Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: redemption collector 777 on March 13, 2014, 06:40:23 PM

Title: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: redemption collector 777 on March 13, 2014, 06:40:23 PM
1. If Hero Matthew drew 2 cards (lets say the 2 drawn cards where dominant card DON and a random purple enhancement ) , then during battle player plays DON and the purple enhancement. After that the blocker negates the SA on Matthew.

 Does the dominant card and purple enhancement card get shuffled or placed back on top of deck?
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: ChristianSoldier on March 13, 2014, 06:52:56 PM
I know for sure the Dominant won't be put back on the deck, and if the Purple Enhancement is CBN/CBI it won't be either.

I think non CBN/CBI enhancements will return to the top of the deck and be negated indirectly, but I'm not entirely sure.
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: TheJaylor on March 13, 2014, 07:16:02 PM
Actually, I believe you cannot "un-play" a card. So if you play the card it is played and would not return to your draw pile, unless it's a Lost Soul in which case it would go back on top.
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: DrowningFish on March 13, 2014, 07:31:42 PM
Actually, I believe you cannot "un-play" a card. So if you play the card it is played and would not return to your draw pile, unless it's a Lost Soul in which case it would go back on top.
but you can undraw cards correct? He draws then I play something to Negate that he puts them back correct?
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: TheJaylor on March 13, 2014, 08:15:51 PM
Actually, I believe you cannot "un-play" a card. So if you play the card it is played and would not return to your draw pile, unless it's a Lost Soul in which case it would go back on top.
but you can undraw cards correct? He draws then I play something to Negate that he puts them back correct?
Correct. They go back in the same order he drew them.
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: redemption collector 777 on March 13, 2014, 08:30:08 PM
Actually, I believe you cannot "un-play" a card. So if you play the card it is played and would not return to your draw pile, unless it's a Lost Soul in which case it would go back on top.
but you can undraw cards correct? He draws then I play something to Negate that he puts them back correct?
Correct. They go back in the same order he drew them.


So does this also include the dominant card that was played before the negate happened?
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: Nameless on March 13, 2014, 08:43:21 PM
No, the only cards that go back are the ones that you drew and did not play.
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: redemption collector 777 on March 13, 2014, 08:49:28 PM
No, the only cards that go back are the ones that you drew and did not play.
   

Does this also include cards that I had drawn and then played it in the field of battle? Do those one go back to top of draw pile as well?
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: Redoubter on March 13, 2014, 09:05:36 PM
Actually, I believe you cannot "un-play" a card. So if you play the card it is played and would not return to your draw pile, unless it's a Lost Soul in which case it would go back on top.

All, I disagree A LOT with the ruling, but we need to clear this up:

By the current rules, you CAN unplay a card if it was played without the use of a play ability, if you negate the draw on which it was originally obtained.  If it is not CBN (or CBI?  fairly certain) it is cascade-negated and returned to deck.

Sorry.  I hate that rule a lot.  I've argued it before.  It won't be changed, in all likelihood.
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: TheJaylor on March 14, 2014, 12:58:54 AM
Huh, really? I've never played it that way... Or perhaps I just remember drawing Transfiguration off of Words of Encouragement and then not having to put it back after Moses negates the draw of Words. I guess that would fall under the category of "with the use of a play ability".
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: The Guardian on March 14, 2014, 01:16:34 AM
Transfiguration falls under the CBN category.  :P
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: Chris on March 14, 2014, 01:33:42 AM
When was that ruled, because that is truly terrible. It was ruled the other way for years.
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: TheJaylor on March 14, 2014, 10:51:55 AM
Transfiguration falls under the CBN category.  :P
Oh, yeah. That too.

Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: Red on March 14, 2014, 11:22:52 AM
Any time major protocol rules get changed, it's a good idea to announce it.
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: Josh on March 14, 2014, 12:05:37 PM
All, I disagree A LOT with the ruling, but we need to clear this up:

By the current rules, you CAN unplay a card if it was played without the use of a play ability, if you negate the draw on which it was originally obtained.  If it is not CBN (or CBI?  fairly certain) it is cascade-negated and returned to deck.

Sorry.  I hate that rule a lot.  I've argued it before.  It won't be changed, in all likelihood.

It's even worse than this.  If a non-CBI/CBN card is played off of a play ability, it still goes back IF it was drawn with a draw ability, and the draw ability is negated. 

There was a thread some time ago (I'll go looking for it after I post this) where someone blocked with a PG character with 2KH equipped, drew SitC, played it, and then the opponent played Baptism of Jesus to negate 2KH.  It was ruled that SitC goes back on top, which makes no sense if play abilities are truly CBI.  CBI means CBI, whether from direct OR indirect negation.

EDIT:  Found it.  http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/ruling-questions/indirect-negation-25787/msg405955/#msg405955 (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/ruling-questions/indirect-negation-25787/msg405955/#msg405955)
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: ChristianSoldier on March 14, 2014, 03:22:02 PM
Why should returning a played card to the top of a deck be considered negating the play ability? The play hasn't been targeted directly (that was the draw) or indirectly (that was the played card) the play just lost retroactively lost the enhancement that it tried to play. It sort of sounds like it was negated, but it really wasn't, it just lost the card it tried to play (or played in the past).
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: Redoubter on March 14, 2014, 04:59:49 PM
Why should returning a played card to the top of a deck be considered negating the play ability?

The logic behind the ruling is that, since the card was never drawn, it was never played.  Ergo, the cascade negates it.

There is Elder dissent on this (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/ruling-questions/can't-be-negated/msg485315/#msg485315) but you have seen the other side linked above.

Personally, I find that it is a horrible rule to be able to unplay cards.  Luckily, I don't see anything in the current rules that says so (at least not in the new rulebook or REG).

So, can we get some Elder clarification about what's going on with Play (the ability), play (of a card normally), and what rules represent the current status quo?
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: ChristianSoldier on March 14, 2014, 05:19:58 PM
Why should returning a played card to the top of a deck be considered negating the play ability?

The logic behind the ruling is that, since the card was never drawn, it was never played.  Ergo, the cascade negates it.

I understood that, in fact that's my point, but nowhere does the play ability get negated, just became irrelevant. I really don't care what the resolution is, I just think that returning a played card to the top of a deck (as is a possible outcome) is actually consistent with play abilities being CBI because the play ability itself isn't being interrupted. But I do know I think differently than many people so maybe that's why I don't see this as a contradiction.
Title: Re: Drawing cards negate question.
Post by: Redoubter on March 14, 2014, 05:52:53 PM
I actually misread your post, and thought you were meaning how could it negate the played card but that's another issue.

I still want to see what the rules currently say and what the status quo actually is based on our CURRENT (and not 3 years ago) rules set.
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal