Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Jmbeers on April 29, 2012, 12:39:22 PM
-
Does Wool Fleece Negate all evil banding or Protect evil cards from banding?
I know it dosen't seem like a big difference but it makes it way stronger if it's a protect ability.
-
It is a prevent ability.
Wool Fleece (Pa)
Type: Artifact • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: No Evil Characters may band • Play As: Evil Characters are prevented from banding. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Judges 6:36-38 • Availability: Patriarchs booster packs (Rare)
-
I say this with unequivocal conviction:
Who knows anymore? ;)
Seriously, it's been played as a prevent all these years yet is worded as a protect. The way things are changing these days, even Split Altar has little ... chance ...
;D
-
I'm actually reasonably sure it was ruled to be a protect ability, not a prevent.
-
Only Elder consensus can overrule the REG. Wool Fleece is a prevent until they say otherwise.
-
Really feel like it should be changed to a protect. It is worded like one and it would make the card see more play.
-
hmm just food for thought as a protect its also stoppable with stuff like iron pan but as a prevent its not and cbn banding aka gomer etc etc get thru it
-
Really feel like it should be changed to a protect. It is worded like one and it would make the card see more play.
I agree. We just need to convince the Elders. ;)
-
It is a prevent, and will remain that way for the foreseeable future.
There is a fairly good way to remember the differences to protect, prevent, and restrict on older cards:
When a card specifies that something cannot happen to it, it is a protect. i.e. "Lydia cannot be taken prisoner" can be reworded as Lydia is protected from capture).
When a card specifies that another card cannot do something, it is a prevent. i.e. "Evil Characters may not band" can be reworded as "Prevent abilities that allow Evil Characters to band"--which would be more in line with current wording rules than the current Play As, but saying the same thing. The current Play As is correct, just worded differently than it would be if WF were made today.
When a card specifies that an opponent cannot do something, it is a restrict. i.e. "Opponent may not make a rescue attempt" can be reworded as "Restrict opponent from making a rescue attempt."
Like everything, there may be exceptions, but I can't think of any.
-
So Cannot be is really a Protect? Wouldn't that mean that CBN cards can be rewritten as Protected from being Negated?
-
So based Prof's descriptions I might actually argue that WF could be a restric (I know it doesn't reference opponent but the most common restric is CWD and that targets everyone, not just opponents (in case you didn't notice I really would prefer a better WF ;))
-
So based Prof's descriptions I might actually argue that WF could be a restric (I know it doesn't reference opponent but the most common restric is CWD and that targets everyone, not just opponents (in case you didn't notice I really would prefer a better WF ;))
It's definitely not a restrict, because it's not targeting the opponent, it's targeting the opponent's characters.
-
It's definitely not a restrict, because it's not targeting the opponent, it's targeting the opponent's characters.
It is actually targetting everyone's evil characters, not that it changes your point. ;)
According to the Professor, though, Wool Fleece targets any special ability that would cause ECs to band, even if they are on enhancements, artifacts, or whatever else.
-
It's definitely not a restrict, because it's not targeting the opponent, it's targeting the opponent's characters.
It is actually targetting everyone's evil characters, not that it changes your point. ;)
::)
The point being restricts specifically target players, not players' cards.
-
:doh:
Ok your right.
I'll go back to my little corner of denial and insist its a protect when deep deep inside I know it's not.
Thanks for the bad news everyone ::)
(except you teach, I always liked math anyways :)
-
(except you teach, I always liked math anyways :)
Who wouldn't? ;D
-
@YourMathTeacher I know a few... But it's not me, I kinda like math.
I'd argue that Retricts are not that. Also CwD targets all players keeping them from playing Enhancements unless a Character is opposed in battle.
-
(except you teach, I always liked math anyways :)
Who wouldn't? ;D
Me. Math is hard and scary, and you don't get into opinions and theories until you're years past calculus. Soft sciences are nice and friendly.
-
Political Science is fun. But all Science requires Math of some level.
(Don't even get me started on Physics... Idk how I got through it w/o knowing any Trigonometry at all...)
-
Math is hard and scary, and you don't get into opinions and theories until you're years past calculus.
That's only because I wasn't your teacher. ;)
My students love to debate about Chaos Theory, non-Euclidean Geometry, and the general theories about metacognition. My personal favorite is the discussion about the Indeterminate Forms, which I start as early as Algebra 2. ;D
-
I'll stick to Constitutional Law and whether Obama Care is constitutional, thanks. ::)
-
I'll stick to Constitutional Law and whether Obama Care is constitutional, thanks. ::)
Now that's scary.... :maul:
-
+1
-
ok 2 words Fractal Math
-
ok 2 words Fractal Math
You can't have a good discussion about Chaos Theory without first going over Fractals. ;)
-
i know lol i was being sarcastic.
-
That's only because I wasn't your teacher. ;)
My students love to debate about ...
My favorite 3 math debates are:
A - whether 1 / infinity REALLY is = 0,
B - whether .999 repeating REALLY is = 1 (same idea)
C - whether 6 x 9 REALLY is 42 (for all you Hitchiker's fans).
-
My favorite math debate is "What is the limit of (the sine of x)/n, as n approaches infinity?"
Some say zero. I say six.
And @Megamanlan: there's algebra based physics. Funnily enough, I was in a calculus-based physics class before ever taking calculus.
-
C - whether 6 x 9 REALLY is 42 (for all you Hitchiker's fans).
It's worth noting that my wife just passed 5000 followers on her Facebook page. Couple this with the 4000 followers on her blog and my wife now has OVER 9000 followers! There may actually be a significant overlap of followers between the two, but who really cares?
-
I'd argue that Retricts are not that.
Restricts are not what?
My favorite math debate is "What is the limit of (the sine of x)/n, as n approaches infinity?"
Some say zero. I say six.
Now that's funny.
My favorite 3 math debates are:
A - whether 1 / infinity REALLY is = 0,
B - whether .999 repeating REALLY is = 1 (same idea)
C - whether 6 x 9 REALLY is 42 (for all you Hitchiker's fans).
A is more or less philosophically true, but mathematically unprovable. It's axiomatic, based on the definition of infinity being representative of a number greater than any other number. In order for a number to be a number, adding another number to it must result in a number. So if we agree that x is a number, then x+1 must also be a number. Hence, the concept of infinity cannot be a number, thus division doesn't really apply to it.
However, if we were to philosophically apply the rules of mathematics, then all numbers (excluding zero, but including infinity, if we accept that it is a number) must have multiplicative inverses. Let's assume that the multiplicative inverse of infinity is a, i.e. 1/infinity = a. Let's then assume that a > 0 (it certainly cannot be less than 0, so really we are assuming that it is inequal to zero, to set up a contradiction).
Since a > 0, there must exist some a' such that a > a' > 0. Thus, 1/a < 1/a'. However, 1/a = infinity, thus infinity < 1/a'. But there cannot exist a number greater than infinity, thus 1/a' cannot exist. We then have a contradiction, so our assumption that a > 0 cannot be true. Hence, a = 0, thus zero is the multiplicative inverse of infinity, thus 1/infinity = 0. Again, the proof is only valid when you apply the rules of number theory to a quantity that is not really a number (infinity) so the idea that 1/infinity = 0 is only philosophically true, and must be accepted axiomatically to be useful in mathematics.
B. 0.999... = Sum(0.9*(0.1)^(n),0, infinity). That is a fact that must be accepted as a definition of 0.999...
The sum of an infinite geometric sequence Sum(a*k^n,0, infinity) is defined as a/(1-k), thus .999...= 0.9/(1-0.1) = 1
A similar argument can be based on the idea from above, as Prof U suggested:
.9 = 1-1/10
.99 = 1-1/10^2
.999 = 1-1/10^3
...
.999... = 1 - 1/10^infinity = 1- 1/infinity = 1 - 0 = 1
C. 6 x 9 = 42 in Base 13, and apparently in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (yes, I'm a nerd who has never read it).
-
That they can't restrict other players and their cards. I'm just making an Arguement that CBN is a Restrict ability.
I think it's time for the Modern Major General... Me!
I'm very well aquainted with matters Mathamatical,
I understand equations both the simple and quadratical
About Bynomial theroum I'm teaming with a Lot of News.
With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse!
I'm very good at Integral and differential calculus
I know the scientific names of beings animalclous,
In short in matters Vegetable, animal and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern major general!
Come on everyone, sing along!
(Gotta love the Pirates of Penzance)
-
My brain hurts...
-
I think we have gotten off topic here cause how does math deal with the issue of Wool Fleece
-
Forget math. Shakespeare could be an Elder.
"To be, or not to be. That is the question"...
...on which I failed miserably to provide the correct answer. May the slings and arrows torment me forever!
Or until all erratas are repealed on ANB...whichever comes first. ;)
-
rofl
-
That they can't restrict other players and their cards. I'm just making an Arguement that CBN is a Restrict ability.
In a way it could be seen like that, but it's really not. CBN/I/P abilities have their own class of abilities, assigning them to a different class might lead to headaches when it comes to possible (but improbable) wording like "protect players from restrict abilities, etc.".
My brain hurts...
Sorry about that.
I think we have gotten off topic here cause how does math deal with the issue of Wool Fleece
Math deals with everything.
-
I think we have gotten off topic here cause how does math deal with the issue of Wool Fleece
I'm actually sitting in math class right now. It starts in 30 seconds. We're going over polar coordinates today EZPZ review plox.
-
Math deals with everything.
9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9!
Inglorious Basterds - Hitler's "Nein Nein Nein Nein Nein Nein!!!" Rant (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UU_GhqVgc9M#)
-
Wow, a bunch of nerds talking about math, and not a single person opts to say that Obama Care is unconstitutional? I thought this board was conservative.
-
That's the 2nd, mabey 3rd time I've hear you bing up obamacare in the last few days. I'm getting the feeling you really don't like it ::)
-
Wow, a bunch of nerds talking about math, and not a single person opts to say that Obama Care is unconstitutional? I thought this board was conservative.
Well whenever I mention obvious things like "the sky is blue", "grass is green", and "ANB is unfairly discriminated against", I am also completely ignored.
-
I think it would be better like that but make it that cards that negate Restricts (like an Iron Pan like card that negates Restrict Abilities) those cannot Stop a CBN card, but then have something that can hurt CBN cards because the overpowered effects are getting crazy especially w/ the CB-cards.
I'd like to see something that is useful against CBN cards (especially like CBN Discards, because of what is now going on w/ the OP CBN D/C's)
Obamacare is unconsitutional. I wouldn't assume that all Christians are conservative, since there are Christians that believe Socialism is in the Bible (which is wrong too)
-
I think it would be better like that but make it that cards that negate Restricts (like an Iron Pan like card that negates Restrict Abilities) those cannot Stop a CBN card, but then have something that can hurt CBN cards because the overpowered effects are getting crazy especially w/ the CB-cards.
I'd like to see something that is useful against CBN cards (especially like CBN Discards, because of what is now going on w/ the OP CBN D/C's)
We have already done some things to combat CB- stuff. Protects and insteads are the two best examples. The next logical step is something that punishes people for using CB- stuff, but whether that will happen or not is not certain.
-
I know there are Protects/Insteads/Immunes, but most of the time I'm waiting to use my Protectorite until after my Opponent has played a nasty card, but now because I can't ItB w/ them, it makes it pointless to do that. I'd rather see more ways to get around them, especially for the themes that don't do to well against them.
-
I'd rather see more ways to get around them, especially for the themes that don't do to well against them.
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg442.imageshack.us%2Fimg442%2F8590%2Fiamcompassinxp3.jpg&hash=48ebe04b6e5e3c4aa6b954d342b1d3fe50d31037)
-
I made one myself that's cool too:
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1014.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf268%2FMegamanlan%2FRedemption%2520CCG%2520%2520Revelation%2520Ideas%2FTheSixthSeal-1.jpg&hash=27cfd8c298073e34240e0bd833c3b9f0549575dc)
-
Well, as fun as this thread has been, I think it's time to let it rest.
Wool Fleece is a prevent, not a protect or restrict.