Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Gohanick on July 08, 2010, 03:22:08 PM
-
I attack with a hero.
Opponent uses Philistine Outpost to Search discard pile for an evil character and blocks with the searched evil character.
Rescuer Plays Helmet of Salvation.
Is Philistine outpost negated? If so what happens to the evil character in battle. What if the evil character is immune to the hero (Philistine Garrison)?
Philistine Outpost
Type: Fortress • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: When you are attacked, you may discard this card or an evil card from deck to search discard pile for a generic Philistine and place it in your territory. Protect Sites from being placed beneath decks. • Identifiers: None • Verse: I Samuel 14:12 • Availability: Thesaurus ex Preteritus booster packs ()
Helmet of Salvation (Kings)
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Multicolor • Ability: 3 / 4 • Class: None • Special Ability: Negate all evil search abilities. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Ephesians 6:17 • Availability: Kings booster packs (Ultra Rare)
-
I believe so.
-
I attack with a hero.
Opponent uses Philistine Outpost to Search discard pile for an evil character and blocks with the searched evil character.
Rescuer Plays Helmet of Salvation.
Is Philistine outpost negated? If so what happens to the evil character in battle. What if the evil character is immune to the hero (Philistine Garrison)?
Philistine Outpost
Type: Fortress • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: When you are attacked, you may discard this card or an evil card from deck to search discard pile for a generic Philistine and place it in your territory. Protect Sites from being placed beneath decks. • Identifiers: None • Verse: I Samuel 14:12 • Availability: Thesaurus ex Preteritus booster packs ()
Helmet of Salvation (Kings)
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Multicolor • Ability: 3 / 4 • Class: None • Special Ability: Negate all evil search abilities. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Ephesians 6:17 • Availability: Kings booster packs (Ultra Rare)
I agree with Alex that the fort is negated. If the Caracter is immune however I don't believe he goes out of battle for the same logic used if you play obedience of Noah against an immune character.
-
If the Caracter is immune however I don't believe he goes out of battle for the same logic used if you play obedience of Noah against an immune character.
This isn't a good parallel though. Obedience of Noah tries to target the character and can't because they are immune. Helmet of Salvation tries to target Phillistine Outpost, and can.
-
This question was brought up, but with Cymbals of the Levites instead. I'm pretty sure it was ruled that the Philistine goes back to the draw pile.
-
I think that the immune character would still return because the good character is targeting the fortress and not the immune character.
Im not sure about this and more input would be helpful
-
That is also my leanings. I believe he would go back because you are not targeting him, you are targeting the fortress.
-
but isnt that sort of like dove vs immunity character? even though the opponent and not the holder has to choose, the immunity character wont be affected by it,.
-
Dove is still directly targeting the character for discard.
Helmet/Cymbals are negating the card that allowed the character to enter play in the first place.
-
so the question is does immunity protect from indirect effect from a source it is immune to.
-
Hey,
I attack with a hero.
Opponent uses Philistine Outpost to Search discard pile for an evil character and blocks with the searched evil character.
Rescuer Plays Helmet of Salvation.
Is Philistine outpost negated? If so what happens to the evil character in battle. What if the evil character is immune to the hero (Philistine Garrison)?
Philistine Outpost is negated. The evil character is returned to where it came from (even if it is immune). Since the net result on the blocking evil character is that it is being removed from battle the defender would have the opportunity to negate Helmet of Salvation, if they don't (and if they don't do something else like Unknown Nation or Unholy Writ to extend the battle) it would result in a successful rescue.
so the question is does immunity protect from indirect effect from a source it is immune to.
No it doesn't. Also worth noting, immunity never protects from negate or interrupt abilities, and since that's what Helmet of Salvation is, immunity can't protect against it ever.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Since the net result on the blocking evil character is that it is being removed from battle the defender would have the opportunity to negate Helmet of Salvation, if they don't (and if they don't do something else like Unknown Nation or Unholy Writ to extend the battle) it would result in a successful rescue.
Actually, wouldn't the negation of PO mean that the player actually never blocked with the Philly, and therefore they could choose a new blocker to use instead?
-
Since the net result removes philistine garrison from battle (and you are doing nothing to negate the immunity only removing him from battle) you are forcing a character who is immune out of battle... That doesn't make sense to me.
-
Hey,
Actually, wouldn't the negation of PO mean that the player actually never blocked with the Philly, and therefore they could choose a new blocker to use instead?
(1) We don't time travel in Redemption. They blocked with a philistine, a negate can't undo the fact that that happened. All a negate does is send things back to how they were, it doesn't mess with space/time.
(2) Once Helmet of Salvation is played you're past the "present a blocker" stage of battle and into the "determine initiative play an enhancement" part. It's too late at that point to present a blocker because we don't backtrack stages (that's why choose the blocker before the "present a blocker" stage is becoming Cannot be Interrupted).
Since the net result removes philistine garrison from battle (and you are doing nothing to negate the immunity only removing him from battle) you are forcing a character who is immune out of battle... That doesn't make sense to me.
Immunity is about targeting not effects. The net effect of Helmet of Brass is forcing the immune character out of battle, but the lone hero isn't targeting the immune character, and the targeting is all the immune ability stops.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Really we don't time travel? I thought it was ruled in the jacob+captain tfg situation that captain never entered battle and that was the reason the battle field was not btn.
I disagree on Redemptions defenition for immunity but I will let it be for now.
-
i vote we need more characters in redemption that can mess with the space-time continuum.
-
Really we don't time travel? I thought it was ruled in the jacob+captain tfg situation that captain never entered battle and that was the reason the battle field was not btn.
Good question.
-
"Really we don't time travel? I thought it was ruled in the jacob+captain tfg situation that captain never entered battle and that was the reason the battle field was not btn."
Since when is this true?? If you make a rescue with Maharia (wa) to Ira (wa), Ira kicks out and the battle is most definitely still fbtn... or am I missing something?
-
Negates undo an effect. So you do everything you can to undo abilities.
So in the case of Jacob + Captain blocked by 12 Fingered Giant the negate negates Jacobs banding ability, which then undoes the FBTN
In the case of Maharia (wa) to Ira (wa) the negating of Maharia's ability would send Ira back which would cause it to be not BTN but because that would cause an infinite loop it was rule that in that case only BTN sticks.
In the case of Philistine Outpost pulling out Philistine Garrison you are negating the search for the Garrison, so to undo that you have to put Garrison back into the discard pile, Immunity doesn't matter because you aren't targeting Garrison and even if you were Immunity doesn't affect negates. And the reason why you can't reblock is because its already past that point and negates don't go back phases they just cascade to other abilities.
So the moral of the story is negates are awesome but they don't time travel
-
Negates undo an effect. So you do everything you can to undo abilities.
So in the case of Jacob + Captain blocked by 12 Fingered Giant the negate negates Jacobs banding ability, which then undoes the FBTN
In the case of Maharia (wa) to Ira (wa) the negating of Maharia's ability would send Ira back which would cause it to be not BTN but because that would cause an infinite loop it was rule that in that case only BTN sticks.
In the case of Philistine Outpost pulling out Philistine Garrison you are negating the search for the Garrison, so to undo that you have to put Garrison back into the discard pile, Immunity doesn't matter because you aren't targeting Garrison and even if you were Immunity doesn't affect negates. And the reason why you can't reblock is because its already past that point and negates don't go back phases they just cascade to other abilities.
So the moral of the story is negates are awesome but they don't time travel
Well said.
-
So in the case of Jacob + Captain blocked by 12 Fingered Giant the negate negates Jacobs banding ability, which then undoes the FBTN
This still seems to contradict all Redemption knowledge that I possess. Similar situation:
I make a RA with Claudia banded to Peter. Opponent blocks with a little black character and plays Wrath of Satan. I then play Walking on Water to become immune. If my opponent plays flight to negate banding, Claudia is still immune even though the enhancement is gone (or so I thought).
Granted this is not the same, but I tried my best to think of a similar situation when a character provides an ongoing ability that effects the entire battle...
-
Actually, just thought of something. What if (in the Jacob + Captain battle) opponent doesn't block w/ 12FG and enhancements get played and then 12FG gets banded in by unknown nation or the likes later on. Do the enhancements just magically "unnegate" (of course not! ...at least to my knowledge). Like I said, this just seems to defy all Redemption knowledge I have...
-
Can someone please address this?
-
If it is true that Jake+CotH blocked by 12FG goes back in time as if CotH was never there and makes the battle cease to be FBN...
and if it is true that PO getting a Philly to block, and then PO getting negated puts the philly back but does NOT go back in time as if they didn't block so that you can block with someone else...
Then there seems to be a contradiction that I can't explain.
-
Tim has already explained this well so I'm not going to try to repeat what he's said:
(1) We don't time travel in Redemption. They blocked with a philistine, a negate can't undo the fact that that happened. All a negate does is send things back to how they were, it doesn't mess with space/time.
(2) Once Helmet of Salvation is played you're past the "present a blocker" stage of battle and into the "determine initiative play an enhancement" part. It's too late at that point to present a blocker because we don't backtrack stages (that's why choose the blocker before the "present a blocker" stage is becoming Cannot be Interrupted).
-
Tim has already explained this well so I'm not going to try to repeat what he's said:
Yes, Tim's explanation would go for why you couldn't block again after the philly, but it does seem to contradict why Jake+CotH blocked by 12FG is NOT FBN. Normally when a FBN character enters battle, then the battle remains FBN even if they are kicked out. So why not this time if there is no time-travel?
-
In the Jacob+Captain scenario, TFG made it as if Captain was never there, but that doesn't make the game revert to the "present a hero" part of the battle. Helmet of Salvation does make it as if PG was never in battle, but it doesn't make the game revert to the "present a blocker" part of battle. There's no time travel involved in either of these situations, it's more like a rewriting of history.
This still seems to contradict all Redemption knowledge that I possess. Similar situation:
I make a RA with Claudia banded to Peter. Opponent blocks with a little black character and plays Wrath of Satan. I then play Walking on Water to become immune. If my opponent plays flight to negate banding, Claudia is still immune even though the enhancement is gone (or so I thought).
I actually don't think Claudia is still immune, because by negating the band, Peter was never in battle for WoW to activate on. So WoW would be indirectly negated. Again, not time travel, but rewriting of history. However, it doesn't change the fact that when Wrath took effect, WoW was active and Claudia was protected, so she would survive, as would Peter. But the next enhancement played could affect either of them.
-
Yes, Tim's explanation would go for why you couldn't block again after the philly, but it does seem to contradict why Jake+CotH blocked by 12FG is NOT FBN. Normally when a FBN character enters battle, then the battle remains FBN even if they are kicked out. So why not this time if there is no time-travel?
12 Fingers vs Jake + Cptn negates Jakes ability to band, therefore 12 Fingers also indirectly negates the special ability on any characters that are banded.
When you band to a normal FBTN character (like TSA) there is a game rule that says the FBTN ability doesn't negate itself. This is to prevent infinite loops.
I hope you can see how these two are different. The first example is the norm. The second is an exception to alleviate weird things from happening.
-
I hope you can see how these two are different. The first example is the norm. The second is an exception to alleviate weird things from happening.
I do see that, and I know that the reason for the FBN stickiness is to prevent weirdness.
What if (in the Jacob + Captain battle) opponent doesn't block w/ 12FG and enhancements get played and then 12FG gets banded in by unknown nation or the likes later on. Do the enhancements just magically "unnegate" (of course not! ...at least to my knowledge).
But isn't this also weirdness? Enhs that are negated at first, but then end up not negated due to CotH never really being there after all...it just seems like it would be a lot easier to say that the "exception" of FBN stickiness would apply in this situation too.
-
I'm gonna take a stab at this...
12FG vs CotH results in negation of FBTN because the only thing you are "time traveling" to negate is a special ability.
Helm of Salv. vs Outpost does not result in a new blocker being picked because you can't go back and negate a core game action. If an artifact said "Negate all drawing," it would not negate the d3 at the draw phase because its a core game action. You can go back and negate abilities, but not core parts of the game itself.
*edit* missed a few words in my second sentence that completely ruined my line of thought, lol.
-
Negates undo an effect. So you do everything you can to undo abilities.
So in the case of Jacob + Captain blocked by 12 Fingered Giant the negate negates Jacobs banding ability, which then undoes the FBTN
In the case of Maharia (wa) to Ira (wa) the negating of Maharia's ability would send Ira back which would cause it to be not BTN but because that would cause an infinite loop it was rule that in that case only BTN sticks.
In the case of Philistine Outpost pulling out Philistine Garrison you are negating the search for the Garrison, so to undo that you have to put Garrison back into the discard pile, Immunity doesn't matter because you aren't targeting Garrison and even if you were Immunity doesn't affect negates. And the reason why you can't reblock is because its already past that point and negates don't go back phases they just cascade to other abilities.
So the moral of the story is negates are awesome but they don't time travel
I disagree, the moral of the story is that Helmet of Salvation's SA is now useful :o
-
What about an instant ability??? Say claudia to ET, we all know the play ability can't be negated b/c that's the way it works, but let's look at ET's recur ability. As it is, if 12FG was to block the enhancement that you recurred would have to go back (according to Gabe and others...). But again, I bring up flight. If a bunch of enhancements were played during battle and then at the very end flight was played, you seem to be arguing that ET's recur ability still would be negated... and yet purple cards played during the battle (aoc, ect...) wouldn't??? This makes ZERO sense to me. For as long as I can remember hero special abilities could never be indirectly negated.
I bring this specific example up b/c I had the exact thing happen to me at Nats in NY. Except the EC was Herod the Great instead of 12fg. It was ruled that I could keep philosophy since the ability had already completed (at least I think that was the reasoning)... but either way.
-
I bring this specific example up b/c I had the exact thing happen to me at Nats in NY. Except the EC was Herod the Great instead of 12fg. It was ruled that I could keep philosophy since the ability had already completed (at least I think that was the reasoning)... but either way.
It sounds like you think that Herod the Great and 12FG have the same ability. Maybe that's what's causing your confusion. That ruling is correct because Herod the Great doesn't negate banding (unlike 12FG). He prevents future banding and returns characters already banded to their territory. The end result is similar because only 1 Hero remains in battle. In your example, because Claudia's banding ability isn't negated, the ability of characters she brought into battle work, then Herod the Great kicks the Hero out of battle.
Herod the Great
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 8 / 9 • Class: None • Special Ability: No Heroes may band this turn. Any already banded must return to their territories. • Play As: Prevent banding of Heroes. Return all Heroes banded into battle to owner’s territory.
I've only been playing Redemption for four and a half years but during that time we've always been able to indirectly negate abilities, such as ET's recur ability. The only time a card isn't indirectly negated is if it falls under a CBN/CBI umbrella. Examples of that are ET's play an enhancement ability and AoCp.
-
So flight would negate ET's recur along with any and all purple enhancement that could be negated...
-
You can go back and negate abilities, but not core parts of the game itself.
This idea about "core game actions" is interesting. I suppose that could explain the contradiction, but we'd have to define what exactly are "core game actions" :)
-
How about this for a definition of core game actions. A core game action is any action that is initiated without the help of a special ability. This includes things like Drawing during the draw phase, activating an artifact, putting a fortress on the table, putting a hero in battle, playing cards due to initiative, etc...
Basically any actions that take place due to game rules rather than abilities. You can't negate initiative, you can't negate someone putting a hero in battle to begin a rescue attempt, you cant negate the d3 during draw phase... because none of these are special abilities. So, therefore, you can't attempt to indirectly negate them.
So, in the case of Helmet vs Philly outpost, you negate the existence of a philistine, but you don't negate the action of blocking, because it is a core game action.
I don't quite have a total REG backing for this, but it makes a lot of sense to me.
-
How about this for a definition of core game actions. A core game action is any action that is initiated without the help of a special ability. This includes things like Drawing during the draw phase, activating an artifact, putting a fortress on the table, putting a hero in battle, playing cards due to initiative, etc...
Basically any actions that take place due to game rules rather than abilities. You can't negate initiative, you can't negate someone putting a hero in battle to begin a rescue attempt, you cant negate the d3 during draw phase... because none of these are special abilities. So, therefore, you can't attempt to indirectly negate them.
So, in the case of Helmet vs Philly outpost, you negate the existence of a philistine, but you don't negate the action of blocking, because it is a core game action.
I don't quite have a total REG backing for this, but it makes a lot of sense to me.
In this case, you could potentially recur Philistines and keep having to re-d/c them and bring out another one using PO, but Helmet would continue to negate the Philistine's existence, so you keep re-blocking with a Philistine?
New time-out strategy, anyone?
-
How about this for a definition of core game actions. A core game action is any action that is initiated without the help of a special ability. This includes things like Drawing during the draw phase, activating an artifact, putting a fortress on the table, putting a hero in battle, playing cards due to initiative, etc...
Basically any actions that take place due to game rules rather than abilities. You can't negate initiative, you can't negate someone putting a hero in battle to begin a rescue attempt, you cant negate the d3 during draw phase... because none of these are special abilities. So, therefore, you can't attempt to indirectly negate them.
So, in the case of Helmet vs Philly outpost, you negate the existence of a philistine, but you don't negate the action of blocking, because it is a core game action.
I don't quite have a total REG backing for this, but it makes a lot of sense to me.
In this case, you could potentially recur Philistines and keep having to re-d/c them and bring out another one using PO, but Helmet would continue to negate the Philistine's existence, so you keep re-blocking with a Philistine?
New time-out strategy, anyone?
No. First off, Helmet negates the ability to grab another phillistine. Second, when it does this, it negates the ability that allowed the player to block with that evil character, but does not negate the fact that they blocked.
-
So she is a successful rescue? Poopy..........
-
Would the Philistine then get the opportunity to Negate since it is causing him to be removed (albeit indirectly)?
-
That's a good question, and it applies regardless of the re-block question.
-
Would the Philistine then get the opportunity to Negate since it is causing him to be removed (albeit indirectly)?
yes i think so they are being removed from battle by an opponent so they should get initiative to negate helmet.
-
+1
EDIT: But wouldn't they NOT be able to play an enhancement since there is no EC to play it on?
-
Hey,
Would the Philistine then get the opportunity to Negate since it is causing him to be removed (albeit indirectly)?
Since the net result on the blocking evil character is that it is being removed from battle the defender would have the opportunity to negate Helmet of Salvation...
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly