Author Topic: Ithamar  (Read 23318 times)

Ironica

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #125 on: March 11, 2010, 11:09:38 PM »
+1
The dam is already starting to show cracks and leaks.

Quote from: Treebeard
Break the dam.  Release the river

Couldn't resist :P.

Offline Captain Kirk

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+29)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3835
  • Combo? Yes please.
    • -
    • Midwest Region
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #126 on: March 17, 2010, 10:23:07 AM »
0
I predicted this debate would happen.  Suddenly we are forced to determine whether certain combos of artifacts and covenants and curses are "broken" or not.  The dam is already starting to show cracks and leaks.  Let's just errata Ithamar and avoid the mess.

Battle Prayer (wa) is way more broken then Ithamar can possibly be due to the way they are both poorly worded.  Therefore, that argument does not hold water.

I don't think it is good to issue errata just because a card doesn't seem Biblical or that it might lead to a broken combo unless Redemption issues errata for ALL of the cards that fall into those two categories.  It is a great injustice, otherwise.

Kirk
Friends don't let friends play T1 multi.

Offline Bryon

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4821
  • Dare to Tread into the Dawn
    • -
    • Southwest Region
    • Redemption California
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #127 on: March 17, 2010, 10:31:47 AM »
0
Ithamar already DOES lead to broken combos if not played as he has historically been played.  So, he's getting a play as so that he stays that way.  Rob already singed off on it.  According to Rob, Ithamar cannot activate a non-Tabernacle artifact on the Tabernacle.

If you think Battle Prayer (wa) is broken, start a thread about it and ask for errata or something.  I'll watch as people throw things at you.  :)

Offline Master KChief

  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Greatness, at any cost.
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • GameStop
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #128 on: March 17, 2010, 12:13:22 PM »
0
everyone knows no one uses battle prayer anymore.
"If it weren't for people with bad decision making skills, I'd have to get a real job." - Reynad

Offline Gabe

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+68)
  • *****
  • Posts: 10674
  • From Moses to the prophets, it's all about Him!
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • Land of Redemption
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #129 on: August 25, 2010, 10:03:46 PM »
0
I don't think the official conclusion to this discussion was announced.  At least not that I see here.  This is Rob's decision.

The identifier on The Tabernacle Reads:  Holds one active Tabernacle Artifact.  That gives us our answer.  Ithamar can't force The Tabernacle to do something it can't do.
Have you visited the Land of Redemption today?

Warrior_Monk

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #130 on: August 25, 2010, 10:30:51 PM »
0
thank you. that makes sense.

Offline BubbleBoy

  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8014
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #131 on: August 26, 2010, 08:15:35 AM »
0
I don't think it makes sense, but at least I'm glad we have an answer.
Use the Mad Bomber to rescue his Province.

Offline RTSmaniac

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • *****
  • Posts: 4289
    • LFG
    • Southeast Region
    • ROOT Online
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #132 on: August 26, 2010, 05:36:47 PM »
+1
makes since to me- why was this such a difficult ruling?
This is the way Lackey gave it to me. All hail the power of Lackey!

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #133 on: August 27, 2010, 01:27:57 PM »
0
That's a load of bull. I guess we'll never see an EC that puts Asherah Pole in Solomon's Temple.

I agree that Ithamar shouldn't do what he says he does, but I disagree with the reasoning of why it shouldn't work. SA's override other SA's and Identifiers all the time.
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

Offline BubbleBoy

  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8014
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #134 on: August 27, 2010, 01:51:09 PM »
0
To me it makes just as much sense to say that Gathering of Angels doesn't work on heroes with banding abilities, because their banding abilities restrict them from banding to anybody else. :P
Use the Mad Bomber to rescue his Province.

Warrior_Monk

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #135 on: August 27, 2010, 03:43:48 PM »
0
SA's override...Identifiers all the time.
such as?
To me it makes just as much sense to say that Gathering of Angels doesn't work on heroes with banding abilities, because their banding abilities restrict them from banding to anybody else. :P
Gathering is a gained ability. it would not be able to band to somebody who has an identifier of "this character may not brought into battle if holder has a hero in battle already." except better wording.

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #136 on: August 28, 2010, 11:58:43 PM »
0
To me it makes just as much sense to say that Gathering of Angels doesn't work on heroes with banding abilities, because their banding abilities restrict them from banding to anybody else. :P
My thoughts exactly, just expressed better.
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

Rawrlolsauce!

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #137 on: August 29, 2010, 03:55:17 PM »
0
I RA with ET and play Reach of Desperation. Can I then play the buckler? Reach says "may play the next enhancement".

At least how I see it. Just because you're allowed to activate an artifact doesn't mean you get to bypass the identifier (or brigade in my ET scenario)

Offline BubbleBoy

  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8014
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #138 on: August 29, 2010, 06:42:47 PM »
0
Brigades are defined as restrictive. "Holds" is not.

Priestly Breastplate says it may be placed on a priest when you activate it. What if the priest says "Holds one Tabernacle Artifact" in the identifier line? Is it not able to hold Priestly Breastplate then?
Use the Mad Bomber to rescue his Province.

browarod

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #139 on: August 29, 2010, 11:05:09 PM »
0
Priestly Breastplate says it may be placed on a priest when you activate it. What if the priest says "Holds one Tabernacle Artifact" in the identifier line? Is it not able to hold Priestly Breastplate then?
I didn't think characters had/could have Holds abilities....

Offline BubbleBoy

  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8014
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #140 on: August 29, 2010, 11:06:03 PM »
0
Priestly Breastplate says it may be placed on a priest when you activate it. What if the priest says "Holds one Tabernacle Artifact" in the identifier line? Is it not able to hold Priestly Breastplate then?
I didn't think characters had/could have Holds abilities....
Where does it say that? And even if that's true, does it really affect the argument?
Use the Mad Bomber to rescue his Province.

browarod

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #141 on: August 29, 2010, 11:53:56 PM »
0
Priestly Breastplate says it may be placed on a priest when you activate it. What if the priest says "Holds one Tabernacle Artifact" in the identifier line? Is it not able to hold Priestly Breastplate then?
I didn't think characters had/could have Holds abilities....
Where does it say that? And even if that's true, does it really affect the argument?
Well, none have it so far that I know of. And, yes, it negates your comparison.

Offline BubbleBoy

  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8014
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #142 on: August 30, 2010, 09:58:55 AM »
0
No, what would "negate my comparison" is whether or not the rules say it is impossible for a hero to have a "holds" identifier, not whether one already does. Besides, have you seen Simon of Cyrene?
Use the Mad Bomber to rescue his Province.

Offline uthminister [BR]

  • Youth Minister
  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+19)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2582
  • Jesus Loves Gamers!
    • -
    • South Central Region
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #143 on: August 30, 2010, 10:46:06 AM »
0
This is bordering on insanity...let it go man...no matter how much you want this to work the PTB have spoken...(coming from someone who can relate)

Offline TheJaylor

  • Trade Count: (+18)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3116
  • Fortress Alstad
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • Redemption with Jayden
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #144 on: August 30, 2010, 11:23:00 AM »
-1
we should just have a vote by the Elders to determine a ruling. Elders please vote for...
1. Ithamar can place an artifact that is not a Tabernacle artifact in The Tabernacle for one turn.

2. Ithamar can only place Tabernacle artifacts in The Tabernacle for game purposes.

3. Other.(post your other)

Offline uthminister [BR]

  • Youth Minister
  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+19)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2582
  • Jesus Loves Gamers!
    • -
    • South Central Region
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #145 on: August 30, 2010, 12:31:56 PM »
+1
Ithamar already DOES lead to broken combos if not played as he has historically been played.  So, he's getting a play as so that he stays that way.  Rob already singed off on it.  According to Rob, Ithamar cannot activate a non-Tabernacle artifact on the Tabernacle.

If you think Battle Prayer (wa) is broken, start a thread about it and ask for errata or something.  I'll watch as people throw things at you.  :)

No vote is needed since Rob's decision has been handed down by an Elder...and in my opinion the thread should be locked once a definite answer has been rendered by an elder so as to not bury the answer in and amongst people discussing and then beating a dead horse.

Offline DDiceRC

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • *****
  • Posts: 678
  • Redemption New Jersey
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #146 on: August 30, 2010, 03:31:08 PM »
0
Besides, if Rob speaks, I doubt even the unanimous dissent of the elders matters. (I'm sure he takes their input into account, but this is his game, so when he makes a ruling its WoG.)
Redemption Curmudgeon
"If we are out of our mind, it is for the sake of God..." (2 Cor. 5:13a)

Offline BubbleBoy

  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8014
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #147 on: August 30, 2010, 03:32:18 PM »
-1
Can we at least see the reasoning as to why the ruling decision was made as it was?
Use the Mad Bomber to rescue his Province.

Offline uthminister [BR]

  • Youth Minister
  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+19)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2582
  • Jesus Loves Gamers!
    • -
    • South Central Region
Re: Ithamar
« Reply #148 on: August 30, 2010, 03:59:51 PM »
0
I cannot seem to find the original post that quoted an e-mail from Rob that said that Ithamar cannot force the fortress to do something it cannot do...it only holds a certain list of artifacts for the purposes of game play...not biblically...there is a difference...

Offline DDiceRC

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • *****
  • Posts: 678
  • Redemption New Jersey
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Redemption Curmudgeon
"If we are out of our mind, it is for the sake of God..." (2 Cor. 5:13a)

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal