Author Topic: Cascade Negate? (Read 9110 times)

Jeremystair · « **on:** August 21, 2017, 12:37:25 PM »

If I block with evil spawn: reveal the bottom card of a draw pile if it is an evil card take it into hand or add it into battle.

And the card is imitating evil: evil character May band to a demon imitating evil becomes a generic copy of that demon cannot be negated.

I added it to battle to band in King of Tyrus: negate all special abilities on characters and enhancements (except this special ability) does king of Tyrus negate evil spawn? If so imitating evil gets put back under the deck right? And does king of Tyrus stay in battle because imitating evil cannot be negated?

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #1 on:** August 21, 2017, 12:38:49 PM »

Yes, you have it right.

Jeremystair · « **Reply #2 on:** August 21, 2017, 12:45:46 PM »

Thanks I thought so just wasn't 100% sure

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #3 on:** August 21, 2017, 07:31:41 PM »

So CBN stuff is allowed to go back to location after being played if the search is negated once again?

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #4 on:** August 21, 2017, 07:43:32 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on August 21, 2017, 07:31:41 PM

So CBN stuff is allowed to go back to location after being played if the search is negated once again?

Yes, I'm not aware of a time when it wasn't that way. The only thing a CBN modifier affects is the ability and the ability sticks around.

TheJaylor · « **Reply #5 on:** August 22, 2017, 12:59:17 AM »

Well that's a neat little "combo".

Josh · « **Reply #6 on:** August 22, 2017, 08:00:52 AM »

I'm pretty sure any enhancement that is CBN sticks, regardless of whether it was added to battle via Play ability, Add To Battle ability, or regular initiative.

Gabe · « **Reply #7 on:** August 22, 2017, 09:14:16 AM »

Quote from: jmhartz on August 22, 2017, 08:00:52 AM

I'm pretty sure any enhancement that is CBN sticks, regardless of whether it was added to battle via Play ability, Add To Battle ability, or regular initiative.

Jeremystair · « **Reply #8 on:** August 22, 2017, 09:37:11 AM »

Quote from: Ivek on July 28, 2017, 08:29:36 AM

Quote from: The Guardian on July 27, 2017, 10:26:19 AM

Quote
One more unnatural rule is the rule that cascade negate may negate the things that were a cascade result of a CBN ability. It seems more natural to understand that everything behind CBN would stay untouched from the cascade negate. So that's one of the rules that I've found hard to understand.

I'm not sure where you heard this rule, but that is not the case. If a CBN ability is activated, it "sticks" and cannot be negated directly (by a negate card) or indirectly (cascade negated). Example: I attack with Tribal Elder and band to Abraham who searches deck for Isaac and bands to him (CBN). If you negate Tribal Elder, then Abraham leaves battle, but Isaac remains because he was banded in by a CBN ability.

I understood the cascade negate rule so that if your character A bands a CBN character B who bands a non-CBN character C who bands a non-CBN character D and then your character A gets negated:
- his band ability would be negated (I still don't know what happens to the character B)
- the CBN band ability of the character B can't be negated - therefore character C stays in battle

And here one would think the CBN ability would stop the cascade negate in negating the character C and D
But, as I understood it, the cascade negate goes behind the CBN ability and negates it's results...
Therefore:

- character C gets negated but stays in battle - therefore the banding of the character D doesn't occur
- character D gets negated and out of the battle

Please correct me if I'm wrong.
This ability is a monster for me to understand...

Quote from: The Guardian on July 28, 2017, 10:25:12 AM

You are correct on all counts. Character B would be kicked out of battle though his ability "sticks" which is why Character C stays in battle.

So this was in a separate thread and that's why I came to the conclusion that I did. The ability from imitating evil that banded king of Tyrus into battle sticks but if king of Tyrus negates evil spawn that play the enhancement then the imitating evil gets put back under the deck. If I am wrong please elaborate. Thanks

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #9 on:** August 22, 2017, 10:25:19 AM »

Quote from: Gabe on August 22, 2017, 09:14:16 AM

Quote from: jmhartz on August 22, 2017, 08:00:52 AM
I'm pretty sure any enhancement that is CBN sticks, regardless of whether it was added to battle via Play ability, Add To Battle ability, or regular initiative.

Why does the enhancement being CBN have anything to do with whether it can be put back in the deck or not? When Evil Spawn is negated, first the game attempts to negate the card retrieved by it, then attempts to put the card back on the bottom. It can't negate the ability of course but Evil Spawn isn't CBI or CBN so what is preventing the game from putting the card on the bottom of the deck?

Gabe · « **Reply #10 on:** August 22, 2017, 10:52:57 AM »

Some CBN cards "stick" and some don't. That's been the ruling (and correct way to play) since before I was introduced to the game. The problem is that I don't know if it was ever codified. If it was it seems to have been lost. Maybe it was just a post on the forum by a member of a previous elder team. Either way, it's a problem to not have it work that way and a problem that it's not codified.

We realized this a couple months ago and began discussing how to (re)introduce the concept that "CBN sticks" to the game. There are card types that MUST "stick" such as Dominants (and traditionally enhancements) or they allow for broken combos, the worse of which is "cloning" a Dominant to get multiple uses out of it. But there are other CBN card types that don't "stick", nor do they need to, like characters.

I realize this answer isn't all that helpful if you're looking for a cut and dry solution. It's something we are formalizing for REG 5.0 so we will have a better answer in the near future.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #11 on:** August 22, 2017, 11:09:15 AM »

Quote from: Gabe on August 22, 2017, 10:52:57 AM

Some CBN cards "stick" and some don't. That's been the ruling (and correct way to play) since before I was introduced to the game. The problem is that I don't know if it was ever codified. If it was it seems to have been lost. Maybe it was just a post on the forum by a member of a previous elder team. Either way, it's a problem to not have it work that way and a problem that it's not codified.

We realized this a couple months ago and began discussing how to (re)introduce the concept that "CBN sticks" to the game. There are card types that MUST "stick" such as Dominants (and traditionally enhancements) or they allow for broken combos, the worse of which is "cloning" a Dominant to get multiple uses out of it. But there are other CBN card types that don't "stick", nor do they need to, like characters.

I realize this answer isn't all that helpful if you're looking for a cut and dry solution. It's something we are formalizing for REG 5.0 so we will have a better answer in the near future.

It seems inconsistent with how cascade is supposed to work but I appreciate it is being codified at least. Dominants are actually ok with the current rules as they all either discard themselves after use (game rule, not negatable) or place themselves as part of their ability which is of course also CBN.

I know this has been said by many people many times before, but I really think it would be good to take a long hard look at the entire concept of cascade negation. If you're having to basically "hard code" interactions of certain types of cards around it to avoid breaking the game that is just adding more to the giant pile of interactions that can't be inferred from any other mechanics of the game and simply work that way "because". I and so many other members of the community believe a better solution is to step away from cascade negation entirely.

I've talked to many people on the boards and at Nats when I had the opportunity to talk to a lot of long time players and nearly every person I have brought this up to agrees cascade negation is unnecessary, unhealthy, and will only become more convoluted as the game evolves. I believe it is inevitable that cascade negate will have to be scrapped and it's only going to get harder the more you tie into it. Now seems the best time as any since you're already having to look at cascade and are about to release a major REG update. The primary point I hear for why cascade exists is because a negate "makes the ability never to have happened" but this is simply not the case. Time travel is not a practical basis for card game rules. Negate should be described simple as undoing an ability, not making it never happen because the fact of the matter is it did happen and as the game has become more complex (in a good way) it is becoming harder and harder to continue the illusion that time travel is possible.

When one or more abilities are negated, only the specific abilities targeted should be negated and no more. I'm aware this gives a power boost to draws and searches but the game is suffering and will continue to suffer far more from cascade negate existing than it will from a marginal power boost to a few abilities.

Gabe · « **Reply #12 on:** August 22, 2017, 11:23:36 AM »

I agree with pretty much everything you've stated. But I don't think that's the entire picture. TBH I have a hard time wrapping my mind around the entire picture sometimes (thank goodness we have a team working on it). Cascades are ugly. I'd love to see them go away. But it's not a change we'll rush into. Something like that needs to be well vetted and it's possible we will still overlook something.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #13 on:** August 22, 2017, 11:30:34 AM »

Quote from: Gabe on August 22, 2017, 11:23:36 AM

I agree with pretty much everything you've stated. But I don't think that's the entire picture. TBH I have a hard time wrapping my mind around the entire picture sometimes (thank goodness we have a team working on it). Cascades are ugly. I'd love to see them go away. But it's not a change we'll rush into. Something like that needs to be well vetted and it's possible we will still overlook something.

That makes me much happier than every other answer I've heard when this issue is brought up. I'm overjoyed that you are at least open to the possibility of change. I've thought about the bigger picture of cascade quite a bit and you are right I did only touch on the bad effects of it and there are a few things it currently duct tapes together, but it is absolutely doable to have negate only negate the abilities it directly targets without breaking the game, and with little to no "hard coded" interactions that cascade continues to require more of every year. It certainly would be one of the most intensive rule reworks Redemption has had (That I know of anyway) but I very strongly believe it will dramatically improve the health of the game.

The Guardian · « **Reply #14 on:** August 22, 2017, 11:51:49 AM »

Being more of a traditionalist when it comes to rulings, I'm typically wary of such major changes.

However, I am interested in investigating what kinds of impacts this would have. Would others be willing to do some test games to see what kinds of things we would run into without cascade negating?

One thing that came to mind was from another thread where we brought up the rule about the same unique character not being allowed to enter battle more than once in the same turn. Currently if I band in a character, and then the band is negated, I can band that character in again or use that character in a second battle phase because of the "it never happened" nature of negates. If we were to do away with the "it never happened" idea, then that rule about unique characters becomes much more relevant.

Jeremystair · « **Reply #15 on:** August 22, 2017, 12:42:43 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on August 22, 2017, 10:52:57 AM

Some CBN cards "stick" and some don't. That's been the ruling (and correct way to play) since before I was introduced to the game. The problem is that I don't know if it was ever codified. If it was it seems to have been lost. Maybe it was just a post on the forum by a member of a previous elder team. Either way, it's a problem to not have it work that way and a problem that it's not codified.

So how are we supposed to determine which CBN cards stick and which ones do not?

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #16 on:** August 22, 2017, 12:48:39 PM »

I have never had a problem with cascade negates because it's consistent with the definition of negate. I'm not sure changing the definition of negate is the way to go either, whenever you have a lot of abilities interacting things are going to get complicated either way. The status quo seems fine.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #17 on:** August 22, 2017, 12:53:41 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on August 22, 2017, 12:48:39 PM

I have never had a problem with cascade negates because it's consistent with the definition of negate. I'm not sure changing the definition of negate is the way to go either, whenever you have a lot of abilities interacting things are going to get complicated either way. The status quo seems fine.

That's why the solution isn't changing how the convoluted interactions work, it's simply removing the convoluted interactions entirely. I'm genuinely curious which interactions you would find complicated with negate only affecting the ability it directly targets, assuming the definition of negate is updated to reflect this.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #18 on:** August 22, 2017, 01:40:01 PM »

It's complicated in a different way. If you change how negate works then you have to explain why the evil character's ability is still able to be active after you interrupt and prevent a dull lost soul that searched it out, because if you are preventing the search he could never be in battle to activate his ability. It can get a bit complicated too, maybe not as much, but if you woes your dull lost soul which got out an auto block EC like fire foxes you get to block without using up your EC. Or get out Domitian with dull and they play an interrupt the battle in si and band in Paul to negate dull. Domitian gets put back and you are left explaining why the original hero is being removed. With cascade negate the only difference is Domitian is negated, but in both cases it does get complicated and you might have to cite the rules to your opponent. But why confuse people by changing the rules to create a new system where you are going to have to cite the new rules, in some cases, anyways.

Cascade negate isn't overly difficult to understand and all you have to do is to undo whatever happened afterwards. If you change it to just the ability targeted is negated that's easy to understand too. When you negate an ability, only that ability is negated and every ability after still works. Both easy to understand and memorize, though not necessarily obvious. It's just simpler to keep it as is.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #19 on:** August 22, 2017, 02:11:05 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on August 22, 2017, 01:40:01 PM

It's complicated in a different way. If you change how negate works then you have to explain why the evil character's ability is still able to be active after you interrupt and prevent a dull lost soul that searched it out, because if you are preventing the search he could never be in battle to activate his ability. It can get a bit complicated too, maybe not as much, but if you woes your dull lost soul which got out an auto block EC like fire foxes you get to block without using up your EC. Or get out Domitian with dull and they play an interrupt the battle in si and band in Paul to negate dull. Domitian gets put back and you are left explaining why the original hero is being removed. With cascade negate the only difference is Domitian is negated, but in both cases it does get complicated and you might have to cite the rules to your opponent. But why confuse people by changing the rules to create a new system where you are going to have to cite the new rules, in some cases, anyways.

You misunderstand what I am advocating. All your examples are still using a partial cascade. Without cascade, if you get Fire Foxes, Emp, or anything else, once you play the card it doesn't matter if Dull gets negated, the EC stays in battle. Putting the Evil Character into battle isn't part of Dull's ability, so negating Dull's ability doesn't undo that action. The only thing Dull does is move the card from deck to hand so the only thing negating it should do it move the card from hand back to deck. If the card is no longer in your hand where Dull put it, negating Dull would do nothing.

When I say negate should only affect the ability negated, I mean exactly that very literally. The only thing that should be undone when an ability is negated is exactly what that ability did. Not an iota more.

The reason this is so much more intuitive and simple to explain is because you only need to look at the words on the cards to figure out what is undone.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #20 on:** August 22, 2017, 03:39:31 PM »

Negating a search means that you are undoing getting a character out of deck and adding it to hand. If you undo getting the character out of deck he has to go back to deck, that's a direct negation that happens to remove the evil character from battle but does not undo the block. The cascade aspect of negate indirectly negates the ability of the evil character in battle because negate undoes all abilities that happened as a result of the ability being negated, but cannot negate the game action of block do to it's transcendent properties.

However, when you band in a character to battle the ability let's him join a rescue/block/ battle challenge not a game action of presenting the character, so his presence can be "undone".

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #21 on:** August 22, 2017, 03:48:08 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on August 22, 2017, 03:39:31 PM

Negating a search means that you are undoing getting a character out of deck and adding it to hand. If you undo getting the character out of deck he has to go back to deck, that's a direct negation that happens to remove the evil character from battle but does not undo the block. The cascade aspect of negate indirectly negates the ability of the evil character in battle because negate undoes all abilities that happened as a result of the ability being negated, but cannot negate the game action of block do to it's transcendent properties.

However, when you band in a character to battle the ability let's him join a rescue/block/ battle challenge not a game action of presenting the character, so his presence can be "undone".

I'm aware of how it currently works. I'm explaining how I believe it should be. I agree just removing the negate part of cascade leaves interactions just as convoluted and possibly more so. What I'm trying to explain is that cascading as a concept needs to be done away with in its entirety. Absolutely nothing more than the exact words of an ability should be undone when it is negated.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #22 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.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #23 on:** August 22, 2017, 04:48:52 PM »

Quote from: Kevinthedude on August 22, 2017, 03:48:08 PM

Absolutely nothing more than the exact words of an ability should be undone when it is negated.

I'm saying that even with this interpretation the evil character still would not be in battle because when you negate a search the cards go back into the deck, but the abilities of the evil character would not be negated. That's why I brought up the 3 woes-Fire Foxes example.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #24 on:** August 22, 2017, 04:56:13 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on August 22, 2017, 04:48:52 PM

Quote from: Kevinthedude on August 22, 2017, 03:48:08 PM
Absolutely nothing more than the exact words of an ability should be undone when it is negated.

I'm saying that even with this interpretation the evil character still would not be in battle because when you negate a search the cards go back into the deck, but the abilities of the evil character would not be negated. That's why I brought up the 3 woes-Fire Foxes example.

Explain how you interpret "nothing more than the exact words of an ability" to include moving an EC from battle to deck when the ability in question only moves an EC from deck to hand.

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.

News:

Author Topic: Cascade Negate? (Read 9110 times)

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13