Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Lawfuldog on July 18, 2009, 07:24:19 AM
-
Quick question.
If I rescue attempt with a unique hero, play Long Day then Stillness, can I make another rescue attempt with the same hero.
-
Yes. It's a different battle, so you can use the same Hero again.
Kevin Shride
-
Yes. It's a different battle, so you can use the same Hero again.
Kevin Shride
• If a character is forced to withdraw (e.g., Darkness (Warriors)) or withdraws from a battle voluntarily (e.g., Highway), it may not re-enter the current battle (see Withdraw in the glossary of the rulebook [p. 54]). Moreover, the character may enter on a new battle on the same turn (e.g., The Long Day).
-
I'm going to shoot myself in the foot here and say that no you can't.
Look at the REG quote - The word Moreover would not be used to set up a counter-point, English Syntax simply doesn't allow it, proper syntax would be However. Add the word 'not' between 'may' and 'enter' in that sentence and re-read it. Does it make more sense that way? It is a simple typo putting things into the REG. If this is not the case and you can re-enter battle I am so playing Type 2 at Natz.
-
There were two other big threads in recent months where this came up. Both Schaef and Bryon posted that they believed the 2nd quote is missing the word "not." This will be addressed in the new REG and I wouldnt' risk it working at nationals, since it will probably end up being ruled the way Schaef and Bryon think.
Kirk
-
It has always been my understanding that a character may not reenter battle during the same battle, but may enter any different battle, even on the same turn. For instance, if you are forced pre-block to fight two evil characters, you may still use the winning evil character to block the rescue, because it is a different battle. The same logic applies to The Long Day.
Kevin Shride
-
It was my understanding that a hero cannot reenter battle on the same TURN.
-
So, Bryon, if my opponent forces two of my Evil Characters to fight pre-block, I cannot block the rescue with either of those?
Kevin Shride
-
I am positive that at some point in the recent past it was ruled that The Long Day allowed the same character that was in the last battle to enter the new battle; this exception is actually stated in the REG:
• If a character is forced to withdraw (e.g., Darkness (Warriors)) or withdraws from a battle voluntarily (e.g., Highway), it may not re-enter the current battle (see Withdraw in the glossary of the rulebook [p. 54]). Moreover, the character may enter on a new battle on the same turn (e.g., The Long Day).
I think this will be changed sometime soon though, due to broken combos.
-
So, Bryon, if my opponent forces two of my Evil Characters to fight pre-block, I cannot block the rescue with either of those?
Kevin Shride
If this ends up being tru i think claudia/ET+Cup of Wrath would see a lot more play.
-
Or Hidden Treasures; however, the REG quote only applies to withdrawing from battle, which isn't the case here. And even if it did apply to this, the bolded part would still take effect, so I really don't think this works.
-
In my opinion, if the REG states something, then it should be played that way. It shouldn't matter if someone else says it, the rules state a fact and should not be changed due to someone saying something else. If this game's rules were constantly open to change because something may seem broken, then it would give new players a hard time understanding rules. I'm sure others would agree with me.
I think it should be played the way the REG says, change the REG, and then I will play it that way.
-
It was my understanding that this only referred to withdrawing from battle. If you are captured by an opponent, and then released by anther card, you can be banded back in by yet another card. Same thing with an ended side battle. If you complete the side battle without withdrawing, then you can still join a main battle.
-
After talking to Bryon on the phone last night, it was clarified that a character that WITHDRAWS from battle may not reenter battle on that same turn, no matter how many battles take place. A character who leaves battle in any other manner may not reenter the SAME battle that turn, but may reenter a DIFFERENT battle on the same turn.
So, if you make two EC's fight pre-block, one of them may still block the rescue, assuming that EC didn't withdraw from the side battle.
If you play The Long Day and withdraw from a battle, that character may not reenter the subsequent rescue attempt on the same turn.
If you play The Long Day and lose by stalemate, for example, that same character may begin the second rescue attempt.
Kevin Shride
-
No, that isn't even close to what the REG says. Just read that quote, it's self-explanatory; it even singles out the example of The Long Day.
-
No, that isn't even close to what the REG says. Just read that quote, it's self-explanatory; it even singles out the example of The Long Day.
Hey, Jeremy, Bryon and Kevin are playtesters. If they agree on somethings that's about as good as hearing it from Rob himself. They tend to know what they're talking about. If something they said doesn't jive with what you see in the REG then maybe their explanation (or the REG) needs better clarification. What exactly do you think "isn't even close to what the REG says"?
-
I'm sorry, you're right. I was just being a jerk. :-[
It's just that this quote...
• If a character is forced to withdraw (e.g., Darkness (Warriors)) or withdraws from a battle voluntarily (e.g., Highway), it may not re-enter the current battle (see Withdraw in the glossary of the rulebook [p. 54]). Moreover, the character may enter on a new battle on the same turn (e.g., The Long Day).
...seems to explicitly state that if a character withdraws from battle he can still enter a new battle on the same turn, whereas Kevin and Bryon are saying...
If you play The Long Day and withdraw from a battle, that character may not reenter the subsequent rescue attempt on the same turn.
...which is exactly the opposite of what the REG says. :-\
-
I would propose that two heroes or ECs that fight each other to a stalemate are both considered withdrawing.
-
That is bad, otherwise Hidden Treasures + Sword of the Lord can keep your opponent from block with two of his characters.
Kirk
-
The REG quote is missing a very important word: NOT. Fixed below.
• If a character is forced to withdraw (e.g., Darkness (Warriors)) or withdraws from a battle voluntarily (e.g., Highway), it may not re-enter the current battle (see Withdraw in the glossary of the rulebook [p. 54]). Moreover, the character may NOT enter on a new battle on the same turn (e.g., The Long Day).
The "Moreover" is a clue that the following phrase will contain an example of the rule, not a counterexample of the rule.
-
Wow, I'm really, really sorry; I was confused. That one word completely reverses the meaning of that clause.
This principle still applies only to withdrawing though, right? And withdraw is an ability, which means someone has to play a withdraw card for that to apply...right?
-
That is bad, otherwise Hidden Treasures + Sword of the Lord can keep your opponent from block with two of his characters.
Kirk
But it is common sense. If two characters are fighting a stalemate, and both do not do anything else to win the battle, then they are essentially withdrawing.
-
Essentially, using non-Redemption terms...
-
Essentially, using non-Redemption terms...
Not really. It's a game rule. Just as characters who are */0 or less at the end of battle are discarded, characters who were not defeated withdraw to territory.
Redemption® Rulebook > Diagram of a Turn > Battle Resolution
Stalemate
The rescue attempt ends in a stalemate if neither the Hero(es) nor the Evil Character(s) have enough strength to defeat the other. Both the Hero(es)and the Evil Character(s) withdraw to their respective territories. All enhancements played during the Battle Phase (except set-aside or weapon-class enhancements, or cards placed on other cards during battle) are discarded. No Lost Soul is rescued. This is considered a defeat of the Hero since the Hero was unable to make a successful rescue.
And now that I found that little tidbit, y'all better put Pot O' Manna in your T2 decks for Nats. :)
-
Pot O' Manna has been in my Type 2 deck for years.
-
Pot O' Manna has been in my Type 2 deck for years.
Yes, but at NC Regionals we established the fact that you are not sane. ;D
-
Essentially, using non-Redemption terms...
Not really. It's a game rule. Just as characters who are */0 or less at the end of battle are discarded, characters who were not defeated withdraw to territory.
Redemption® Rulebook > Diagram of a Turn > Battle Resolution
Stalemate
The rescue attempt ends in a stalemate if neither the Hero(es) nor the Evil Character(s) have enough strength to defeat the other. Both the Hero(es)and the Evil Character(s) withdraw to their respective territories. All enhancements played during the Battle Phase (except set-aside or weapon-class enhancements, or cards placed on other cards during battle) are discarded. No Lost Soul is rescued. This is considered a defeat of the Hero since the Hero was unable to make a successful rescue.
And now that I found that little tidbit, y'all better put Pot O' Manna in your T2 decks for Nats. :)
"Withdraw" is also used when describing what happens when a battle ends by the numbers or by ignore/repel. The only time characters survive and don't "withdraw" is when all opposing characters are removed from battle via a SA.
-
Excellent. More opportunities.
-
wow side battles are more useful than I thought :o
-
Instant Abilities > Withdraw from Battle
Clarifications
• “Opponent must present a new blocker or rescue is successful” is only true if no blockers remain in battle.
• “Withdraw”, “retreat”, “lose their way” “return”, “refuses to block”, and “flee from battle” are the same.
• Many withdraw cards state: “… may withdraw from battle. All enhancements used may be returned to owner’s hand, except this one.”, e.g., Stillness These two sentences are contingent. You may only keep the enhancements if you withdraw from battle.
Actually, based on this quote, all characters that survive the battle withdraw - winning by removal uses "return to territory".
-
• “Withdraw”, “retreat”, “lose their way” “return”, “refuses to block”, and “flee from battle” are the same.
I just checked - no card uses "flee from battle" that I can find.
-
Despite the rulebook actually using the word "withdraw" in defining a stalemate, there is no ability causing the withdrawl. A character may not reenter a battle on the same turn when an ability causes that character to withdraw from battle. Those phrases defining "withdraw" were just listed a couple of posts ago.
In short, stalemate does not equal a withdraw ability.
Kevin Shride
-
That was my understanding also, but I'm not so sure; I've been wrong about a few things lately.
-
Despite the rulebook actually using the word "withdraw" in defining a stalemate, there is no ability causing the withdrawl. A character may not reenter a battle on the same turn when an ability causes that character to withdraw from battle. Those phrases defining "withdraw" were just listed a couple of posts ago.
In short, stalemate does not equal a withdraw ability.
Kevin Shride
The REG quote is missing a very important word: NOT. Fixed below.
• If a character is forced to withdraw (e.g., Darkness (Warriors)) or withdraws from a battle voluntarily (e.g., Highway), it may not re-enter the current battle (see Withdraw in the glossary of the rulebook [p. 54]). Moreover, the character may NOT enter on a new battle on the same turn (e.g., The Long Day).
The "Moreover" is a clue that the following phrase will contain an example of the rule, not a counterexample of the rule.
Funny, I don't see the word, "ability", anywhere in the REG quote provided by Bryon.
-
Funny, I don't see the word, "ability", anywhere in the REG quote provided by Bryon.
That's what happens when you take something out of context and try to apply your own meaning to it. The context of that quote is from the section of the REG designated to the Special Ability Withdraw. Look under Instant Abilities > Withdraw from Battle > Special Conditions. In that context it's certainly talking about special abilities only.
-
Just a note - I am starting a list of REG changes to show up this weekend. I don't have the ability to upload the changes until this weekend, but am preparing to do so. The added "NOT" is one of the changes. You can follow the changes to be made in the "REG Updates" section of the newsgroup.
Mike
P.S. Thanks Gabe - you are correct and most wise.
-
Guess I'll just have to find another envelope to push. ;)
-
I know this is a necro-post but I want to be clear on something. If someone uses the Long day:
The Long Day
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Blue • Ability: 2 / 1 • Class: None • Special Ability: If holder's rescue attempt this turn fails, holder may make an additional rescue attempt this turn. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Joshua 10:13 •
They can re-enter battle but they have to do it with a different hero,
MOREOVER:
If they use the Longday in combination with stillness:
Stillness
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Blue • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Hero may withdraw from battle unharmed. All enhancement cards played may be returned to the player's hand except this one. • Identifiers: OT, Involves Music • Verse: Psalms 46:10
All the enhancements that they used in that battle may return to hand. They may begin a new battle but they will have to use a new hero. Correct?
-
Yes.
-
Is there a limit to the number of times a long day can be used? The original copy says "a second rescue attempt" that was ruled to just mean "another" correct? If I understand it right you can use it multiple times in a turn as long as you have a different hero each time.
-
"Second" was redefined as "additional" for the Warriors version, so both versions do the same thing. You can attack as many times as you want by reuse of A Long Day. It's just a good thing that there is only one green prophet who can play Obedience of Noah at the beginning of a battle...
-
Wel jacob can, but he isnt green and he doens't need Hidden Treasures. Is there a green prophet that can play a blue genesis enhancement?
-
Paul is the only one. So you can use Jacob once, and Paul once, and maybe a Provisioned hero once, but it would be a trick to be able to attack more than three times choosing the blocker.
-
I guess I am confused on using Jacob for this, The Long Day is not a genesis enhancement, so you cannot play first?
-
No, Jacob + Obedience of Noah first, THEN play your cards along with The Long Day/Stillness.
-
I guess I am confused on using Jacob for this, The Long Day is not a genesis enhancement, so you cannot play first?
Yeah, I keep forgetting about Paul. So three guys can play it pre-block.
but it would be a trick to be able to attack more than three times choosing the blocker.
Yeah, that would be a trick wouldn't it ::) hmmmm....
-
In T1 you could easily do it 5 times...
Jake + Obed of Noah
Paul + Obed of Noah
Provisioned blue hero
lamenting for jepth's daughter on a blue hero
lamenting for jepth's daughter on a blue hero
-
Yeah, I'll bet Crustpope is really concerned with how many times he can do it in T1 ::). And getting Lamenting for Jephthah's daughter to complete is a trick in and of itself.
The other problem is having someone to choose every time. The best thing I could think of would be to have Garrison x5, but black has become pretty common these days...
-
Yeah, I have thought of that. Jonathan and I have come up with two different versions of a deck in the aftermath of the Highway ruling. Now they are going to have to make a "Long Day Ruling." One I am sure will be infinitely less palatable to the PTB than the other. The other may just actually be very effective.
They still need a lot of tweaking and I wouldn't look for them here on the boards anytime soon, but you may just see them at Nats ;)
-
Psst, don't email Bryon about them... ;)
Sorry, couldn't resist. No hard feelings I hope.
-
no, at least none on my end. It was obviously a misunderstanding on top of a ruling that should have been made last August. he hasnt returned any of my pm's though.... :-\
-
no, at least none on my end. It was obviously a misunderstanding on top of a ruling that should have been made last August. he hasnt returned any of my pm's though.... :-\
Don't take it personally. I'm just swamped. No hard feelings. :)
-
Question: what if the character is generic? can you enter the battle on the same turn?
question: what if Jacob is Grapes'd, you RA with somebody else, draw a Jacob (in T2) and try to band him in to battle?
-
Adding on to that, if its a generic character, and say its a T2 deck, if the character returns to hand, can they enter battle again? How would you know its the exact copy of that character?
-
Well that exact copy cannot enter battle but it pretty much becomes an honor system unless somone has cards that an let you look at their hand. Basically if I start it with one garrison and it gets returned to hand, then I it cannot re-enter battle that turn and must basically sit that round out.
-
Well that exact copy cannot enter battle but it pretty much becomes an honor system unless somone has cards that an let you look at their hand. Basically if I start it with one garrison and it gets returned to hand, then I it cannot re-enter battle that turn and must basically sit that round out.
that logic doesn't work for shuffling.
-
How does "honor system" not work for shuffling. You have 5 generic copies of a card, now you can only use up to 4 of them this turn, how is that problematic?
-
How does "honor system" not work for shuffling. You have 5 generic copies of a card, now you can only use up to 4 of them this turn, how is that problematic?
You shuffle my character. Lets say I draw it somehow (make a RA with hero, play Reach before trying to band). I have no way of knowing if it was the character in the previous RA.
Just let it slide. RW and I are trying to break the game. (Mostly him, but the shuffle was my idea :D)
-
Just let it slide. RW and I are trying to break the game. (Mostly him, but the shuffle was my idea :D)
Don't get a big head, I came up with the notion last year and hid it by asking about it from the evil perspective. ::)
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=16657.0 (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=16657.0)
Trying to break the game is so much fun. ;)
Kirk
-
Trying to break the game is so much fun. ;)
This man speaks the truth!
-
I beat my older sister a lot and she says that it's because the game is broken but i'm pretty sure it's because I'm better than her :D
-
Trying to break the game is so much fun. ;)
This man speaks the truth!
FACT