Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: spicynumber1 on February 26, 2011, 11:03:56 AM
-
Vengeance of Eternal Fire (Ap)
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Yellow • Ability: 1 / 1 • Class: None • Special Ability: Discard Kingdoms of this World and two Lost Soul sites from one player's territory and discard all Evil Characters placed on Lost Soul sites to "guard" them. • Errata: Discard Kingdoms of the World and two Lost Soul sites from one player’s territory and discard all Evil Characters placed on Lost Soul sites to “guard” them. Evil Characters return to owner’s territory. • Identifiers: NT, Based on Prophecy • Verse: Revelation 20:14-15 • Availability: Apostles booster packs (Rare)
So I had a few questions about this card.
1.) Do you have to have discard kingdoms and two lost soul sites to play this card or can you mix it up (only kingdoms or 1 lost soul etc...) (the same way jepthah can discard either 1 or 2 evil characters)
2.) The errata says "Evil Characters return to owner’s territory", does that mean it would "repel" or withdraw the evil characters in battle?
-
1. You have to discard as much as is available, since there is no "may" (i.e. If they have no sites, you would still discard Kingdoms).
2. The errata does not make any sense. I have to wonder if that was some sort of misprint, although I have no idea what was intended by that statement. The only thing I could think of was that they meant to return the ECs from the discarded Kingdoms, because that is not the normal default. Normally the ECs would be discarded with Kingdoms. I find it hard to believe that this card was given an errata to affect the ECs in battle.
-
1. You have to discard as much as is available, since there is no "may" (i.e. If they have no sites, you would still discard Kingdoms).
2. The errata does not make any sense. I have to wonder if that was some sort of misprint, although I have no idea what was intended by that statement. The only thing I could think of was that they meant to return the ECs from the discarded Kingdoms, because that is not the normal default. Normally the ECs would be discarded with Kingdoms. I find it hard to believe that this card was given an errata to affect the ECs in battle.
So to clarify, you can play VoEF to discard 2 sites if only 2 sites are in play, But you have to choose kingdoms if its in play?
I would love to have a elder please respond on the errata.
-
So to clarify, you can play VoEF to discard 2 sites if only 2 sites are in play, But you have to choose kingdoms if its in play?
Correct, but they all have to be in the same territory.
-
I agree with YMT on the "do as much as you can". I also think the second half makes no sense. It seems to apply to the EC's in Kingdoms but it is not very clear.
-
It seems the card's errata was intended to say instead of discarding the EC return it to territory instead as YMT pointed out.
Although the way it is currently worded it clearly says "Evil Characters return to owner’s territory", which makes it much more powerful.
-
I agree that the current wording of the errata would return the ECs in battle to their territory. This would not be a repel, since that would be "ignore." The ECS are being removed from battle. This is a "withdraw" ability.
-
But honestly, I would probably play it less because it would pass initiative and therefore open it up to being negated. it is much easier to choose gold Ehud to RA, choose a big opponent and then drop vengeance to d/c t heir kingdoms and then die to not pass initiative. It would still work if you could choose one of their immune guys but that means they have to have an immune guy int heir territory
-
But honestly, I would probably play it less because it would pass initiative and therefore open it up to being negated. it is much easier to choose gold Ehud to RA, choose a big opponent and then drop vengeance to d/c t heir kingdoms and then die to not pass initiative. It would still work if you could choose one of their immune guys but that means they have to have an immune guy int heir territory
This comment confuses me.
Its only 1/1, so that's not a huge initiative change. Plus, as the errata is worded it wouldn't really matter, as its currently a battle winner (all the ECs in battle are being kicked out).
-
eh good point. im an idiot. my mind inst working since I am sick.
-
Whats up with the errata? This card isnt intended to be a battle winner why was it changed to one? lol
-
Whats up with the errata? This card isnt intended to be a battle winner why was it changed to one? lol
That's the main point. It should not have been. Something is definitely amiss here.
Good find for Spicynumber, though. ;)
-
2. The errata does not make any sense. I have to wonder if that was some sort of misprint, although I have no idea what was intended by that statement. The only thing I could think of was that they meant to return the ECs from the discarded Kingdoms, because that is not the normal default. Normally the ECs would be discarded with Kingdoms. I find it hard to believe that this card was given an errata to affect the ECs in battle.
yeah its not a misprint
-
Elder(s) could we please have your much appreciated two cents?
-
Thanks for pointing out this error in the REG. The purpose for errata on Vengeance of Eternal Fire was only to correct the name of a card which was referenced incorrectly. Nothing else should change.
From the official errata thread (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=24.0).
Vengeance of Eternal Fire - should read "Kingdoms of the World" rather than "Kingdoms of this World."
I'll add this to the official REG corrections thread (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=24699.30).