Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Mr.Hiatus on April 10, 2009, 10:31:15 PM
-
So what I heard is Michael (who can not be negated) does not get initiative even when he has Angel's Sword (play the first when blocked by a human) against a Rabshekah/2k, Ner/Swift Horses, Naaman/Chariots and horses. How is this? The EE's interrupt...INTERRUPT! You CAN NOT Interrupt Michael. You can d2 but Michael gets to play. Can someone clarify this, please! How does this work, it makes no sense. Also would that mean that any new EC who grants himself iniative gets to play against Michael?
If so then I have 4 Michael's for trade.
-
I'll take the Michaels. Check my trade thread "YMT Trading Classroom."
-
Lol YMT. If this ruling is correct about Michael not playing the first against 2k horses and such then I'll trade them off.
-
I wasn't really paying attention during the arguing, but I believe the conclusion was play the first was the same as play the next. So, you only get to play the next enhancement after the evil character/weapon special ability completes.
Interrupting isn't the reason for the EC playing first. Are they AW Michael? ::) If they are, I'd be interested in two. Just let me know
-
All Kings sorry.
-
I always thought that Micheal played first, as soon as the evil character entered battle.
Would someone clarify how he doesn't.
-
Yeah, the problem boils down to the fact that before michael gets to play his enhancement, that all the special abilities on the blocking EC have to be completed. King merodockbaladan for instance has part of his SA that says that he can play an enhancement from 2 kings as part of his SA. If his SA is activated at the same time that he is presented, then they ran into a problem. The problem is, does angel's sword "suspend" any "play the next/any enhancement" abilities or does angels sword have to get in line behind others that are activated in a manner that may force them to go before Angels sword due to Special Ability Mechanics.
With the horsies that say interrupt ... and play next enhancement, they are weapon class enhancements and weapon class enhancements are actually suppose to be resolved before even banding abilities. since they are a special designation of card, they are seen as abilities that belong with the blocker (though not gained abilities such as those granted by set asides) since they activate with the blocker, they complete the same way in the same fashion.
So the problem came down to this: Is angels sword ( and those like it such as helmut of brass) going to be a seperate class enhancements that enable the hero to "suspend" the normal order of SA activation, or is it just another version of play next enhancement. It was ruled by Rob that AS and those like it will be seen as cards that simply let the holder play an enhancement.
I am with you though in seeing it that way on Michael. I do not like the fact that an Angels sword on michael, can be trumped by any schmo with a horse. I think that, against michael, they should draw their cards, but wait to get behind Michaels first enhancement because that part of his SA cannot be negated and his CBN enhancement was played first.
I understand how it will work on everyone else but this deal with Michael not being able to play first enhancement even when he has AS on has got me all confused.
-
Same here. On anyone else I completely understand the interrupt and play first. But on one of the (used to be ) best cards in the game. Michael plays first against any human that is what it boils down to. I think this should go under re-consideration because of Michael's cbn SA. Or not even re-consideration just Michael can play the first against any human long as he has AS on him. Because the whole thing about wc enhs activating before banding would go the exact same way for Michael, because AS is a WC enh!
-
First, I want to know why a second thread was started about the exact same subject that has been under discussion here (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=14975.0).
Second, if you would actually read the posts here (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=14975.0), you wouldn't be asking this and there would no need for more discussion. The ruling actually makes a lot of sense if you step back and stop thinking of micheal with AS as some all-mighty being. Rules are rules and even a CBN character can get around the order of play.
-
The second thread was started with good reason. The first thread was started about different cards. In that thread Gabe said the following,
"Michael + Angel's Sword vs The Rabshakeh + 2Khorses is a little confusing, I agree. However, there are hard and fast rules to govern these things. It's just a matter of sorting out a difficult situation and breaking it down step by step. I've found rules questions are much easier to sort out here on the boards when I have the REG and other references at my fingertips. Get me in a tournament and I have questions (and get confused) too.
Michael enters battle and Angel's Sword activates, waiting for a human EC to block.
The Rabshakeh enters battle, Angel's Sword triggers (but still waits for it's chance to play), characters abilities complete and 2Khorses activates.
2Khorses tries to interrupt Angel's Sword but cannot since it's used by Micahel.
The holder of 2Khorses may draw 2.
Angel's Sword play next was active first so Michael is allowed to play an enhancement.
Provided there is still an evil character in battle, the holder of 2Khorses is now allowed to play next.
Angel’s Sword
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Silver • Ability: 3 / 2 • Class: Weapon • Special Ability: If blocked by a human Evil Character, Hero may play the first enhancement. • Play As: If blocked by a human Evil Character, holder may play the first enhancement on this character. • Identifiers: OT, Depicts a Weapon • Verse: Numbers 22:23"
In the next post Brian agreed.
So when Brian said later that "First Enhancement" just means next enhancement that changes how it has been ruled since Kings came out.
There sould be some discussion about a change like that.
-
There sould be some discussion about a change like that.
Agreed. But, I want to get Hiatus' Michaels first in case the ruling goes back the other way. :o
-
Apparently, they've been playing it this way in Rochester for years, so I'm surprised that you've not heard of this interpretation before.
The deal is, "first enhancement" or "next enhancement" must wait for ALL special abilities on characters and enhancements to complete. Then you can play an enhancement. I used to think that "play first" implied two abilities: First, a triggered "play an enhancement" ability, and second, a "opponent can't play an enhancement until after you do" ability. Rob ruled that the second ability is not part of "play first/next" at all. All "play first/next" does is let you "play an enhancement" after the string of abilities on an EC and its weapon have completed.
So please, sell your copies of Michael/MS to YMT. That way he and his playgroup can have that combo ready to go when the new set releases this summer. That set might contain a card or two that makes this ruling not hurt heroes quite so much. :)
-
Basically, "play first enhancement" has been demoted to "Play an enhancement" There will be no separate category for play first enhancement because now that there are several different cards that allow themselves to play an enhancement, those cards on defense are likely going to go first since they are activated after the hero is presented.
The horsies do not interrupt anything on michael, because his enhancement is not read as (play an enhancement when blocked by a human EC. so when all the SA's on the HUman EC are completed, then Michael gets to play an enhancement...it just may not be the first one.
I re-read the discussion today. IF you follow the whole thing, it makes sense. You can thank Lamborgini Diablo for "demoting" Angels sword if you want to blame anyone, but he was the one who correctly found the flaw in the order of operations that ultimately led to the crisis of "Do we make a septerate class for "play first enhancement" ro just make it part of "play and enhancement"". IT was actually quite insightful on his part.
but evidently everyone in Minnesota had been playing it correctly for years, but then again they are perfect so who would suspect otherwise. *dripping with sarcasm*
-
Well, this is news to me. Why does "first Enhancement" have to be the same as "next Enhancement"?
How long has this ruling been around? I've understood that Michael plays first in this situation ever since Rabshakeh+2KHorses came out in Kings.
-
Apparently, they've been playing it this way in Rochester for years, so I'm surprised that you've not heard of this interpretation before.
I have been to 20 tournaments in Rochester and it has never been interpreted that way. I'm not sure what Red Dragon Thorn is talking about.
The deal is, "first enhancement" or "next enhancement" must wait for ALL special abilities on characters and enhancements to complete. Then you can play an enhancement. I used to think that "play first" implied two abilities: First, a triggered "play an enhancement" ability, and second, a "opponent can't play an enhancement until after you do" ability. Rob ruled that the second ability is not part of "play first/next" at all. All "play first/next" does is let you "play an enhancement" after the string of abilities on an EC and its weapon have completed.
The change is fine and makes sense and has been well explained because we had this discussion. All is good in Redemption Land.
So please, sell your copies of Michael/MS to YMT. That way he and his playgroup can have that combo ready to go when the new set releases this summer. That set might contain a card or two that makes this ruling not hurt heroes quite so much. :)
Don't have any to sell. We give them away to "Random Little Kids" at Game nights so They can beat SirNobody when he comes to town. :)
-
Don't have any to sell. We give them away to "Random Little Kids" at Game nights so They can beat SirNobody when he comes to town. :)
Hmmmmm..... I wonder if shaving will make me look young enough.....
-
Don't have any to sell. We give them away to "Random Little Kids" at Game nights so They can beat SirNobody when he comes to town. :)
Too bad about this ruling, everytribe. Now we'll have to find a good card we can give the the Random Little Kids.
(And by "we'll" and "we," I mean--of course--"you'll" and "you." ;))
-
So the ruling made by Rob was Michael/Angel's Sword does not work against any play the next? Even if 2k horses is not on Rabshekah?
-
Yes it works. You just play the good enhancement AFTER the EC and his weapon abilities complete (including any evil "play an enhancement" ability).
-
Where was the original ruling for this made? Was it in a recent thread?
-
Where was the original ruling for this made? Was it in a recent thread?
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=14975.msg235171#msg235171 (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=14975.msg235171#msg235171)
I re-read the discussion today. IF you follow the whole thing, it makes sense. You can thank Lamborgini Diablo for "demoting" Angels sword if you want to blame anyone, but he was the one who correctly found the flaw in the order of operations that ultimately led to the crisis of "Do we make a septerate class for "play first enhancement" ro just make it part of "play and enhancement"". IT was actually quite insightful on his part.
Hehehe. Yeah, I was arguing with someone about how AS works, and then it hit me... how can AS come before weapon enhs, but banding is fine, when weapons are ranked higher than banding in the order of operations. I had that order hammered into my brain when i tried to argue that placed CTB enhs should activate before banding... so I know it very well. :)
All in all though, I think people need to stop thinking Mike + AS = total win. It made no sense for that combo to insert itself into instantaneous game functions when even CM couldnt insert itself between say... ET and AoCP. It was inconsistant. We want this game to be consistant do we not?
-
I'm just glad they turned play first abilities into play next abilities, it makes the game slightly simpler. I've been wanting that for a while.
-
It may be simpler, but silver just took a huge hit in power. You can't go mono silver in type two now because you will never get initiative to play a card.
-
Well, it was a faulty ruling... sorry that you all got used to it being that way. :-\
-
Got used to? There wasn't anything to get used to. It was ruled that way from the release of 2KHorses.
There wasn't anything faulty about it either. First simply means first...except in Redemption.
-
So, how would you have ruled 2kh on Assyrian Archer then?
Would you say AS plays before Assyrian Archer can band?
It was faulty.
-
You can't go mono silver in type two now because you will never get initiative to play a card.
Never? Really? It's not even remotely possible?
-
this is no different than the errata to make "add a second (character) to battle" simple mean "band a (character) into battle." Or would you rather we allow those cards to ONLY work if there's only one (characteR) in battle when they're played?
-
You can't go mono silver in type two now because you will never get initiative to play a card.
Never? Really? It's not even remotely possible?
Yeah, Im with schef and I am tempted to build one just to see it done. THere are dozens of high and low numbered angels and no one has more fbtn goodness on offense than angels. plus there are at least two killer banding cards that can be played to make a battle really hard to win. YOU just have to watch out for the few characters who play CBN cards like Naaman and nergalshazzer (an weaponclass on Rabby)
-
If Play first WC enhs bug you that much, add a purple splash with coat of mail.
-
Or I Am Grace?
-
To me, it is more disappointing that battles are won before initiative is ever determined.
-
As hypocritical as it may sound, as I'm notorious for abusing odd methods of pre-block ignore... i completely agree with you.
-
purple splash with coat of mail.
Making my point that it wouldn't be mono silver. Besides, that's not even the best counter for this new problem that silver has inherited because of this redefining.
Or I Am Grace?
I think I Am Grace is probably one of the better solutions but it doesn't help against brown and gray like it does other brigades. If you want to get extremely picky it is red, making your offense more than one color, but I think that would be a silly argument.
few characters who play CBN cards
Few? What type two defense do you know that don't use CBN battle winners x 3, 4, or 5?
So, how would you have ruled 2kh on Assyrian Archer then?
Exactly how it was ruled with others. You just band and draw and then Michael(or Eli) plays first. I don't see how defining "first" to actually play as first is faulty. I don't think the new ruling is faulty either, but that doesn't mean it doesn't redefine something that has been played differently for 4 years. It also doesn't mean that it doesn't take silver down a few notches on the power scale. Michael+Angel's Sword has been a centerpiece of silver type two offenses and now it is functionally useless when you take an honest look at what defenses are being played. The number of type two defenses that do not have a "play first" Enhancement or Character or combo is extremely low.
There are dozens of high and low numbered angels and no one has more fbtn goodness on offense than angels.
Initiative is what rules type two because it allows you to play your battle winners straight away. Why do you think Jacob is so good? And Ethiopian Treasurer? They get to play a card without a Evil Character even in battle. If you don't see how important it is to be able to play your Enhancements before your opponent then I think you have some learning to do about the nature of type two, and to a lesser extent type one, though I don't think this has nearly the effect on type one silver as it does for type two. FbtN is good, yes, but there are too many CBN defensive cards to be able to base your offense on it. Angel's Sword is what made silver competitive when combined with the FbtN and the banding. By taking away that initiative aspect, silver is severely weakened in type two game play.
I am tempted to build one just to see it done.
I'm confident that a mono silver offense will not be able to win a tournament above local level as a result of this redefinition. I would grant you a few tournament wins in the event that you don't have to play a lot of games because of low number of participants but I don't think a mono silver offense has a chance to win consistently. If you try and succeed, I'll be glad that you proved me wrong.
Anyway, I think I've mourned enough over the effect this has on silver in type two. I'm sure we could go around the card counter carousel for days but I'm going to go ahead and get off here.
-
Wow, Just... Wow. Mono silver is still very viable in t2. They have some awesome set asides, they still can play first against anyone without a play first enh, they have fbtn, protection against being d/c'd, with I am redemption they can't be captured for long, etc. Also O_o; If you wanna stay 'mono' and still kill play firsts. Destroyer and Cov with Eden.
-
A winning T2 silver consists of Michael, Capn, TSA, and a few other heroes that help. Such as Zaccheus, Peter, and Phillip. But for the most part there are three angels. And the winning combo is TSA Gathered to Michael w/ Angel's Sword. Then you play your enhs against anyone that is blocked. Now with this new ruling the top defenses right now will play before and take care of one or both heroes. What Bryon said about silver heroes having low numbered heroes is honestly nothing. A 1/1 king will destroy you as well as the Wc enhs. So although you have interrupts and negates and banding with btn, a top defense will beat this offense every time, sorry. So what Sean said is completely true, this will not rank in any top tournaments and make MONO-silver not used.
-
Except the offense you described is splashed, not silver-only. So I don't see how your example and Sean's are even comparable.
-
Wow the weapons activating before banding thing just created a lot of amazing combos for type 2 defenses awesome. Hopefully people will abuse this.
-
Wow the weapons activating before banding thing just created a lot of amazing combos for type 2 defenses awesome. Hopefully people will abuse this.
This is not new by any stretch.
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=26.0 (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=26.0)
WC before banding has been around since at LEAST 2006.
-
Yea tyler - were talking about monosilver top ranking strategies; not almost completely silver with one red guy and one blue guy to stop simothmagician and a zaccheus for a chamber. You were completely off target with that one.
-
Haha RTS. Once again Schaefs deck building tactics kick in!
Except the offense you described is splashed, not silver-only. So I don't see how your example and Sean's are even comparable.
For real schaef? Why areyou starting this conversation...why are you even posting on t2 decks that rank...
-
Why areyou starting this conversation.
I'm not starting anything. Sean is the one who approached this from the standpoint of silver-only offenses, and you are saying that winning T2 silver offenses are splashed. The two statements don't make sense together, and you're saying that Sean's statement is correct because of this completely different thing that you are saying.
Is there some reason that you think this discussion benefits from being sarcastic and bringing other people down?
-
People abuse what? WC enhs have always been before banding. Banding is the last thing. All you can do is WC band guys all with d2 play next and play stuff then band, then play something else, band again to the final guy who plays the last card. I mean that is almost the same exact thing as banding three wc guys together all with d2 play next and instead of going, d2 play the next, then band, couple more times you just go with your band and draw however many there are and play 3 enhs or however many you can. So nothing to much to abuse.
-
There could be some strategic pros and cons of WC before banding, but for the most part you are right.
-
Its just stupid that Michael + Angel's Sword has been played that way since Kings and now it changes. Only in Redemption would "play the first enhancement" be the same thing as "play the next enhancement".
-
Why?
Michael enters battle and completes his ability.
Rab enters battle and completes his ability.
Now that's done, Michael gets to play the "first" Enhancement.
-
"Add a second Hero" also no longer just means "second" and yet no one gripes about that. Seriously, people, this is not the end of Redemption as we know it. Silver may have taken a bit of a hit but they do actually have low numbered heroes :O and you can always pull off other strategies to stop your opp's 1/1 kings.
-
"Add a second Hero" also no longer just means "second" and yet no one gripes about that.
Know why? Doing that didn't "ruin" the card, it made it stronger, so why would anyone complain? ;)
I agree though, this isn't the end of the world. Silver is still strong.
Its just stupid that Michael + Angel's Sword has been played that way since Kings and now it changes. Only in Redemption would "play the first enhancement" be the same thing as "play the next enhancement".
No, Only in Redemption does "Play the first enhancement" mean, "When all character abilities and WC abilities complete, you may play the first enhancement"
Besides, if you REALLY want to get technical about the wording, Angel's Sword itself IS the first enhancement played in battle, so If read litterally like you all seem to be doing, it plays itself.
-
Why?
Michael enters battle and completes his ability.
Rab enters battle and completes his ability.
Now that's done, Michael gets to play the "first" Enhancement.
No Michael enters battle but can not complete his ability because his ability is an ongoing cbn ability. Now Angel's Sword does not complete the ability because there is no EC in battle yet. Rab enters battle does his ability but can not because Angel's Sword says when blocked. Meaning when the blocker is presented you get to play. Also 2k interrupts and you can not interrupt Michael so that should be another reason for Michael to play. So when a blocker is presented that is when Angel's Sword is activated because it says that on the friggin card! So this ruling is wrong. Angel's Sword should play over any human because when blocked Angel's Sword activates.
-
If you've read the other threads, you'd see that nothing can be inserted between a card entering battle and the resolution of its special abilities. Nothing can be inserted between Two Thousand Horses entering battle and its special abilities (interrupting, drawing, and playing) resolving. Not even triggers waiting to "fire" can be inserted.
-
Rab enters battle does his ability but can not because Angel's Sword says when blocked. Meaning when the blocker is presented you get to play.
You are almost correct, except that Character abilities activate IMMEDIATELY when the EC blocks. The two happen at the same time. You keep treating them as if they happen at different times... they don't. EC blocks and SA's activate instantaneously, leaving no room for AS to be inserted inbetween. There is no time gap inbetween those actions. So AS doesnt trigger until the EC blocks, which means the ECs SA and WC enhs will have already completed by that time.
-
No Michael enters battle but can not complete his ability because his ability is an ongoing cbn ability.
You're splitting hairs. Of course ongoing abilities carry over but the fact is that each character enters battle and their effects get rolling.
Meaning when the blocker is presented you get to play.
Correct. So after the blocker has entered battle and carried out his special ability, you get to play.
Also 2k interrupts and you can not interrupt Michael
Not relevant. You are not interrupting Michael. You are only carrying out your special ability.
So when a blocker is presented that is when Angel's Sword is activated because it says that on the friggin card!
That's exactly what happens. The special ability of the card is part of presenting the character into battle.
-
So after the blocker has entered battle and carried out his special ability, you get to play.
In the event that Forgotten History is played as part of the blocking special abilities resolving, would you still get to play an Enhancement?
-
No, because the battle ends immediately.
-
Does that mean that Angel's Sword never triggers? (in that situation)
-
It triggers, so to speak, but since the battle has ended, there are no more opportunities to play Enhancements, so nothing happens.
-
There was a ruling about Assyrian archer not being able to discard himself if the battle ended with Forgotten History, that is a triggered ability as well.
So, I say AS never gets to activate.
-
It triggers, so to speak, but since the battle has ended, there are no more opportunities to play Enhancements, so nothing happens.
If it triggers, why does it matter if there is a battle?
Altar of Burnt Offering allows for Enhancements to be played outside of battle by triggering during the preparation phase. Wouldn't Angel's Sword grant a similar opportunity iff the Hero holding it is still in play?
-
Why?
Michael enters battle and completes his ability.
Rab enters battle and completes his ability.
Now that's done, Michael gets to play the "first" Enhancement.
No Michael enters battle but can not complete his ability because his ability is an ongoing cbn ability. Now Angel's Sword does not complete the ability because there is no EC in battle yet. Rab enters battle does his ability but can not because Angel's Sword says when blocked. Meaning when the blocker is presented you get to play. Also 2k interrupts and you can not interrupt Michael so that should be another reason for Michael to play. So when a blocker is presented that is when Angel's Sword is activated because it says that on the friggin card! So this ruling is wrong. Angel's Sword should play over any human because when blocked Angel's Sword activates.
So, By your logic I should be able to CM BEFORE your ability to not be d/c'd or UW before your ability to be captured kicks in?
Only in Redemption would "play the first enhancement" be the same thing as "play the next enhancement".
You DO play the first enhancement. It's Angel's sword. So either, it becomes complete fail, or we try to fix bad wording.
-
If it triggers, why does it matter if there is a battle?
...beeeecause you can only play Enhancements in battle?
Wouldn't Angel's Sword grant a similar opportunity iff the Hero holding it is still in play?
Why? What power does it grant to play an Enhancement in a phase other than the Battle Phase?
-
It triggers, so to speak, but since the battle has ended, there are no more opportunities to play Enhancements, so nothing happens.
If it triggers, why does it matter if there is a battle?
As said, you need a battle to play enhancements in. Not counting the time for human actions, Once Forgotten History is played, the battle is pretty much over instantly and characters leave battle/die, meaning theres no more hero left in battle.
-
Why? What power does it grant to play an Enhancement in a phase other than the Battle Phase?
The current play as for Angel's Sword says:
If blocked by a human Evil Character, holder may play the first enhancement on this character.
Would not the updated play as be:
"If blocked by a human Evil Character, holder may play an Enhancement on this character."
Nowhere is there a distinction or requirement that the Enhancement be played in battle. Other cards that allow for an Enhancement to be played say "in battle". Lacking Sleep, for example. The wording is more similar to Altar of Burnt Offering, which allows for playing of Enhancements outside of the battle phase because of special ability. Special abilities circumvent normal game play rules. So Angel's Sword's special ability would circumvent the normal rule that Enhancements can only be played in battle.
-
I realize that this might be a little off-topic, but Lambo said that if Assyrian Archer d/c's a hero and then plays Forgotten History, he doesn't have to be discarded? Why is this? Does this mean that Assyrian Archer can d/c another hero in a territory next he blocks?
-
Nowhere is there a distinction or requirement that the Enhancement be played in battle.
Cool! So I can play enhancements outside of battle on my ET as well? It just says I can play an enhancement, not specifying battle. Awesome, I dont even have to put him into battle to play AOCP.
-
There was a ruling about Assyrian archer not being able to discard himself if the battle ended with Forgotten History, that is a triggered ability as well.
I think that involved using 2KH to interrupt his pending discard (which is ongoing) and ending the battle before it reactivated.
I realize that this might be a little off-topic, but Lambo said that if Assyrian Archer d/c's a hero and then plays Forgotten History, he doesn't have to be discarded? Why is this? Does this mean that Assyrian Archer can d/c another hero in a territory next he blocks?
Hopefully the above answers the first 2 questions. For the last one, yes he can discard another hero next time he blocks.
-
Nowhere is there a distinction or requirement that the Enhancement be played in battle.
Cool! So I can play enhancements outside of battle on my ET as well? It just says I can play an enhancement, not specifying battle. Awesome, I dont even have to put him into battle to play AOCP.
Be constructive please.
-
I am. If you say Angels Sword can play regardless of if theres a battle or not just because it doesnt specify "In battle," then why couldn't ET? Its the same thing isn't it?
-
Awesome, I dont even have to put him into battle to play AOCP.
This has nothing to do with the discussion. Nobody is questioning the need to activate special abilities by putting characters into battle.
If you say Angels Sword can play regardless of if theres a battle or not just because it doesnt specify "In battle," then why couldn't ET?
Good point, I can add that to my questioning. Why can't I play an Enhancement on a Hero that isn't in battle with Ethiopian Treasurer's special ability? His ability is similar to Altar of Burnt Offering too. Just for clarification, not kidding.
-
Nowhere is there a distinction or requirement that the Enhancement be played in battle.
Your logic is backwards. The rule is that Enhancements must be played in battle. Therefore, to break the rule, you need to specify an exception. Which is exactly what your own example of Altar of Burnt Offering provides, and is exactly what Angel's Sword does not.
Other cards that allow for an Enhancement to be played say "in battle". Lacking Sleep, for example.
Lacking Sleep and Weakness are the only examples of this kind of language. There are over 30 other cards that do not. This is a weak argument.
So Angel's Sword's special ability would circumvent the normal rule that Enhancements can only be played in battle.
There is no language that says the Enhancement can be played outside of battle. Therefore, the only rule bypassed by this card is the rule that you check for initiative before you get to play your card. Since the battle is over, no more cards can be played in battle and the question of initiative is moot.
-
The rule is that Enhancements must be played in battle. Therefore, to break the rule, you need to specify an exception. Which is exactly what your own example of Altar of Burnt Offering provides, and is exactly what Angel's Sword does not.
Alright, that makes sense.
Lacking Sleep and Weakness are the only examples of this kind of language.
Without Food. :P
-
I have four Michael Kings for trade, message me. Fact that this game is constantly being errated and changed makes it not that great of a game. There needs to be more playtesters that are EXPERIENCED and know the rules so these things won't happen again. Because right now silver will not be used. Other than capn/tsa competitively.
-
Why? You don't like that the game is changed so everything makes sense?
Would you prefer the game to not work under a solid set of rules, so people have to bicker and debate every game about what happens? I see this as an improvement to the game.
-
I have four Michael Kings for trade, message me.
Since you think they're useless, I suggest you just give them to me.
Fact that this game is constantly being errated and changed makes it not that great of a game.
I think your definition of "constant" and mine are drastically different.
There needs to be more playtesters that are EXPERIENCED and know the rules so these things won't happen again.
Experienced and know the rules, as opposed to what. Do you even know who you're talking about when you make these accusations and personal attacks?
Because right now silver will not be used. Other than capn/tsa competitively.
Sorry you don't like silver. I love it, and half the kids in my playgroup use it. They'll really appreciate your worthless Michaels.
-
Why? You don't like that the game is changed so everything makes sense?
You think it makes sense to change the plain English meaning of PLAY THE FIRST ENHANCEMENT to mean "play an enhancement any old time after the evil guys get to play all their enhancements"? Makes sense?? ?? ?? SENSE?!?!?!?!?!?!? In what possible PARALLEL universe does that make any sense?
Would you prefer the game to not work under a solid set of rules,
About as solid as a putrid lump of jello sitting on a festering layer of quicksand which overlays a fetid swamp built in the middle of a brackish lake. If the rules were so solid we wouldn't have to change them every single NIT-PICKING time someone has a whim or decides that the old rulings aren't good enough any more. Is this game had some REAL play testers, it wouldn't be a quivering mass of contradiction wrapped in the blanket of oxymoron.
so people have to bicker and debate every game about what happens?
Quit your belly aching and carping. You're just whining because I have you stone cold solid in the crushing grip of inexorable logic. It's deontological also.
I see this as an improvement to the game.
This is a LESS THAN ZERO PERCENT improvement. We've been playing the same exact way since Kings, and all of these new fangled "interpretations" are just destroying the game. I might as well burn all my cards--no forget that--burning is too good for them. I'm going to feed all my cards into a wood chipper and use what comes out for kitty litter.
How does this ruling stack up on my Rage-O-Meter?
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( <== Watch out. I am EIGHT angry.
I have four Michael Kings for trade, message me.
Ooooooo. Can I have one? That would be awesome. Thx.
@TimMierz: Do you like how I worked LESS THAN ZERO PERCENT into the discussion?
-
I'm trying to figure out if I need to delete your comment and close the thread. Meaning, if your intention was to be boisterously humorous, it wasn't clear enough that I could tell one way or the other.
-
I'm trying to figure out if I need to delete your comment and close the thread. Meaning, if your intention was to be boisterously humorous, it wasn't clear enough that I could tell one way or the other.
That's a truly sad commentary on this entire discussion, isn't it?
I would have thought the line "It's deontological also" would have been a fairly large clue to intent.
I could go back and add more faux-outrage if you like.
-
I could go back and add more faux-outrage if you like.
Poor little Faux. I know their fur is expensive, but to be outraged at them? ::)
Godspeed,
Mike
-
Hahahahahahahahahahha MJB... that post was win.
-
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( <== Watch out. I am EIGHT angry.
Don't worry guys he wakes up at FIVE angry
-
"Less than zero percent" and "eight angry" gave it away for me. ;)
I serously can't believe people are still whining about this. :P Rob made a decision. The final outcome of this ruling has very little impact on your life, whether you use Mike + AS or not. Lets move on... ::)
-
I would have thought the line "It's deontological also" would have been a fairly large clue to intent.
There were several clues which is why I didn't just do it right away. But you're right, some of your bluster sounds a lot like what some people are really saying.
-
Excellent, Mr. B! Now that's rage.
Of course, I could be lying. Because if I said I didn't like that, then I'd be messing with someone that's eight angry.
And of course I agree with Mr. Gabe, as always.
-
Close this topic please, it's going nowhere.
-
I would have thought the line "It's deontological also" would have been a fairly large clue to intent.
There were several clues which is why I didn't just do it right away.
I threw in "It's also deontological" just for you, however. I thought you would appreciate it.
-
Close this topic please, it's going nowhere.
It's your topic you can close it if you want
-
I have four Michael Kings for trade, message me.
Since you think they're useless, I suggest you just give them to me.
Because right now silver will not be used. Other than capn/tsa competitively.
Sorry you don't like silver. I love it, and half the kids in my playgroup use it. They'll really appreciate your worthless Michaels.
Hey, can I please have one of them? I really need it for my deck. Thanks!
-
Tyler, I think you're overreacting. I agree that silver got a lot weaker because of the redefinition of how Angel's Sword is played but it is because the play testers have a better understanding that this came about. To that point, ALL of the play testers are experienced and knowledgeable more so that most players. There are very few players who know the rules better than they and there are very few players who can interpret the rules better than they. There is a big difference in silver being able to be a competitive mono color and not being used at all. There are plenty of ways to use Michael+Angel's Sword as long as you couple it with something to get rid of WC Enhancements. I think it was clear how I wasn't very excited about how the redefinition changes things for silver but that doesn't mean that the new way isn't better and easier to understand.
-
Yeah, if WC enhs bug you that much, just include Salome in your deck.
-
After the next set, everyone is just going to use I Am Grace in every deck anyway, so evil weapons will be no prob. ;)