Author Topic: Counting Turns Set Aside  (Read 11488 times)

Offline SirNobody

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3113
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #25 on: September 14, 2008, 11:28:10 PM »
0
Hey,

Quote
And with the set-aside lost soul, the heroes set aside will be unavailable for one rescue regardless of it we count turns for the owner or the set-asider-er.

On my turn, I draw three cards, including the set-aside LS.  I set your Hero aside for one turn.  I complete my turn.
On your turn, you draw three cards, upkeep phase adds counter, your Hero comes back.

Please explain to me where is the one rescue for which your Hero is not available.

Um, Schaef, re-read the line from my post that you quoted.  I was not saying that one turn rather than two turns would make no difference, I was saying two turns of the owner of the card vs. two turns of the player that used the set-aside would make no difference.

Quote
Or we can go the other direction and you can figure out how to explain to them how they have three different characters in their set-aside area and they all get counters added at three different times because they were targeted by three different players, and they need to keep track of that.

Hum, good point.  What if cards were all set-aside to the set-aside area of the player that set them aside (but were still controled by their owner)?  That would address that issue.  And it would eliminate one set-aside ability setting characters aside to multiple set-aside areas.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly, WildCard Secretary of Defense
www.freewebs.com/redemptionne

Offline SirNobody

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3113
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #26 on: September 14, 2008, 11:29:36 PM »
0
Hey,

You add your counters during your Upkeep Phase and your opponent adds their counter during their Upkeep Phase.

Do you add your counters to the cards you own or the cards you set aside?

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly, WildCard Secretary of Defense
www.freewebs.com/redemptionne

Offline 777Godspeed

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+29)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1985
  • Breathe redemption into wasted life, Breathe deep
    • -
    • Northwest Region
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #27 on: September 14, 2008, 11:34:51 PM »
0
I added counters to my hero in my set-aside area.
 
I cannot add counters to my opponents hero in their set-aside area, eventhough I put it there.


Godspeed,
Mike
Divine mental biopsy reveals you need psychosurgery
When in doubt  D3.
I support Your Turn Games.

The Schaef

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #28 on: September 14, 2008, 11:56:31 PM »
0
Um, Schaef, re-read the line from my post that you quoted.  I was not saying that one turn rather than two turns would make no difference, I was saying two turns of the owner of the card vs. two turns of the player that used the set-aside would make no difference.

Um, yes it does.  If I count it on my own turn, I lose one turn with the Hero.  If you count my Hero on your turn, I lose two turns with the Hero.  I have no idea why you would say it makes no difference, because the number of turns is different no matter which portion of the hypothetical you were changing.

Quote
Hum, good point.  What if cards were all set-aside to the set-aside area of the player that set them aside (but were still controled by their owner)?  That would address that issue.  And it would eliminate one set-aside ability setting characters aside to multiple set-aside areas.

But then you run into the issue of keeping track of whose characters are being kept where and dealing with cards that target set-aside areas.  For example, with the new anti-angel soul in RoA, I could play Moses Kills Egyptian on your guy, put him in my set-aside and gain access, a complete change from the way it works now.  People could set aside a High Priest with Two Possessed and use U&T with him for potentially the rest of the game.  Pretty much every card that "discards a [character] from opponent's set-aside area" would be fundamentally changed, including (especially?) Ambush the City combos.

I think this adds more confusion and changes more of the set-aside landscape a lot more than a simple rule that says each player sets aside their own characters in their own area and adds their own counters on their own turn.  Contrasting everything listed above and other things I'm sure I'm missing, I am having a hard time seeing why setting aside multiple characters presents any kind of significant problem.

Offline Kor

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 756
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #29 on: September 15, 2008, 01:38:12 AM »
0
Um, Schaef, re-read the line from my post that you quoted.  I was not saying that one turn rather than two turns would make no difference, I was saying two turns of the owner of the card vs. two turns of the player that used the set-aside would make no difference.

Um, yes it does.  If I count it on my own turn, I lose one turn with the Hero.  If you count my Hero on your turn, I lose two turns with the Hero.  I have no idea why you would say it makes no difference, because the number of turns is different no matter which portion of the hypothetical you were changing.



No, you lose one rescue attempt with that hero either way.

Example 1 (count on your turn)

Your turn.
You draw the lost soul and set aside my hero.
You then do your upkeep and take a counter off my hero.
My turn.
I can't make a rescue attempt with my hero because he is set aside.
Your turn.
You do your upkeep, take a counter off my hero and I get him back.

That is one rescue attempt lost with that hero.


Example 2 (count on my turn)

Your turn.
You draw the set aside lost soul and set my hero aside.
My turn.
My upkeep I remove a counter from my hero.
I cannot make a rescue attempt with that hero this turn because he is set aside.
Your turn.
My turn.
I remove the second counter from my hero and return him to play.
I can then make a rescue attempt.

That is one rescue attempt lost with that hero.



Life is what you make of it.

Offline 777Godspeed

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+29)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1985
  • Breathe redemption into wasted life, Breathe deep
    • -
    • Northwest Region
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #30 on: September 15, 2008, 02:41:03 AM »
0



Example 2 (count on my turn)

Your turn.
You draw the set aside lost soul and set my hero aside.
My turn.
My upkeep I remove a counter from my hero.
I cannot make a rescue attempt with that hero this turn because he is set aside.
Your turn.
My turn.
I remove the second counter from my hero and return him to play.
I can then make a rescue attempt.


This is the correct way to add counters to the set-aside heroes.

Godspeed,
Mike
Divine mental biopsy reveals you need psychosurgery
When in doubt  D3.
I support Your Turn Games.

The Schaef

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #31 on: September 15, 2008, 07:25:14 AM »
0
No, you lose one rescue attempt with that hero either way.
Example 1 (count on your turn)
Your turn.
You draw the lost soul and set aside my hero.
You then do your upkeep and take a counter off my hero.
That is not how that works.  You do not add a counter the same turn you activate the ability.  Otherwise the first-round-protect Lost Soul would be completely worthless (you draw the card, then add a counter, then I take my turn, add a counter, ta-da, I now have access to rescue it).

Offline TimMierz

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4047
  • I can't stop crying. Buckets of tears.
    • -
    • Northeast Region
    • Tim's Photos
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #32 on: September 15, 2008, 07:28:23 AM »
0
Since the draw phase happens before the upkeep phase, why wouldn't the Shame LS add counters for the player who drew the soul that turn? The first-round soul is different, since it does not deal with counters or the set aside area (it deals with an entire round).
Get Simply Adorable Slugfest at https://www.thegamecrafter.com/games/simply-adorable-slugfest

Offline 777Godspeed

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+29)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1985
  • Breathe redemption into wasted life, Breathe deep
    • -
    • Northwest Region
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #33 on: September 15, 2008, 10:38:15 AM »
0
Since the draw phase happens before the upkeep phase, why wouldn't the Shame LS add counters for the player who drew the soul that turn? The first-round soul is different, since it does not deal with counters or the set aside area (it deals with an entire round).

Good catch on that. There doesn't seem to be any reason, at the moment, that it wouldn't work that way, other than -

REG - Set-Aside - How to Use - More: Duration
Once a character is set aside, you will add counters to the character during each subsequent Upkeep Phase of yours.

I can interpret this as - I set my hero aside this turn, so I will start adding counters next turn during my Upkeep Phase.

Or

I set my hero aside during my Draw Phase and the subsequent phase is my Upkeep Phase so I will start adding counters now.


I can't seem to locate anything, at the moment, that states specifically that you wait until your next turn to start adding counters. Once again, this is all specifically about the "Shame" LS, not set-asides in general.


Godspeed,
Mike



Divine mental biopsy reveals you need psychosurgery
When in doubt  D3.
I support Your Turn Games.

Offline TimMierz

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4047
  • I can't stop crying. Buckets of tears.
    • -
    • Northeast Region
    • Tim's Photos
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #34 on: September 15, 2008, 11:42:31 AM »
0
Mike, I don't see how you get the first interpretation there. I see this going phase-by-phase, like the second interpretation you give. The subsequent Upkeep Phase is the Upkeep Phase of the turn when Shame came into play.

As you say, this is the exception, not the rule, since no other set-asides can occur during the Draw Phase that I know of.
Get Simply Adorable Slugfest at https://www.thegamecrafter.com/games/simply-adorable-slugfest

Offline 777Godspeed

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+29)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1985
  • Breathe redemption into wasted life, Breathe deep
    • -
    • Northwest Region
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #35 on: September 15, 2008, 12:02:56 PM »
0
With the wording the way it is on the information I can currently find in the REG, I would lean toward the second one also.  I was just posting how it could be interpreted.
Is an official ruling needed to settle this once and for all?


Godspeed,
Mike
Divine mental biopsy reveals you need psychosurgery
When in doubt  D3.
I support Your Turn Games.

Offline SirNobody

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3113
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #36 on: September 15, 2008, 08:21:21 PM »
0
Hey,

But then you run into the issue of keeping track of whose characters are being kept where and dealing with cards that target set-aside areas.  For example, with the new anti-angel soul in RoA, I could play Moses Kills Egyptian on your guy, put him in my set-aside and gain access, a complete change from the way it works now.  People could set aside a High Priest with Two Possessed and use U&T with him for potentially the rest of the game.  Pretty much every card that "discards a [character] from opponent's set-aside area" would be fundamentally changed, including (especially?) Ambush the City combos.

The anti-angel soul in RoA says, "excpet by a player with a human Hero in play or set-aside area."  If I don't have a human, and I set-aside your human, and it goes to my territory I still don't have a human.  My opponent just has a human in my set-aside area.  Urim and Thummim also requires control, which is why I specified that they were still controlled by the owner.  As far as cards that target things in set-aside areas many of them are "a set aside area" and thus it doesn't matter which one the character is in.  The few that would be influenced are the couple "discard a character from opponent's set-aside area" which would just mean that you could discard your own character...I'm not really seeing that as breaking the game.

Not to mention there's only what about six cards in the game that can set-aside an opponent's character, and six months ago it wasn't even in the REG whose set-aside area your opponent's character is set-aside to, so I'm pretty sure it's not that big of an issue.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly, WildCard Secretary of Defense
www.freewebs.com/redemptionne

The Schaef

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #37 on: September 15, 2008, 10:15:20 PM »
0
The guy who tried to pitch the line that setting aside to either player's side of the table makes no difference is now telling me what is and is not that big of an issue.  If it really made no difference which side it was on, there would be no reason to argue for a change in the first place.  That is sort of my whole point here, that this entire issue is not big enough to warrant a change from what is a very simple and consistent way to count set-aside characters, to scattering them all over the table, creating new scenarios where players "control" characters that are not on their side of the table for the first time in the history of the game, and changing the way certain cards are played, which apparently, as long as it doesn't break the game, we can just change anything we want for any reason we want, or no particular reason at all.

Which of course brings me to another point raised by your own post, the reason the set-aside ruling was not in the REG six months ago was the exact reason you stated: it wasn't that big of an issue.  It was pretty standard procedure that my cards went to my side (Patience) and your cards went to your side (Moses Kills Egyptian).  Then suddenly, it became an issue of monumental importance because anything that's not explicitly stated in the REG is wide open to interpretation and represents a colossal failure on the part of the players assisting Rob and/or Mike.  There's about 8000 things in the REG that are "not that big of an issue" and so I don't really take their presence or absence as being a real indicator of what is or is not a "big issue", especially when one can only dare to guess what the Big Ruling Crisis will be next month.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 10:33:10 PM by The Schaef »

Offline SirNobody

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3113
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #38 on: September 16, 2008, 12:45:47 AM »
0
Hey,

Here's a little insight into my philosophy of rule changes.  I believe rule changes should be made if they help make the game more intuitive and systematic (i.e. simplify the system of the game).  On very rare occasions rule changes can be made to address game play issues (i.e. stopping "broken combos") but I believe that should be only as a last resort.  Errata and printing counter cards are preferred solutions, or sometimes you can find a way to make the rules more systematic and address a game play issue in the process.

When making a rule change the goal should be to maximize the increase in how systematic the game is while minimizing the change in how the game is played.  Rule changes that create a significant change in how the game is played are usually not worth making; the better option in those cases is usually to accept that element as it is and work on improving the structure around it.

In this case I believe that setting cards aside to the set-aside area of the player that used the set-aside ability will be a significant improvement to the systematicness of the game while being an insignificant change on the way the game is played.  Thus I believe it would be a good rule change.  And that explains why I called the change the idea would cause to be both significant and insignificant.

creating new scenarios where players "control" characters that are not on their side of the table for the first time in the history of the game

This is not the case.  Cards that are placed in an opponent's territory are still controlled by the player that placed them.  The Pale Green Panic Demon is a prime example.

Quote
Then suddenly, it became an issue of monumental importance because anything that's not explicitly stated in the REG is wide open to interpretation and represents a colossal failure on the part of the players assisting Rob and/or Mike.  There's about 8000 things in the REG that are "not that big of an issue"

Wow, "monumental importance," "colossal failure," and "8000 things" all in the span of two sentences.  I haven't seen an example of Hyperbole that good in a long time.  But I can't find any other mention of importance or failure anywhere in this thread, so I'm not sure what it is you're trying to exaggerate.

And I consider myself to be one of the players that assists Mike, so if I'm accusing anyone of failure (which I'm not), I would be accusing myself.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly, WildCard Secretary of Defense
www.freewebs.com/redemptionne

Offline New Raven BR

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6793
  • P.J.S. May 23rd 1956- May 18th 2012
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Redemption Xtreme League
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #39 on: September 16, 2008, 12:52:43 AM »
0
so i have to put a counter on my characters on my next turn on my upkee phase or do i put the counter on immediatly when my heroes are set aside?
Your biggest competition is YOURSELF

Offline TheKarazyvicePresidentRR

  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15781
  • Currently undead
    • -
    • Southeast Region
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #40 on: September 16, 2008, 03:39:04 AM »
0
You put them on your upkeep phase. If its the person using the set aside ls, one counter is added right away as the ruling stands
Not quite a ghost...but not quite not.

The Schaef

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Counting Turns Set Aside
« Reply #41 on: September 16, 2008, 07:21:00 AM »
0
In this case I believe that setting cards aside to the set-aside area of the player that used the set-aside ability will be a significant improvement to the systematicness of the game while being an insignificant change on the way the game is played.

Except I have demonstrated that the opposite is true.

This is not the case.  Cards that are placed in an opponent's territory are still controlled by the player that placed them.  The Pale Green Panic Demon is a prime example.

Actually, they're not.  All placed cards do is sit there and continue to have their effect.

Quote
Wow, "monumental importance," "colossal failure," and "8000 things" all in the span of two sentences.  I haven't seen an example of Hyperbole that good in a long time.  But I can't find any other mention of importance or failure anywhere in this thread, so I'm not sure what it is you're trying to exaggerate.

I am being dramatic, yes, but I have been referring to a lot more than this thread when talking about these kind of attitudes, and considering I have been talking about this phenomenon elsewhere, I have reason to believe you know exactly what I'm talking about, and are feigning ignorance in order to marginalize what I'm trying to say instead of addressing what goes on in these boards.

Quote
And I consider myself to be one of the players that assists Mike, so if I'm accusing anyone of failure (which I'm not), I would be accusing myself.

Why exactly does everything have to be about you?  For someone who insisted on parsing my statement and suggesting it's invalid because my references don't specifically appear in your posts in this thread, I would have thought that you would also have noticed that nothing in that paragraph directs the comments specifically at you.  If you're being hyper-literal about the generalized statements and extrapolating a perceived slight out of the specifics, I would say you've got it backwards.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal