Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Ironica on June 03, 2013, 03:48:44 PM
-
Just wanted to double check a situation that came up.
I RA with a hero (obviously), my opponent blocks with Nebby that has some horses attached. He uses Nebby's ability to search his deck and plays a capture enhancement to capture my hero. Do I get my special initiative to negate that enhancement before the horses activate?
We played as if I did. I played an enhancement to interrupt and remove Nebby from play. Does the horses then come into play since it is an interrupt and the ability has not gone off yet?
-
If you remove Nebby, horses can't activate (assuming he's the only crimson character in battle)
-
I would think the horses goes off because it is an "interrupt the battle."
-
I would think the horses goes off because it is an "interrupt the battle."
You have to finalize Neb's ability first. Part of that would be reconciling the discard of Nebby.
-
Neb's ability would activate, then Swift Horses would activate right after. All abilities in battle have to complete before you can interupt any other ability. first the character, then the weapon. then you would have Special Inicative.
-
Neb's ability would activate, then Swift Horses would activate right after. All abilities in battle have to complete before you can interupt any other ability. first the character, then the weapon. then you would have Special Inicative.
This is not accurate.
1. Nebby activates, searches for a capture.
2. The capture activates.
3. The hero has speicial init to interrupt the capture.
4. The hero is either captured or plays something to prevent the capture (let's say Zeal) and targets Nebby for discard.
5. Nebby has init to play an interrupt.*
6. After the above has been resolved, Swift horses activates (if a crimson character is in battle)
*The question is if Swift Horses can activate here, which it should not be able to
-
Im pretty sure you use horses before they play an enhancement. because all abilities finish before the opponent can play something. A weapon activates as soon as you go into battle and everything else finishes.
-
I agree with Wyatt that "special initiative" just means that you WILL get the opportunity to negate whatever removed your last character from battle after everything else has finished. But first you go ahead and let everything finish (other than the fact that even if the card that removed your last character from battle normally would be discarded/removed/etc., it is still "quasi-in-play" so that it can be targeted by a regular negate).
However this understanding is also something that is currently being discussed among the elders.
-
Neb's ability would activate, then Swift Horses would activate right after. All abilities in battle have to complete before you can interupt any other ability. first the character, then the weapon. then you would have Special Inicative.
This is not accurate.
1. Nebby activates, searches for a capture.
2. The capture activates.
3. The hero has speicial init to interrupt the capture.
4. The hero is either captured or plays something to prevent the capture (let's say Zeal) and targets Nebby for discard.
5. Nebby has init to play an interrupt.*
6. After the above has been resolved, Swift horses activates (if a crimson character is in battle)
*The question is if Swift Horses can activate here, which it should not be able to
That's not how Jezebel/Ahab works (to my knowledge). You only get SI after all current abilities finish, so the hero would not get SI until Neb chooses whether or not to play off of horses.
*instaposted*
-
If all abilities have to complete why do horses activate before the capture completes? That's nonsensical.
-
If all abilities have to complete why do horses activate before the capture completes? That's nonsensical.
Horses doesn't, not technically. The capture is 'complete', or else it could not allow SI (because interrupt/negate only works AFTER an ability is complete) but there is still a state of SI that allows the opponent the opportunity to play an enhancement once all other abilities have been resolved. That's the way SI works, outside of the normal initiative. That is why it is special.
-
Underwood is right up there saying horses is being used before the capture resolves. Either you get special initiative and then horses happens or... Well actually I don't know because that seems like the only option since any other option would mean horses happen in the middle of the capture.
-
The capture completes. Horses activates and finishes (including any enhancements played off the horses). Should the battle not be over (end battle - Forgotten History, etc.), the captured hero has SI to interrupt the capture.
-
I don't see how you could construe that as the capture resolving.
-
I don't see how you could construe that as the capture resolving.
That's exactly what it is doing, but the cards don't "go" to those places and the battle doesn't end until SI completes or another ability causes the ability to be something that cannot be stopped or the battle ends. Your perspective on the situation seems to want to add complexity and detail that just isn't there.
The game does not interrupt the activation of abilities. Anything 'queued' goes off before SI is resolved. It is actually a simple solution to a complicated (potentially) problem and is consistent with all other rules we have.
-
I don't see how you could construe that as the capture resolving.
That's exactly what it is doing, but the cards don't "go" to those places and the battle doesn't end until SI completes or another ability causes the ability to be something that cannot be stopped or the battle ends. Your perspective on the situation seems to want to add complexity and detail that just isn't there.
The game does not interrupt the activation of abilities. Anything 'queued' goes off before SI is resolved. It is actually a simple solution to a complicated (potentially) problem and is consistent with all other rules we have.
You can think how you want, but I don't see how immediately awarding special initiative before horses has even activated is more complex. It's substantially more consistent actually.
-
You can think how you want, but I don't see how immediately awarding special initiative before horses has even activated is more complex. It's substantially more consistent actually.
It is actually not more consistent, because one of the main underlying rules of abilities in Redemption is that all abilities must complete before anything can respond to it. Doms, interrupts, negates (seriously, look at their definitions, they have the part about the ability having to complete right there), none of them can be played until an ability completes. Do you get SI if the same card has 2 components, and the first would cause removal? Or do you get to Grapes in response to that first component? No, the entire ability completes first, and even after that, there are strict rules about what can happen. It is also an established rule that all abilities on characters and everything they bring in (be they gained abilities, weapons, triggered abilities, etc.) must complete before the character is considered 'in battle'. Partial activation violates that component in cases of blocks being described.
So, consistency actually supports this system over a stack or game-interrupt system. It is written all over the rules of Redemption. All abilities must finish, and then special initiative (which is by definition 'special') kicks in if able.
-
Actually Special Initiative is already an exception to abilities having to complete before something else can activate, otherwise you couldn't play anything at all. Yes it is a major rule that you can't insert abilities until they complete, but since it is already an exception, it wouldn't be inconsistent to say that everything is suspended until it finishes, rather than this ability waits, but this one doesn't. It makes some rulings easier (Mass Removal on Emperor Otho with Naaman's Chariots and Horses for example becomes far easier to understand the rule, although it gives the same rule) and it would make many cases at least as easy to understand and give the game more battle interaction, since there are more chances to interrupt/negate.
-
You can think how you want, but I don't see how immediately awarding special initiative before horses has even activated is more complex. It's substantially more consistent actually.
It is actually not more consistent, because one of the main underlying rules of abilities in Redemption is that all abilities must complete before anything can respond to it. Doms, interrupts, negates (seriously, look at their definitions, they have the part about the ability having to complete right there), none of them can be played until an ability completes. Do you get SI if the same card has 2 components, and the first would cause removal? Or do you get to Grapes in response to that first component? No, the entire ability completes first, and even after that, there are strict rules about what can happen. It is also an established rule that all abilities on characters and everything they bring in (be they gained abilities, weapons, triggered abilities, etc.) must complete before the character is considered 'in battle'. Partial activation violates that component in cases of blocks being described.
So, consistency actually supports this system over a stack or game-interrupt system. It is written all over the rules of Redemption. All abilities must finish, and then special initiative (which is by definition 'special') kicks in if able.
Consistency would suggest that you don't insert Horses (which have not happened yet) because special initiative.
-
Consistency would suggest that you don't insert Horses (which have not happened yet) because special initiative.
You then missed the entire point of my post. Horses are active, they must activate in order for the character to be blocking so long as something else hasn't already removed him. That is the rule. SI does not take precedence over that.
-
Consistency would suggest that you don't insert Horses (which have not happened yet) because special initiative.
You then missed the entire point of my post. Horses are active, they must activate in order for the character to be blocking so long as something else hasn't already removed him. That is the rule. SI does not take precedence over that.
'
I understand the point of view that Horses is activate, but my argument is that it shouldn't be active because that's inserting abilities into the capture. It's much simpler to resolve the capture first.
-
I understand the point of view that Horses is activate, but my argument is that it shouldn't be active because that's inserting abilities into the capture. It's much simpler to resolve the capture first.
Here is the crux: It is not actually interrupting the capture. The capture is 'complete', even if it can later be negated/interrupted through SI. It is just another ability completing before SI is resolved. It is the rule, the way it has been ruled, and is consistent with other rules. Not really sure what else I can say for you beyond that about how it is the actual rule :dunno:
Also, if we go with your suggestion, then what do we have, a situation where the card played in SI is immediately interrupted by horses and you get to play another card? Not only is the suspension of the horses (or other abilities on the same card as caused SI) more complicated and inconsistent with existing rules, but it drastically changes gameplay in a negative way.
-
I understand the point of view that Horses is activate, but my argument is that it shouldn't be active because that's inserting abilities into the capture. It's much simpler to resolve the capture first.
Here is the crux: It is not actually interrupting the capture. The capture is 'complete', even if it can later be negated/interrupted through SI. It is just another ability completing before SI is resolved. It is the rule, the way it has been ruled, and is consistent with other rules. Not really sure what else I can say for you beyond that about how it is the actual rule :dunno:
Also, if we go with your suggestion, then what do we have, a situation where the card played in SI is immediately interrupted by horses and you get to play another card? Not only is the suspension of the horses (or other abilities on the same card as caused SI) more complicated and inconsistent with existing rules, but it drastically changes gameplay in a negative way.
What should happen is:
1. The capture is played
2. Special iniative passes and resolves
3. After the resolution, if horses can still activate, it does.
This is really simple. It's really consistent with the ruling you can't insert other abilities (since no matter how you slice it, currently you capture, then there's this other ability, and then you finish capturing).
-
Based on my current understanding of the rules I would agree with Redoubter, that all the abilities will complete before you get special initiative to do anything about the capture. Nothing in redemption is currently allowed to occur mid special ability, which Redoubter already said. I have even had it ruled in a tournament against me that I could not interrupt my losing condition because an end the battle CBN cards was played. So either that ruling was wrong, or the idea that SI occurs mid ability is wrong. Is there any discussion on the elder side of the board? What is the elders ruling? What seems to be going on here is a difference of opinion, and that's why we need an answer from the elders.
Actually Special Initiative is already an exception to abilities having to complete before something else can activate, otherwise you couldn't play anything at all. Yes it is a major rule that you can't insert abilities until they complete, but since it is already an exception, it wouldn't be inconsistent to say that everything is suspended until it finishes, rather than this ability waits, but this one doesn't. It makes some rulings easier (Mass Removal on Emperor Otho with Naaman's Chariots and Horses for example becomes far easier to understand the rule, although it gives the same rule) and it would make many cases at least as easy to understand and give the game more battle interaction, since there are more chances to interrupt/negate.
'
Special Initiative is not an exception to having abilities complete first, it just holds after the ability is completed to allow you an attempt to negate it. It is not any more consistent than the rule we currently have.
-
Special initiative is not as instant as one might think. In the past, for example, if two heroes are in battle and one is captured by an evil enhancement the defending player can writ or cm the other hero before SI kicks in. A little while ago they made changes to that scenario and said the last hero in battle never gets special initiative, even if it is losing. Something to think about.
I also see an issue if it is ruled that Nebuchadnezzar can play of horses b4 the hero gets special initiative. What if Nebuchadnezzar played Deceit or Pride or some other battle winner what would happen then? Can my opponent play some thing like Samuel's Edict to negate deceit and discard Nebuchadnezzar even though he is also being captured?
-
What should happen is:
1. The capture is played
2. Special iniative passes and resolves
3. After the resolution, if horses can still activate, it does.
This is really simple. It's really consistent with the ruling you can't insert other abilities (since no matter how you slice it, currently you capture, then there's this other ability, and then you finish capturing).
Currently you capture, then there's this other ability, and then you get a chance to use SI to play an interrupt/negate from captured. The capture finishes when you play it, not when special initiative fails. If Neb captured you with an enhancement played via his ability and then with Horses I play an enhancement that discards a captured character I would be able to target the Hero I just captured even if SI for that capture is still pending.
-
This is why MtG created "the Stack" back in '94 to get rid of the interrupt system.
-
Any update from the elders, it was mentioned they are discussing this.
-
Any update from the elders, it was mentioned they are discussing this.
There are two solid ways of looking at this issue and the elders discussed both. We ended up taking a narrow understanding of "special initiative" to only allow the last character removed from a battle to be able to negate what removed them even though normally the character (and possibly what removed them) would no longer be in play.
This means that "special initiative" would NOT interrupt cards that have already been played. So if a chain of cards removes the last character in battle at some point in the chain, then the chain would still keep going until all those cards finished. Then at that point the player whose character was removed would have an opportunity to play a negate (unless of course something was CBI or CBN).
-
I preferred the old system better. It made sense to me more.
-
I preferred the old system better. It made sense to me more.
Perhaps I didn't explain clearly enough. This is the way we've always played it Wyatt :)
-
It used to be slightly different, if you were losing by the numbers because of removal of another character, not just if the last character was removed. Or is this the wrong thing and I'm getting confused?
-
I preferred the old system better. It made sense to me more.
Usually a statement like this refers to Facebook! ;)
-
wait, no wrong thread. NVM then. ignore me. moment of stupidity there.
-
Just for clarity (since the Nebby/horse combo is big in my deck):
If I block with nebby with horses, I use Nebby’s special to play, let’s say, Head Of Gold. One of the choices I chose is the rescuing hero. I then use the horses to draw two and then play an end of battle enhancement. Does that mean that they are never allowed to interrupt HOG because of the end the battle enhancement?
Also, can I play two capture cards against the same hero (e.g. the above situation but the second enhancement would be carried into exile or another HOG (T2 FTW))?
-
I do not think that they would be able to stop you if you use an end the battle enhancement(AKA Belshazzar's Banquet) after head of gold.
as for capturing the character twice, I guess you can, but not really a point with it is there? it is one less person that you capture with one of your top battle winners in your deck. if no more heroes, capture some ecs.
-
I do not think that they would be able to stop you if you use an end the battle enhancement(AKA Belshazzar's Banquet) after head of gold.
as for capturing the character twice, I guess you can, but not really a point with it is there? it is one less person that you capture with one of your top battle winners in your deck. if no more heroes, capture some ecs.
The point would be that it will stop all negate one evil enhancement since if they stopped one, the other would get them.
-
Wyatt is right that if you play an "end the battle" enhancement then that would be one way of getting around "special initiative" This has been the status quo at least since Jezebel + Ahab + Gibeonite Trickery.
However I do NOT think you could target a removed hero to remove them from battle AGAIN. From your perspective, that card is already removed from battle. It is only your opponent who has "special initiative" and can therefore still play a negate on their "removed" character. Since you don't have "special initiative", you can't target their player with an additional capture, etc.
-
Would the capture even take effect if you end the battle? Horses interrupts the capture and you end the battle. Wouldn't it be as if you never played the capture?
-
Would the capture even take effect if you end the battle? Horses interrupts the capture and you end the battle. Wouldn't it be as if you never played the capture?
"interrupt the battle" enhancements interrupt ongoing abilities (but the capture was an instant ability and is over) and the last enhancement/card that your opponent played (but the capture was played by you). Neither of those would affect the capture.
-
However I do NOT think you could target a removed hero to remove them from battle AGAIN. From your perspective, that card is already removed from battle. It is only your opponent who has "special initiative" and can therefore still play a negate on their "removed" character. Since you don't have "special initiative", you can't target their player with an additional capture, etc.
The real question is this: How can I target a character at each step, and what happens during a chain of events? I agree with your perspective on not being able to target again for an ability targeting a character in battle, but does that mean that you can target them as their eventual card type?
For example: King Belshazzar (http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/King_Belshazzar_%28FF2%29) with Swift Horses (http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/Swift_Horses_%28FF%29) blocks, D2, and plays Head of Gold (http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/Head_of_Gold_%28FF%29) in such a way that it would create special initiative by removing the last or all heroes from the battle. Now he bands to Babylonian Soldiers (http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/Babylonian_Soldiers_%28FF2%29), who target the (or one of the) hero from battle for removal from the game. None of this is CBI/CBN, so SI is granted. Does the rescuing player have to negate/interrupt Head of Gold or Soldiers, and if he negates Head of Gold, can Soldiers retarget since it 'was not' a legal target by the time the ability completed (due to SI's insertion)?
My thought would be that you can indeed target the to-be-captured hero with Babylonian Soldiers (fitting with the Herod Agrippa II (http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/Herod_Agrippa_II_%28TP%29) ruling that withdraws become CBN captures without SI, since that triggers before SI would be granted), that Head of Gold would need to be negated because it caused the removal from battle (which is key for SI), and that Soldiers would not be able to retarget, as instant abilities cannot change targets (and therefore the draw/negate+discard-artifact and increase all cascade away off the negation of the original capture).
Really, this is the question I think is being brought out: What else can you do before SI is attempted, and how are cards targeted in the meantime?
-
My understanding is that if you play Head of Gold to capture all of the heroes in battle, then from your perspective they are captured, and therefore Babylonian Soldiers can target one of them to remove them from the game. However after this is all done, then your opponent will have special initiative to negate that Head of Gold. If he negates the capture, then that would also undo the removal (because it was based on something that never happened). So if you're doing the removing with BS, then you have to choose whether to risk using your ability on something that might get negated, or on a different captured character from earlier in the game.
So in general, from the perspective of the chain of events, everything happens like normal. But then from the perspective of your opponent who gains special initiative, they still have a chance to undo anything that wasn't CBI or CBN.
-
My understanding is that if you play Head of Gold to capture all of the heroes in battle, then from your perspective they are captured, and therefore Babylonian Soldiers can target one of them to remove them from the game. However after this is all done, then your opponent will have special initiative to negate that Head of Gold. If he negates the capture, then that would also undo the removal (because it was based on something that never happened). So if you're doing the removing with BS, then you have to choose whether to risk using your ability on something that might get negated, or on a different captured character from earlier in the game.
So in general, from the perspective of the chain of events, everything happens like normal. But then from the perspective of your opponent who gains special initiative, they still have a chance to undo anything that wasn't CBI or CBN.
I agree with Prof U's understanding.
-
Cascading negates seem aweful for the game.
-
Cascading negates seem aweful for the game.
We've always had cascading negates. Imagine I attack with a hero who bands to another hero that draws a card. If you block and negate the band, then I have to put the card that I drew from the 2nd hero back on top of my deck. This is really just the same kind of thing.
And this is the best way to maintain the gamerule that cards which are already played have to complete before other cards can be played.