Author Topic: Cascade Negate? (Read 9077 times)

jbeers285 · « **Reply #25 on:** August 22, 2017, 05:06:07 PM »

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on August 22, 2017, 03:49:46 PM

I actually like the current Cascade Negating (at least given how Redemption functions), it makes sense to me and it's usually pretty easy to follow in my experience. There are a few weird situations that come up and some things need to get clearly defined, but I don't think I'd like to see Cascade Negating be done away with.

I go AutO to Jair. I draw on both. You use Gifts of the magi for both draws and the dull LS for a search. That triggers music leader for me. I search out 2 cards from d/c and 4 from deck. It also triggered my PoZ twice and I kill your site and EC. You block with sabbath breakers (who you searched with dull) and draw 3. That triggers my priest of Zeus again and ML searches deck and finds 1 more music card I play Deborah's directive and band in Isaiah with his call and Jacob who bands to Cherubim to band to paul.

What happens? (To be honest this is still a rather simple interaction at the upper level of redemption play.). There are much worse things then this and loops that can occur. Do you still want cascade negate?

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #26 on:** August 22, 2017, 05:19:08 PM »

I would honestly need like 2 minutes and the cards in front of me.....
I'm fairly certain your initial 4 cards all stay because CBI, the 3 Zues discards stay because CBI, all your opponents drawing and searching is negated, so all your music leaders go away, and Sabbath Breaker goes back to deck, and you get a soul! Yay for successful rescues

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #27 on:** August 22, 2017, 05:26:17 PM »

Meanwhile over in Camp Anti-Cascade you simply return to deck any cards from Dull and Sabbath Breaker that are still in your hand and carry on with the battle. Much easier

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #28 on:** August 22, 2017, 05:30:27 PM »

Quote from: Kevinthedude on August 22, 2017, 04:56:13 PM

Think of negating as doing the ability again but as its inverse. Dull searches your deck and puts the card into your hand. Therefore, negating the search should take the card from your hand and put it back in your deck. When the search is negated, the game attempts to do the inverse of Dull's ability and move the card from hand to deck but fails to find (as the EC is no longer in hand) so nothing happens.

My understanding is that the default for search is adding to hand, which is not apart of the search ability itself. This is equivalent to printing on every unspecified search card "and add to hand". Abraham's descendants says "search... and place them beneath owners decks". So if you negate dull with 3 woes the search is negated and you do the reverse of taking the card out of your deck and the reverse of putting the card in your hand. If you can't do one of these actions then don't do it.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #29 on:** August 22, 2017, 05:38:40 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on August 22, 2017, 05:30:27 PM

Quote from: Kevinthedude on August 22, 2017, 04:56:13 PM
Think of negating as doing the ability again but as its inverse. Dull searches your deck and puts the card into your hand. Therefore, negating the search should take the card from your hand and put it back in your deck. When the search is negated, the game attempts to do the inverse of Dull's ability and move the card from hand to deck but fails to find (as the EC is no longer in hand) so nothing happens.

My understanding is that the default for search is adding to hand, which is not apart of the search ability itself. This is equivalent to printing on every unspecified search card "and add to hand". Abraham's descendants says "search... and place them beneath owners decks". So if you negate dull with 3 woes the search is negated and you do the reverse of taking the card out of your deck and the reverse of putting the card in your hand. If you can't do one of these actions then don't do it.

I pretty much agree with you except in how it applies to the rule change I am suggesting. With cascade completely gone, the game should not be able to move a card without directly undoing the last action that moved it. If I put the EC in battle from my hand after I search for it with Dull, that's an action the game would have to undo for the card to not be in battle. Dull has nothing to do with that action so it can't be undone by negating Dull and the EC stays in battle.

This would work the same for draw abilities. If I draw 3 cards with a Hero, play one of those cards during the battle with normal initiative, play ability, or whatever else, then that draw gets negated, without cascade only the 2 cards still in hand can go back on the deck. The one already played stays on the table, CBN or no CBN.

I'm not sure I understand what we're debating since I'm merely telling you how I believe it should work. Your interpretation of what I mean by "getting rid of cascade" evidently is different than mine. I've described how I think it should work and obviously this requires the rules to be changed and I am advocating for them to be changed in such a way the the game would work as I have been describing.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #30 on:** August 22, 2017, 05:49:58 PM »

Quote from: jbeers285 on August 22, 2017, 05:06:07 PM

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on August 22, 2017, 03:49:46 PM
I actually like the current Cascade Negating (at least given how Redemption functions), it makes sense to me and it's usually pretty easy to follow in my experience. There are a few weird situations that come up and some things need to get clearly defined, but I don't think I'd like to see Cascade Negating be done away with.

I go AutO to Jair. I draw on both. You use Gifts of the magi for both draws and the dull LS for a search. That triggers music leader for me. I search out 2 cards from d/c and 4 from deck. It also triggered my PoZ twice and I kill your site and EC. You block with sabbath breakers (who you searched with dull) and draw 3. That triggers my priest of Zeus again and ML searches deck and finds 1 more music card I play Deborah's directive and band in Isaiah with his call and Jacob who bands to Cherubim to band to paul.

What happens? (To be honest this is still a rather simple interaction at the upper level of redemption play.). There are much worse things then this and loops that can occur. Do you still want cascade negate?

Yes. I would have preferred a game where you couldn't negate cards after they've finished resolving (something similar to the Stack in Magic: the Gathering, although I'm not sure how to implement that in a game like Redemption), since we can negate previous abilities to the beginning of the phase, I actually think it's best to actually negate them.

coknight · « **Reply #31 on:** August 22, 2017, 06:53:41 PM »

see this is way to complicated...

Red Wing · « **Reply #32 on:** August 22, 2017, 10:27:28 PM »

Quote from: coknight on August 22, 2017, 06:53:41 PM

see this is way to complicated...

Agreed, but only because cascade negate is a thing.

Isildur · « **Reply #33 on:** August 23, 2017, 04:08:04 AM »

There's a reason why MTG implicated a "stack" in their game rules eons ago, it gets rid of wonky interactions like this.

For what it's worth... implementing some sort of stack and getting rid of cascading negating completely changes the feel of Redemption.

jbeers285 · « **Reply #34 on:** August 23, 2017, 06:40:14 AM »

Quote from: Isildur on August 23, 2017, 04:08:04 AM

There's a reason why MTG implicated a "stack" in their game rules eons ago, it gets rid of wonky interactions like this.

For what it's worth... implementing some sort of stack and getting rid of cascading negating completely changes the feel of Redemption.

"Unless I am wrong and I am never wrong" (cascade negate has gone in and out of redemption several times since I started playing in 2012) "they're headed dead into the fire swamp."

The Guardian · « **Reply #35 on:** August 23, 2017, 09:07:27 AM »

Quote

(cascade negate has gone in and out of redemption several times since I started playing in 2012)

I wasn't around much in 2012, but from 2013 until now I'm fairly certain nothing has changed regarding cascade negate.

jbeers285 · « **Reply #36 on:** August 23, 2017, 09:24:19 AM »

I hadn't recognized the actual use of cascade negate in its current form until this year. Call me blind if you want but I've been apart of several high level tournaments and not really seen cascade ruled like it was this year, until this year.

I remember a short stretch where it was brought up in 14-15 but it seemed to me it got held down before it got started. Again maybe this is an area thing but my experience at nats has not been built around cascade until this year.

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #37 on:** August 23, 2017, 09:28:21 AM »

Quote from: jbeers285 on August 23, 2017, 09:24:19 AM

I hadn't recognized the actual use of cascade negate in its current form until this year. Call me blind if you want but I've been apart of several high level tournament and not really seen cascade rules like it was this year, until this year.

I remember a short stretch where it was brought up in 14-15 but it seemed to me it got held down before it got started. Again maybe this is an area thing but my experience at nats has not been built around cascade until this year.

I think a decent portion of that can be attributed to the evolving meta. As we've pushed things back towards interactive battle we've used far less CBN and FBTN abilities which in turn leads to more scenarios like you posted above. Dull and Music leader are also two of the most prominent, relevant cards in these scenarios, both introduced recently.

The Guardian · « **Reply #38 on:** August 23, 2017, 09:40:15 AM »

jbeers285 · « **Reply #39 on:** August 23, 2017, 10:40:05 AM »

I'm not sure the amount cbn would shadow this big of a ruling for 4-5 years.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #40 on:** August 23, 2017, 12:56:48 PM »

I don't really remember cascade negate going in an out of Redemption and I even found a thread dating back to 2010 where Prof A rules that negates cascade.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #41 on:** August 23, 2017, 04:57:51 PM »

I'm pretty sure Cascade Negate has existed for my entire 10+ years playing Redemption.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #42 on:** August 23, 2017, 10:03:25 PM »

Consider this scenario:

A Throne of David draws two or more cards. Later in the battle, Foreign Wives is introduced. Later in the battle, The Throne of David is negated. Is Foreign Wives protected from opponents?

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #43 on:** August 23, 2017, 10:35:57 PM »

Yes, because FW is static.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #44 on:** August 23, 2017, 11:16:39 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on August 23, 2017, 10:03:25 PM

Consider this scenario:

A Throne of David draws two or more cards. Later in the battle, Foreign Wives is introduced. Later in the battle, The Throne of David is negated. Is Foreign Wives protected from opponents?

This scenario isn't affected by the existence of cascade negate, she determines if she is protected the moment she enters battle and stays that way as long as her ability is active.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #45 on:** August 24, 2017, 12:08:44 AM »

Gabe ruled differently at Nationals.

Gabe · « **Reply #46 on:** August 24, 2017, 12:31:59 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on August 24, 2017, 12:08:44 AM

Gabe ruled differently at Nationals.

I did. When discussing this later with other elders it was determined that I ruled incorrectly.

News:

Author Topic: Cascade Negate? (Read 9077 times)

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13