Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Red Dragon Thorn on December 04, 2009, 12:48:15 AM
-
Very Hypothetical Situation.
I create a side battle between a random evil character and my King Ahaz.
I play Gibeonite Treaty and convert King Ahaz to a hero, can I play Authority of Christ on Ahaz?
Gibeonite Treaty
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Brown • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Holder's human Evil Character may be converted to a Hero in brigade of choice, or may be placed in opponent's Land of Bondage and treated as a Lost Soul. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Joshua 9:15 • Availability: Kings booster packs (Uncommon)
Other abilities Irrelavant.
Thanks,
RDT
-
If you get Gibeonite Treaty errata'd... [fist wave]
-
No, converting him would force him out of battle.
-
Regardless of Sean's point (which I back as well), He would no longer be a brown EC.
-
Wouldn't it be easier to use something like King Rehoboam, or christian suing another on your own purple hero? For that matter, you could make one of your heroes fight your own hero.
King Rehoboam
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Crimson • Ability: 7 / 6 • Class: Warrior • Special Ability: Select any two Heroes in territory to fight each other. Losers are placed beneath owner's draw pile(s).
Christian Suing Another
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Crimson • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Holder interrupts the battle and chooses a Hero in play to fight the rescuing Hero. The loser is discarded.
No, converting him would force him out of battle.
Um..why? I'm sort of new, so I may sound newbie-ish here, but I don't remember (or see in the REG) a rule about converting a character forcing them out of battle unless it's an illegal situation, and since it would be a side battle, I don't think that would force him out.
-
Hey,
No, converting him would force him out of battle.
Um..why? I'm sort of new, so I may sound newbie-ish here, but I don't remember (or see in the REG) a rule about converting a character forcing them out of battle unless it's an illegal situation, and since it would be a side battle, I don't think that would force him out.
Perri is right. Conversion does not force the character out of a side battle, only out of a rescue attempt. There are no cards right now that force a hero to fight an evil character in a side battle, but there is nothing "illegal" about such a side battle so it would be allowed to continue.
So the answer to the original question is yes, assuming Ahaz is converted to purple (or gains the ability to play purple enhancements some other way) of course.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Lol, that's awesome!
-
Conversion does not force the character out of a side battle, only out of a rescue attempt.
This makes no sense. If conversion forces a character out of a "normal" battle then it should do the same in a side battle.
-
Conversion does not force the character out of a side battle, only out of a rescue attempt.
This makes no sense. If conversion forces a character out of a "normal" battle then it should do the same in a side battle.
It makes sense that if an EC is fighting a hero in a RA, that if the EC becomes a hero he would stop trying to stop a LS from being saved. It also makes since that if the hero was converted to an EC that he would stop trying to save a LS. It also makes sense that in a side battle alignment doesn't matter (since there is not LS up for grabs and the fight is really for no particular reason) and so conversion wouldn't affect it.
What doesn't make sense really is why side battles are allowed in this game to begin with. Why do we ever allow heroes to fight each other? I guess evil characters fighting among themselves makes a little more sense. But really this whole idea seems to kinda go against the theme of the game.
-
What doesn't make sense really is why side battles are allowed in this game to begin with. Why do we ever allow heroes to fight each other? I guess evil characters fighting among themselves makes a little more sense. But really this whole idea seems to kinda go against the theme of the game.
There are several examples in the Bible of "Heroes" fighting with one another. Why doesn't it make sense as a game mechanic in Redemption?
-
There are several examples in the Bible of "Heroes" fighting with one another. Why doesn't it make sense as a game mechanic in Redemption?
I admit that my thinking goes back a few years to the old system where special abilities couldn't convert if they would harm someone of the same alignment. I know that the rules have changed since then, but I still have a feeling like the game generally wants heroes doing good things and evil characters doing bad things. Side battles between heroes seem to go against this line of thinking.
I'm not fighting to get this changed or anything. It's been a part of Redemption for a looooong time. I'm just pointing out to Sean that if he wants to point to something not making sense, that there are better targets.
-
To answer RDT's original question, an Ahaz converted in a side battle would return to territory. Sean and I tried to convince the PTB that it was okay for the battle to revert to hero vs. EC because it doesn't break anything and actually enhances the game. The "Goodell team" thought otherwise. Prof appears to agree with Sean and me. Also, you may be penalized for excessive celebration if you win a game without letting your opponent do much. ;)
I know that the rules have changed since then, but I still have a feeling like the game generally wants heroes doing good things and evil characters doing bad things. Side battles between heroes seem to go against this line of thinking.
I agree with you that heroes don't want to fight each other. However, it's an evil special ability that makes them do so. That in my mind is very natural and full of common sense.
-
Sean and I tried to convince the PTB that it was okay for the battle to revert to hero vs. EC because it doesn't break anything and actually enhances the game.
STAMP, when was this?
-
I agree with TimSirNobody, who agrees with Perri.
-
To answer RDT's original question, an Ahaz converted in a side battle would return to territory. Sean and I tried to convince the PTB that it was okay for the battle to revert to hero vs. EC because it doesn't break anything and actually enhances the game. The "Goodell team" thought otherwise.
Try again! Try again!
I agree with TimSirNobody, who agrees with Perri.
-
It makes sense that if an EC is fighting a hero in a RA, that if the EC becomes a hero he would stop trying to stop a LS from being saved. It also makes since that if the hero was converted to an EC that he would stop trying to save a LS. It also makes sense that in a side battle alignment doesn't matter (since there is not LS up for grabs and the fight is really for no particular reason) and so conversion wouldn't affect it.
My answer has nothing to do with alignment. Whenever a character is converted it is considered to be "losing by removal." This should not change no matter what kind of battle is taking place.
-
Sean and I tried to convince the PTB that it was okay for the battle to revert to hero vs. EC because it doesn't break anything and actually enhances the game.
STAMP, when was this?
Ok, here's the deal. I did many advanced searches, and lo and behold, could not find the thread I was looking for (seems to happen a lot lately :-\). I thought it was Sean, but it could also have been TimMierz, who asked if they could use Unknown Nation to bring an EC into a side battle between two heroes if the holder let his hero die. Based on the wording of the special ability it made sense. The "blah blah blah" PTB-explanation was that once a battle starts as hero vs EC, here vs hero, or EC vs EC, it stays that way. As a judge, I like that because it is simple and straightforward. But I'm retired. So my opinions are only from a player perspective now. Therefore, the explanation to me just supresses the creativity that can be harnessed which will help to avoid the game becoming stagnate. In my honest opinion, of course. :) To expound, there is no lost soul at stake in a side battle so I feel that if a special ability allows for the battle to change from hero vs hero to hero vs EC, and then maybe another SA changes it to EC vs EC, that creates a scenario for more strategy, more cards used, and more FUN! It's just as logical as an SA that bypasses game rules to allow a hero to fight a hero (which some feel isn't that logical at all ;) )
BUT, it looks like some of the PTB agree with this:
Hey,
No, converting him would force him out of battle.
Um..why? I'm sort of new, so I may sound newbie-ish here, but I don't remember (or see in the REG) a rule about converting a character forcing them out of battle unless it's an illegal situation, and since it would be a side battle, I don't think that would force him out.
Perri is right. Conversion does not force the character out of a side battle, only out of a rescue attempt. There are no cards right now that force a hero to fight an evil character in a side battle, but there is nothing "illegal" about such a side battle so it would be allowed to continue.
So the answer to the original question is yes, assuming Ahaz is converted to purple (or gains the ability to play purple enhancements some other way) of course.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
I agree with TimSirNobody, who agrees with Perri.
So this is cause for GREAT CELEBRATION!! :amen:
-
I thought it was Sean, but it could also have been TimMierz, who asked if they could use Unknown Nation to bring an EC into a side battle between two heroes if the holder let his hero die.
It was I who prompted that discussion.
-
Well in this case perhaps the ruling on Unknown Nation in a side battle should be revisited because it seems inconsistent with this ruling.
-
Wow.... I would have thought the other way but this is AWESOME that it works like this. Cool. Maybe they're making cool stuff work to make up for all the dreams they crushed when they errata'd ANB?
;D ;D ;D
-
Heh, I'm just gonna see how many cards I can get Errataed/rule against before the next set, my goal is 5 ;)
-
Heh, I'm just gonna see how many cards I can get Errataed/rule against before the next set, my goal is 5 ;)
HAHHAHAHA. That's a hard combo to pull off though, I doubt that's gonna get an errata. ;D That's a sweet goal though let me know if I can be of help.
-
The way Tim and Bryon are ruling this is stupid and they have no grounds to make they ruling they've made. There is no rule or precedent that says cards are treated differently when played in side battles.
Please note that I am not saying Tim and Bryon are stupid. They are just very wrong.
-
Wow.... I would have thought the other way but this is AWESOME that it works like this. Cool. Maybe they're making cool stuff work to make up for all the dreams they crushed when they errata'd ANB?
;D ;D ;D
Well, being that side battles are my favorite T2 strategy, I don't mind. :)
But....
Heh, I'm just gonna see how many cards I can get Errataed/rule against before the next set, my goal is 5 ;)
I foresee a repeal on the horizon. :laugh:
-
Nah, the ANB thing was a thorn in the playtesters side for years, I just gave them a legitimate excuse to remove it (No pun intended) This one I could see going either way, and I honestly don't have any real combo revolving around it just yet.
-
Hey,
There is no rule or precedent that says cards are treated differently when played in side battles.
Actually, there is a lot of precedent supporting the idea that cards can be handled differently when played in side battles. A New Beginning, Women as Snares, King Menehem all work differently in a side battle than in a normal battle. And those are just a few examples, there are a lot of abilities that say "If making a rescue attempt," "When blocking" or similar phrases that only work in a normal battle and do not work in a side battle. Saul's Spear's ability only works if it's used in a side battle. And it's not just abilities that treat side battles differently. Experience Credit is a rule that treats side battles differently than normal battles. You cannot get experience credit in a side battle you can get experience credit in a regular battle.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
The cards you mentioned don't change when used in side battles, their special abilities just don't do anything because of how they are worded. That has nothing to do with losing by removal and your desire to throw it out the window for side battle situations.
Again, what rule are you using that says conversion, when played in side battles, doesn't cause the target to be losing by removal?
-
Again, what rule are you using that says conversion, when played in side battles, doesn't cause the target to be losing by removal?
Characters being converted are losing by removal in a normal battle due to game rule, not due to the card itself. There is no such game rule for side battles (that I know of). So, if cards really are being treated differently between regular and side battles, it's the current ruling that's doing it, not a ruling that says characters can be converted without losing in a side battle.
-
Battle resolution for side battles is played the same as normal battles. There's nothing that says losing by removal is different in side battles than it is in normal battles. There aren't separate rules for side battles because the rules for normal battles apply just the same.
-
I agree with Sean that there is no consistency. I don't care how the rule goes or even have much of an opinion... but I do like to see consistency.
-
Battle resolution for side battles is played the same as normal battles.
Apparently not?
There aren't separate rules for side battles because the rules for normal battles apply just the same.
Except that there have to be, otherwise side battles wouldn't work at all since they don't have 2 sides (at the beginning, at least).
-
Battle resolution for side battles is played the same as normal battles.
Apparently not?
There aren't separate rules for side battles because the rules for normal battles apply just the same.
Except that there have to be, otherwise side battles wouldn't work at all since they don't have 2 sides (at the beginning, at least).
Please show me these rules for side battles.
-
Battle in the REG is broken into several parts, 2 of which are "Present Hero" (self-explanatory) and "Block" (where it is decided whether an Evil Character will block). Obviously side battles work differently since these 2 steps are not taken, rather whoever plays the ability usually chooses which 2 characters will block. The side battle doesn't follow the usual rules of battle ("Present Hero" and "Block" specifically). The only stipulation the side battle rules have are to "surviving" and "not surviving" characters and what happens to them and their enhancements after the battle is over. You cannot rescue a Lost Soul in a side battle, so obviously the battle resolution for side battles are different. There is no "rescuing" or "blocking" so why would conversion change anything? It's still 2 characters fighting. Side battles make no distinction regarding the alignment of the battling characters.
REG -> Side Battles: http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/sidebattles.htm (http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/sidebattles.htm)
-
That is a definition of what a side battle is, not the rules for carrying it out. The rules for initiative and battle resolution are the same unless stated otherwise. Can anyone show me where they are stated otherwise?
-
That is a definition of what a side battle is, not the rules for carrying it out. The rules for initiative and battle resolution are the same unless stated otherwise. Can anyone show me where they are stated otherwise?
Well even if they are not stated otherwise we cannot assume they are the same. When you look at the Battle Resolution section in the REG, all four scenarios are written from the perspective of a normal battle. There really should be a separate distinction made for side battles.
-
Well even if they are not stated otherwise we cannot assume they are the same.
We are bound to the rules set forth for normal battles because there are not specific rules for side battles. It isn't that we are assuming that they are the same, its that we have to use the same rules because we don't have separate rules. We can't just make stuff up.
There really should be a separate distinction made for side battles.
:amen: +1
-
Hey,
The current REG says (http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/specialconditions2.htm):
"A converted character in an illegal situation must withdraw to its owners territory (e.g., a Hero blocking a rescue attempt resulting from an Evil Character being converted)."
This is being rewritten in the new REG to say:
"If a conversion ability creates a hero that is blocking or an evil character that is attacking that character must withdraw to its owner's territory as a response to the convert ability."
It is this rule, not the conversion itself that forces a converted character out of battle and passes initiative as a character defeating ability. (Note that Gold Shield does not necessarily pass initiative because, since the hero remains a hero, this rule does not apply.) This rule does not apply in side battles which is why convert works differently in side battles.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Why doesn't it apply in side battles? Where is this stated? As I said before, we are bound to the rules set forth for normal battles because there are not specific rules for side battles.
-
Why doesn't it apply in side battles? Where is this stated? As I said before, we are bound to the rules set forth for normal battles because there are not specific rules for side battles.
If the quote Maly said was written for the new REG is true, then it wouldnt apply to side battles for one reason.
You dont rescue or block in a side battle.
-
Why doesn't it apply in side battles? Where is this stated? As I said before, we are bound to the rules set forth for normal battles because there are not specific rules for side battles.
From the REG:
"A converted character in an illegal situation must withdraw to its owners territory (e.g., a Hero blocking a rescue attempt resulting from an Evil Character being converted)."
The convert "How to use" and "Default Conditions" say nothing about removing a converted character from battle, under "Special Conditions" it says they're removed in an illegal situation. If two heroes or evil characters fighting eachother was an illegal situation, it seems to me that there would be no cards that cause them to do such.
For example, someone mentioned gold shield. If I use gold shield on a hero in battle, to change him to a different brigade, he wouldn't be removed, would he?
Gold Shield
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Gray • Ability: 0 / 5 • Class: Weapon • Special Ability: You may discard this card to convert a human Hero in play to a Hero in the brigade of your choice.
Sorry for the terribly long post. :O
-
Hey,
Why doesn't it apply in side battles? Where is this stated? As I said before, we are bound to the rules set forth for normal battles because there are not specific rules for side battles.
If the quote Maly said was written for the new REG is true, then it wouldnt apply to side battles for one reason.
You dont rescue or block in a side battle.
Exactly.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
For example, someone mentioned gold shield. If I use gold shield on a hero in battle, to change him to a different brigade, he wouldn't be removed, would he?
Nope. He stays in battle.
Sorry for the terribly long post. :O
Pfft, long posts are when it takes two full posts of text to get a point across. Trust me, It's happened before. ;)
-
I fully expect to be able to use Unknown Nation in the manner STAMP mentioned previously because of this ruling.
-
It was ruled that you can't use unknown nation in a side battle? I must have missed that... what was the reason for that ruling?
-
asked if they could use Unknown Nation to bring an EC into a side battle between two heroes if the holder let his hero die. Based on the wording of the special ability it made sense. The "blah blah blah" PTB-explanation was that once a battle starts as hero vs EC, here vs hero, or EC vs EC, it stays that way.
-
Oh I see. That makes sense.... but I think Sean is right that they should both work the same way.
-
If my EC is converted in a rescue attempt or battle challenge, then my EC becomes a hero. Heroes cannot block rescue attempt or battle challenge, so the character is removed from battle. The removal is not a result of a conversion ability. A convert ability does not have a "return to territory" as part of it. The removal is because of the RULE that heroes don't block rescue attempts or battle challenges.
There is no rule that says heroes can't fight ECs in side battles. Just because they don't typically start that way doesn't mean they can't become that way.
As further evidence on my side of the argument, Gold Shield converts a hero to a different brigade and does not result in losing by removal. Thus, it is NOT the convert ability that causes removal. It is the game rule that heroes don't block. But once again, there is no rule disallowing ECs from fighting heroes in side battles. I would not be surprised to see a card that begins such a side battle in the coming years.
-
If my EC is converted in a rescue attempt or battle challenge, then my EC becomes a hero. Heroes cannot block rescue attempt or battle challenge, so the character is removed from battle. The removal is not a result of a conversion ability. A convert ability does not have a "return to territory" as part of it. The removal is because of the RULE that heroes don't block rescue attempts or battle challenges.
There is no rule that says heroes can't fight ECs in side battles. Just because they don't typically start that way doesn't mean they can't become that way.
As further evidence on my side of the argument, Gold Shield converts a hero to a different brigade and does not result in losing by removal. Thus, it is NOT the convert ability that causes removal. It is the game rule that heroes don't block. But once again, there is no rule disallowing ECs from fighting heroes in side battles. I would not be surprised to see a card that begins such a side battle in the coming years.
So that means I can use Unknown Nation in the scenario described. Thanks.
-
I would not be surprised to see a card that begins such a side battle in the coming years.
Handel's Messiah (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ2ywczFcME#)
-
Judging from all your amazing posts in the past, I'm gonna assume that was a really clever pun. Unfortunately I missed it this time. ::)
-
Maybe a Gene Kelly/Singing in the Rain dance clip would have been more on par with the double entendre I like to slip in. ;)
Rain = sad, sad day about ANB
Dancing = joy to expanded use of side battles