apparently which is nice cause now i can use john to knock it off by preventing the sa lol
If that happened I'd argue quite a bit.apparently which is nice cause now i can use john to knock it off by preventing the sa lol
I don't think it would get "knocked off"; if that was the case and it actually does work like that, idk...i don't think i'd be happy. But dems da breaks...
So a warrior holding a weapon is a special ability now?
The icon contains the hold "special ability" as it is now referred. And many cards refer to "if X is holding a Y".
So, if I negate TGT, can I put any cards I want on TGT, since it'd no longer be "empty"?No, because there is no ability gained that allows you to put cards in it.
You all missed my joke so much... :DLOL. Sorry, I couldn't tell if that was as funny as it first sounded, or if you were being sarcastic. I apologize for misreading you. :)
"Holds" is a special ability, regardless of where it appears on a card.
Definitions of */* abilities are identifiers, regardless of where they appear on the card.
No. Dance of Death and G's Spear have pre-defined standard abilities (i.e., not a */* ability). The fact that they have an SA which changes these numbers does not makes them */*."Holds" is a special ability, regardless of where it appears on a card.
Definitions of */* abilities are identifiers, regardless of where they appear on the card.
emphasis mine, does this mean Dance of Death can now be worth 10/6 in a fbtn battle? And Goliath's spear could be worth 8/10 in a fbtn battle?
So, if I negate TGT, can I put any cards I want on TGT, since it'd no longer be "empty"?
Special Abilities
These are the instructions printed on the picture of some cards. ( See Anatomy of a Card and Resolving Special Ability Combinations in the rulebook).
Technically, an "identifier" just says what something IS, not what action is performed by it. On a fortress, what "Holds X" does is a special ability.but the whole awesomeness of identifiers is the fact that part can be negated and part can't. but I guess it's not really an identifier then. still...
What action does "prophet" or "king" do? Nothing on its own. Another card can say do something to or for a prophet, but prophet is not an action.
"Holds x" on a fortress grants this special ability: "You may place X on this card." If it is not a special ability, then it is not an action that you can perform.
If you want to be able to use the "Holds X" on a fortress to put cards in that fortress, then it needs to be a special ability.
If it is not a special ability, then it is not an action that you can perform.Self's ability is not a SA, yet we perform it.
Then why were they put in the identifiers box in the first place? IMO, and the REG's, special abilities are the text printed on the card's picture. Identifiers are the small text underneath or clarifying text in the SA area. The identifier box does not hold SAs.it won't be the first time Cactus messed up...QuoteIf it is not a special ability, then it is not an action that you can perform.Self's ability is not a SA, yet we perform it.
Nor will it be the last but they do fix their mistakessome mistakes would be fine if they didn't fix it.
Then why were they put in the identifiers box in the first place? IMO, and the REG's, special abilities are the text printed on the card's picture. Identifiers are the small text underneath or clarifying text in the SA area. The identifier box does not hold SAs.What is Self? The identifier tells you what it is. In order to tell what it is (the definition of an identifier), you have to select a hero to "copy." Otherwise, Self isn't anything. It is all identifier.QuoteIf it is not a special ability, then it is not an action that you can perform.Self's ability is not a SA, yet we perform it.
That was never my understanding of the use for the identifier line. Ever.
Then why were they put in the identifiers box in the first place? IMO, and the REG's, special abilities are the text printed on the card's picture. Identifiers are the small text underneath or clarifying text in the SA area. The identifier box does not hold SAs.What is Self? The identifier tells you what it is. In order to tell what it is (the definition of an identifier), you have to select a hero to "copy." Otherwise, Self isn't anything. It is all identifier.QuoteIf it is not a special ability, then it is not an action that you can perform.Self's ability is not a SA, yet we perform it.
As I already stated above, "Holds" was put into the identifier line to save space. In retrospect, perhaps we should have just covered the entire picture with words to prevent this confusion. :)
I'm REALLY glad I'm retired! ;)I never thought I'd say this, but I don't blame you with things like these. my whole redemption world just flipped around.
A much needed flip honestly.I'm REALLY glad I'm retired! ;)I never thought I'd say this, but I don't blame you with things like these. my whole redemption world just flipped around.
We made a mistake when we made Z-temple's ability to hold an artifact an identifier.
My :2cents::+1 this is always how I've viewed it.
Putting an "ability" in the identifier line is IMO a perfectly legitimate way to make that "ability" CBN and active outside of battle while the rest of the card is not.
I also have a question, which most likely has been asked, but what happens when a "hold" "ability" is negated? Is the card returned to where it was before? Is it returned to your hand? Is it discarded?
I'll cry quarts if this means ruling out "cannot be Ignored" in an identifier.
I'm on my third already.I also have a question, which most likely has been asked, but what happens when a "hold" "ability" is negated? Is the card returned to where it was before? Is it returned to your hand? Is it discarded?
It should be returned to where it was.I'll cry quarts if this means ruling out "cannot be Ignored" in an identifier.
This seems to be inevitable. There is no way that it could be consistent with this new ruling if "cannot be ignored" was made an identifier on the identifier line, especially when the phrase appears on other cards as special abilities. Perhaps we could make "unigorable" an identifier. But it doesn't seem likely.
Let me know how many pails you fill.
Innumerable does not have */*. Therefore, it has a copy special ability.
Self has */*. If */* is not defined, then the card is nothingness. You can't have a character that is nothingness. Therefore it has an identifier, just like Silly Women and Angel with a Secret Name.
Just look for the stars. If words on a card are telling you what the stars are, then it is an identifier.
Get it? :)
Hey,
The playtesting team and rules management teem are volunteers. As a result we end up flying by the seat of our pants sometimes. When we make things up as we go, occasionally we make mistakes. We made a mistake when we made Z-temple's ability to hold an artifact an identifier. We made a mistake when we said Self had a copy ability. When we realize we've made mistakes we correct them. Sometimes it takes a little time to get corrections through.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
I also have a question, which most likely has been asked, but what happens when a "hold" "ability" is negated? Is the card returned to where it was before? Is it returned to your hand? Is it discarded?The special ability "Holds" only allows you to place the card there. It does not "keep" the card there. If a "Holds" ability is negated during the phase in which the card is placed in it, then the card comes out. If it is negated in a later phase, then the place is not undone. The card on or in the fortress remains. However, no cards may be added to the fortress while the "Holds" ability is negated.
I also have a question, which most likely has been asked, but what happens when a "hold" "ability" is negated? Is the card returned to where it was before? Is it returned to your hand? Is it discarded?The special ability "Holds" only allows you to place the card there. It does not "keep" the card there. If a "Holds" ability is negated during the phase in which the card is placed in it, then the card comes out. If it is negated in a later phase, then the place is not undone. The card on or in the fortress remains. However, no cards may be added to the fortress while the "Holds" ability is negated.
While "unignorable" won't be appearing on an identifier line of an evil character (since it is a special ability, not an identifier), that idea will appear in special abilities on other cards (such as sites, fortresses, lost souls, etc.) eventually.
But that's sort of the point here: now that special abilities can be and are placed in the identifier line, all bets are off as to when and where these things will appear, or be shifted from one thing to another.Rob sent the last playtest list back with a request that a special ability be removed from an identifier line (see the promo at the end of the list). He wants special abilities written over the picture, where they always appear, and always will appear. "Holds" on fortresses is the only exception, and was (I thought) a needed step to allow special abilities to fit on a card. Given the confusion evident on this thread, we should have just covered more art. :)
Maybe it's time to have a little separation of duties. I've worked in software development for years. The developers do not write techinical documentation. I would suggest that there be a separation between those that develop cards and those that document/proofread them.
the art remains on the fort if the fort is negated? i thought it was ruled the art goes back to art pile, but it was still up in the air whether the art immediately goes back, or goes back during the owners next prep phase.If a special ability completed in a previous phase, it can't be negated. That is why Abraham does not remove the Site Doubler from a site. The ability to put it on an occupied site completed during the player's prep phase. It can't be negated during the battle phase of a subsequent turn.
Yikes! With all due respect I completely understand the intent. However, the choice of english makes it all confusing. A "hold", which in english connotes an ongoing action, appears to be ruled as an instant action (which is further confusing when you use the verb "place" in your description).
Okay, time to throw a wrench into things. We have this game rule that cards in a fortress follow the fortress. I have Holy of Holies in Z-Temple. I play The Meal in Emmaus and choose to activate Book of the Covenant on Z-Temple and activate two covenants. Later in the battle my opponent negates Z-Temple with an enhancement.
What happens??
The ironic thing about this is that we have 4+ pages of debate/surprise/complaining about something that rarely happens.
Since when has irrelevancy kept Redemption players from having a 12 page discussion concerning something they're passionate about?
I play The Meal in Emmaus and choose to activate Book of the Covenant on Z-Temple and activate two covenants.You can't do that. Meal in Emmaus activates a new artifact on your artifact pile.
Cards are put into or out of fortresses only during prep phase, unless specified otherwise.
Research has revealed that this decision was reached as the result of a private email discussion between three people over a year ago (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=17880.msg281672#msg281672) but only just now spoken aloud. In the meantime, the rest of us, having no knowledge or input on this, went and developed an entire new set of cards under what turned out to be an obsolete premise.Isn't separation of powers great? ;)
The Site Doubler lost soul is a perfect example of a card with a "Hold/Held" ability. You can use it any time during the preparation phase. It is an manually-triggered special ability that you can use during your prep phase.Cards are put into or out of fortresses only during prep phase, unless specified otherwise.
An ability that activates multiple times over multiple turns cannot be a mere instantaneous one-time ability.
The rules for placing cards in Fortresses is built into the game rules, which confuses me as to why this needs to be treated as a special in the first place. Filling and emptying Forts makes the most sense as a game rule, with an identifier specifying what kind of cards, if any, it can hold.
The ironic thing about this is that we have 4+ pages of debate/surprise/complaining about something that rarely happens.Since when has irrelevancy kept Redemption players from having a 12 page discussion concerning something they're passionate about?
If that hero refers to the Tabernacle, then the "Holds" ability is undone. But that is not what put the artifact there. The hero did. Sapphira or King of Tyrus would neagte the special ability on the hero (sending the artifact back). But negating the "holds" ability would not, since that is not what placed the artifact there. Get it?
I activate HoH on Tabernacle in my prep phase. I rescue with Eleazar and activate BotC, and then activate two covenants. HoH remains active. My opponent then negates Tabernacle.Negating Tabernacle does nothing. As I said in my post above, Tabernacle's Special Ability was not used to activate the artifact there: the HERO did that. If you don't negate the hero's special ability, then the Artifact stays.
Based on what's been said in this thread I am guessing that BotC AND the two covenants are put face down on the art pile, with HoH and the SA of the two covenants still active?
QuoteI activate HoH on Tabernacle in my prep phase. I rescue with Eleazar and activate BotC, and then activate two covenants. HoH remains active. My opponent then negates Tabernacle.Negating Tabernacle does nothing. As I said in my post above, Tabernacle's Special Ability was not used to activate the artifact there: the HERO did that. If you don't negate the hero's special ability, then the Artifact stays.
Based on what's been said in this thread I am guessing that BotC AND the two covenants are put face down on the art pile, with HoH and the SA of the two covenants still active?
And that same result happens regardless of whether "Holds" on Tabernacle is treated as a special ability (similar to the Site Doubler lost soul), or a game rule (which can't be negated).
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 the battle.
If you put this lost soul in a site, each of your opponent's must discard a card from hand.
This Site may hold one Lost Soul for each Babylonian Site in Play.
This Lost Soul may be held captive in a Site currently occupied by another Lost Soul
For each Lost Soul in your territory that is not in a Site, search draw pile for an Eqyptian Site an dput in play. Put a Lost Soul in each of those Sites. Cannot be interrupted.
Search your draw pile for one single color Lost Soul Site. Place Site in play. A Lost Soul may be added to the Site immediately.
That definition will kill you on Storehouse, which works only in the Discard Phase.Storehouse does not have a "holds" rule on the identifier line. It has a special ability that is used when it says it is used.
"Holds/may be held" cannot be treated exactly as JUST an instant place ability, since it would have to be used immediately when it hits the table. The Site Doubler would have to be placed immediately when drawn or not at all. Further, it could be used immediately when drawn in the middle of a battle, for instance.
You may place one Lost Soul in this site for each babylon site in play.At what time do I get to use this ability? How often can I use it? That isn't very clear.
Anything in the identifier line can't be negated. Rob ruled on this in the playtester side of the message board. Feel free to announce that on the relevant threads.
I asked privately about the final ruling on how we should handle a "hold" ability found in the identifier line of a card. I received the following answer as well as the suggestion that I pass along this announcement to the Redemption community:HALLELUJAH!QuoteAnything in the identifier line can't be negated. Rob ruled on this in the playtester side of the message board. Feel free to announce that on the relevant threads.
Anything in the identifier line can't be negated. Rob ruled on this in the playtester side of the message board. Feel free to announce that on the relevant threads.Is it also active outside battle? That's important...
I asked privately about the final ruling on how we should handle a "hold" ability found in the identifier line of a card. I received the following answer as well as the suggestion that I pass along this announcement to the Redemption community:QuoteAnything in the identifier line can't be negated. Rob ruled on this in the playtester side of the message board. Feel free to announce that on the relevant threads.
QuoteAnything in the identifier line can't be negated. Rob ruled on this in the playtester side of the message board. Feel free to announce that on the relevant threads.Is it also active outside battle? That's important...
WOOO! One unresolved debate down... now we just need to resolve the Playced debate.