Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Warrior_Monk on May 14, 2010, 08:48:02 AM
-
does the Guard lost soul allow you to add a character to battle if the other one was removed by an SA?
"When you place this card in a Site, you may put an Evil Character face down from hand, The Darkness or Tartaros on that Site. During a rescue attempt at that Site, you may add that Character to battle."
if so, this card + D-Raid is beast.
-
does the Guard lost soul allow you to add a character to battle if the other one was removed by an SA?
...
if so, this card + D-Raid is beast.
;D I prefer The Ends of the Earth...
-
I believe the "add to battle" happens at the beginning of battle as in you choose to use it or you lose the ability to do so. I could be wrong though.
This on a multi woudl be an interesting strategy
-
I believe the "add to battle" happens at the beginning of battle as in you choose to use it or you lose the ability to do so. I could be wrong though.
This on a multi woudl be an interesting strategy
The Site Guard works like another Unknown Nation. You can add the Guard at any time during battle. The best part is, because it's face down and out of play, it's virtually untargetable before it's used. I've used the Site Guard in a good majority of my decks since I learned the strategy.
-
+1 with Prof. I use this in many of my decks as well.
-
I use it in my demon decks all the time.
Madness + Site Guard + Unknown Nation + Gates of Hell = Good Luck. ;D
-
does the Guard lost soul allow you to add a character to battle if the other one was removed by an SA?
"When you place this card in a Site, you may put an Evil Character face down from hand, The Darkness or Tartaros on that Site. During a rescue attempt at that Site, you may add that Character to battle."
if so, this card + D-Raid is beast.
WI believe the "add to battle" happens at the beginning of battle as in you choose to use it or you lose the ability to do so. I could be wrong though.
This on a multi woudl be an interesting strategy
The Site Guard works like another Unknown Nation. You can add the Guard at any time during battle. The best part is, because it's face down and out of play, it's virtually untargetable before it's used. I've used the Site Guard in a good majority of my decks since I learned the strategy.
Sure just post my epic defense combo all over the place ;)
-
Sure just post my epic defense combo all over the place ;)
Actually, the first person who showed me the combo after my return to Redemption following RoA was Polarius. He used pretty much all of the same cards as Lambo to have tons of extra blocks.
-
Sure just post my epic defense combo all over the place ;)
Actually, the first person who showed me the combo after my return to Redemption following RoA was Polarius. He used pretty much all of the same cards as Lambo to have tons of extra blocks.
I shall have to steal his deck then and laugh evilly. ;)
-
I believe the "add to battle" happens at the beginning of battle as in you choose to use it or you lose the ability to do so. I could be wrong though.
This on a multi woudl be an interesting strategy
The Site Guard works like another Unknown Nation. You can add the Guard at any time during battle. The best part is, because it's face down and out of play, it's virtually untargetable before it's used. I've used the Site Guard in a good majority of my decks since I learned the strategy.
AOCP can still target it.
-
AoCP says All Evil Characters in Play... face down cards are not "In Play".
-
+1 to the Diablo
-
So is the add to battle ability CBN?
-
No, I am salvation will stop it.
-
AoCP says All Evil Characters in Play... face down cards are not "In Play".
hmmmm i retract my former satement. I forgot that simple rule...I needs to think before i speak...or type in this situation...
-
So you could put kot down on the site and add him to battle with another evil character and it wouldn't kick out the other evil character?
-
That is correct. The ability adding KoT is not on a character or enhancement, so KoT doesn't negate it.
-
Actually I'm not entirely sure the LS is required to still be around to add to battle. If it's Negated during the same phase it's drawn, the EC will go back, but once it's successfully placed there, any time there is a RA at that site you can add the EC to battle, whether the original soul is around or not.
-
So would Dragon Raid discard the face down evil character guarding the site?
-
So would Dragon Raid discard the face down evil character guarding the site?
not if it's on pergamum. or any of the angel wars ones.
-
So would Dragon Raid discard the face down evil character guarding the site?
not if it's on pergamum. not if pergamum is occupied or any of the angel wars ones.
Te guard LS doesnt have to be on Pergamum, it can be in any site if Pergamum is also occupied because pergamum targets dragon raid itself, while the AW sited only protect against dragon raid.
-
So would Dragon Raid discard the face down evil character guarding the site?
Dragon Raid targets cards in play. Since the EC if face-down, it is NOT in play. Therefore it wouldn't be discarded.
-
So would Dragon Raid discard the face down evil character guarding the site?
Dragon Raid targets cards in play. Since the EC if face-down, it is NOT in play. Therefore it wouldn't be discarded.
I am not so sure about this.
Dragon Raid
Type: Site • Brigade: Multicolor • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Discard all evil cards in one site (not Lost Souls). • Identifiers: None • Verse: Isaiah 6:8 •
Since it is on the site, we know it is evil. I know it is out of play if face down, but still, is there no argument to be made that since it MUST be an evil card, that it cannot be targeted by DR?
-
Dragon Raid targets cards in play.
What makes you say that?
-
All cards default to play
and do we know its evil? How can we tell? Are you peeking at my cards? CHEATER! ;)
-
All cards default to play
Does the default apply to cards that specify a location? If so, we need to rethink a lot of cards...
and do we know its evil? How can we tell? Are you peeking at my cards? CHEATER! ;)
The same way I know that an Ambush'd card is a hero. The card that put it face-down says it is. If it is not, then YOU are the cheater. The same applies to all cards that place EC's on sites.
-
Yes but a face down card can not be targeted by cards that don't target out of play/face down cards.
-
Yes but a face down card can not be targeted by cards that don't target out of play/face down cards.
Is there a rule that says this specifically?
-
Hey,
You can add the Evil Character to battle at any time during a battle at the site (similar to when you can use Unknown Nation).
As far as negating the site guard soul, it can only be negated during the phase it was put into a site, after that phase the ability to add the character to battle is unnegateable. Pol is right that it does not have to be the site guard soul in the site for the add to battle to work. If the site guard soul is removed from the site and another lost soul is put there the character can still be added to battle.
Dragon Raid discarding a face down Evil Character on a site has come up before. I ruled that it does not (like Prof U said) but not everyone agreed with me.
I was very excited about this lost soul when it first came out but have found that with the ubiquity of The Garden Tomb it tends to be a liability rather than an asset.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Dragon Raid targets cards in play.
What makes you say that?
Because this has already been officially ruled on (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=14210.msg219350#msg219350) by a PTB.
-
Dragon Raid targets cards in play.
What makes you say that?
Because this has already been officially ruled on (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=14210.msg219350#msg219350) by a PTB.
If that is the case, then I don't think Lampstand should stop FA or Mayhem.
-
Because this has already been officially ruled on (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=14210.msg219350#msg219350) by a PTB.
If that is the case, then I don't think Lampstand should stop FA or Mayhem.
Lampstand affecting cards that are not in play has also already been ruled on previously in many threads including this one. (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=17150.msg269093#msg269093)
-
I'm sorry, but could someone please explain to me why DR's location specification is treated differently than Lampstand's?
-
I'm sorry, but could someone please explain to me why DR's location specification is treated differently than Lampstand's?
+1 Lamp Stand does not specify in play or out of play and neither does DR, so why are they different. ???
-
Did either of you actually READ the thread that I linked to in my last post. If not, then please read it and see if it makes sense to you. It's not a long thread :)
-
Did either of you actually READ the thread that I linked to in my last post. If not, then please read it and see if it makes sense to you. It's not a long thread :)
I did read it but now I'm all confused and junk and a little bit tired and I think I forgot everything either of the posts said... :sleepy: ??? :-X :-[ :D
-
Did either of you actually READ the thread that I linked to in my last post. If not, then please read it and see if it makes sense to you. It's not a long thread :)
I did read it but now I'm all confused and junk and a little bit tired and I think I forgot everything either of the posts said... :sleepy: ??? :-X :-[ :D
Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!! Face-down cards aren't target-able, but your hand and land of redemption are........... Makes sense (Although I do believe that I have come across an enhancement or 2 that say remove all evil cards including face-down cards placed on a ls ;)
-
Did either of you actually READ the thread that I linked to in my last post.
I did. However, it does not answer my question. Do the rules say somewhere that the wording "not in battle" negates the in play default but the wording "in a site" does not? If anything, I would think that it would be the other way around.
Face-down cards aren't target-able ...
So, what about poor Blinding Demon (http://redemptionreg.com/REG/blindingdemon.htm)?
-
Do the rules say somewhere that the wording "not in battle" negates the in play default but the wording "in a site" does not? If anything, I would think that it would be the other way around.
I don't think it is written in the rulebook, but has definitely been stated by PTB on these boards that LotS targets all cards that are "not in battle", which would include areas that are out of play such as the Land of Redemption and your hand.
It has also definitely stated by PTB on these boards that DR targets only cards that are "in sites", and are also "in play" due to the default conditions for targeting.
If you want to get this ruling changed you're going to need to PM Rob about it and have him state that it's changing, because that's about the only higher authority left that you could appeal to.
-
Is anyone else behind me on this?
-
Is anyone else behind me on this?
Not really. I don't see the issue. :-\
-
Nope. Makes perfect sense to me.
-
So, what about poor Blinding Demon (http://redemptionreg.com/REG/blindingdemon.htm)?
Erm, I said placed on lost souls. Blinding demon discards face-down HEROES, but it does not specify placed on lost souls, and only EC's get placed on lost souls anyway... :o
-
Is anyone else behind me on this?
JSB probably would be. He was none too thrilled when the DR ruling was made at the tournament two Saturdays ago.
-
Makes perfect sense to me.
How? How does it make any sense at all? I don't understand...
-
Hey,
Is anyone else behind me on this?
There are others (myself included) that don't care for the way Lampstand vs. Falling Away is ruled. That being said, the way Lampstand vs. Falling Away is ruled isn't wrong and isn't a fight I'm interested in starting (again).
When a card says where it's target must come from it is doing one of two things: (1) further limiting the "in play" default or (2) replacing the "in play" default.
Death of Unrighteous, King Rehoboam, and Egyptian Archer are examples of (1). Complaint of Moses, Darius' Decree, and King Menahem are examples of (2).
Dragon Raid is (1) while Lampstand has been ruled to be (2). Lampstand is unique in that it defines what can be targeted based on what cannot be targeted (there are only a couple cards that do this and Lampstand was the first). Since Lampstand does not specify that it can target cards not in play, the "not in battle" phrase could be considered (1) but that's not how it has been ruled. (Kinda like Euclidean and Non-Euclidean geometry, but we'll save that discussion for another time.)
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Fine! Make Dragon Raid useless! I don't care about this stupid game anyway! *mumblecommunistsgrumble*
-
Yeah..most people are only vaguely aware that Dragon Raid has a special ability. :)
-
Yeah..most people are only vaguely aware that Dragon Raid has a special ability. :)
wyn. it's so true though...