Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: TXJonathan on May 24, 2017, 06:27:02 AM
-
1. If the new strong angel is in battle and opponent blocks with a play ability then who plays first?
2. If the golden altar is in play and a revelation angel is in battle then is the hero immune to all harm and effect (the numbers and special ability of the enhancement) from the first enhancement played by opponent for remainder of battle? Would the opponent's enhancement simply do nothing? I'm thinking if my opponent plays a card like bringing fear.
-
1. The EC/weapon plays first, then TSA. Same as Michael/Angel's Sword blocked by an EC w/ 2KH equipped.
2. Bringing Fear or other negates will work. Negates target abilities, not characters. As to the 3/3 numbers of Bringing Fear, based on the definition of Protect, I guess the 3/3 would be treated as 0/0?
-
1. The EC/weapon plays first, then TSA. Same as Michael/Angel's Sword blocked by an EC w/ 2KH equipped.
2. Bringing Fear or other negates will work. Negates target abilities, not characters. As to the 3/3 numbers of Bringing Fear, based on the definition of Protect, I guess the 3/3 would be treated as 0/0?
I seem to remember that Angel's Sword vs 2k Horses was ruled differently. But I'm not remembering the exact ruling (but it may have to do when weapons kick in and that Sword is CBN on Michael. But if TSA is blocked with an EC and the EC has a play ability, then the EC play's first.
-
jmhartz ruled the play first correctly. Both TSA (RoJ) and Angel's Sword are triggered abilities that must wait for the triggering event (block) to complete. The block includes activating all abilities that happen when the blocker enters battle (including their weapons).
-
I seem to remember that Angel's Sword vs 2k Horses was ruled differently.
That was an old, old ruling that we eventually realized was inconsistent.
-
I seem to remember that Angel's Sword vs 2k Horses was ruled differently.
That was an old, old ruling that we eventually realized was inconsistent.
Ah. That makes sense. As I remember seeing it a long time ago, and didn't hear the new ruling on it as it wasn't brought up since I came back to game.