deck building and in-game strategy.
-
Teams isn't a real category anyway. It's a gimmick.
-
Teams is a figment of your imagination.
why is TEAMS completely capitalized? is it like one of those acro things? Totally Extreme Amazing Multiplayer Situation? Tennis Eating A Mutant Samuri? Teenagers Expressing Advantageous Molecular Synonyms? The Equipment Activating Machines for Spam?
-
are there realy new team rules? if so, i'm going to make a new topic with them. or was MJB just messing around?
Yes. Check out the changes starting about here. (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=17965.msg320275#msg320275)