Author Topic: Philistine Armorbearer (Read 9341 times)

Professoralstad · « **on:** August 27, 2009, 12:52:06 PM »

I know the default of cards returning to their owner's decks/discard piles when applicable, but I was wondering how this applies to Philistine Armorbearer. If my opponent bands to/switches for my PAB and exchanges it with his own Philistine in his deck or discard pile, does it stay in his pile, or does it somehow transfer to mine because of the default? I would think this might be a special exception, but I'm not sure.

Philistine Armor Bearer

Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 6 / 6 • Class: Warrior • Special Ability: You may exchange this card with an evil Philistine in your deck or discard pile. Evil Enhancements remain in battle. Cannot be negated. • Identifiers: OT Male Human, Philistia, Fought Earthly Battle

ejberkenpas22 · « **Reply #1 on:** August 27, 2009, 12:59:05 PM »

I don't think there is any exception to that default. That just seems wrong to have someone elses card in your deck for many reasons. I think you would just get a philistine and put PAB in your opponents deck. There is also that purple card that searches your oppenents discard pile for an enhancement and you can play it. What if you grab great faith and play it? I think the same thing would apply where great faith would actually go into your opponents deck and you would get to get a card from your deck. Thats how I see it.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #2 on:** August 27, 2009, 01:06:54 PM »

I don't know, exchange has been pretty clearly defined as swapping the exact locations of two cards. Which is what would happen in this case.

ejberkenpas22 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 27, 2009, 01:09:26 PM »

I agree with you but that just seems wrong. Think as simple as card protectors

If I have blue and you have red, you know exactly when your card is coming up with is not right. And as clearly defined as exchanging is its also clearly stated that under no circumstance can you have an opponents card in your deck is it not? I have never seen that stated anywhere but I thought that was pretty set in stone.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #4 on:** August 27, 2009, 01:12:13 PM »

I think Exchange by SA rule puts it in your own deck, and then game rule puts it in your opponent's deck.

The Guardian · « **Reply #5 on:** August 27, 2009, 01:13:25 PM »

I could live with that. Definitely do not want to see opponents' cards remaining in each others' decks.

ejberkenpas22 · « **Reply #6 on:** August 27, 2009, 01:14:55 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on August 27, 2009, 01:12:13 PM

I think Exchange by SA rule puts it in your own deck, and then game rule puts it in your opponent's deck.

Well put! That makes a lot of sense.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #7 on:** August 27, 2009, 01:28:39 PM »

That would be fine with me. I thought it might be interesting to see if I could somehow get TWO PAB's going with Outpost recursion, but I also understand the reasons against it.

NWJosh · « **Reply #8 on:** August 27, 2009, 02:42:32 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on August 27, 2009, 01:28:39 PM

That would be fine with me. I thought it might be interesting to see if I could somehow get TWO PAB's going with Outpost recursion, but I also understand the reasons against it.

That would make things a heck of alot of fun for black, but I do agree with the previous idea of SA puts it in your deck but gameplay returns it to owners deck.

The Guardian · « **Reply #9 on:** August 27, 2009, 02:43:31 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on August 27, 2009, 01:28:39 PM

That would be fine with me. I thought it might be interesting to see if I could somehow get TWO PAB's going with Outpost recursion, but I also understand the reasons against it.

Umm, 100+ deck?

Professoralstad · « **Reply #10 on:** August 27, 2009, 03:46:11 PM »

Yeah, but no one uses those...

ejberkenpas22 · « **Reply #11 on:** August 27, 2009, 03:53:09 PM »

I DO!! And its pretty good too I think! http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=17392.0

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #12 on:** February 08, 2010, 11:58:05 AM »

Sorry for the necropost.

Original Question:

Quote from: Professoralstad on August 27, 2009, 12:52:06 PM

I know the default of cards returning to their owner's decks/discard piles when applicable, but I was wondering how this applies to Philistine Armorbearer. If my opponent bands to/switches for my PAB and exchanges it with his own Philistine in his deck or discard pile, does it stay in his pile, or does it somehow transfer to mine because of the default? I would think this might be a special exception, but I'm not sure.

Philistine Armor Bearer

Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 6 / 6 • Class: Warrior • Special Ability: You may exchange this card with an evil Philistine in your deck or discard pile. Evil Enhancements remain in battle. Cannot be negated. • Identifiers: OT Male Human, Philistia, Fought Earthly Battle

Response:

Quote from: Minister Polarius on August 27, 2009, 01:12:13 PM

I think Exchange by SA rule puts it in your own deck, and then game rule puts it in your opponent's deck.

Verification:

Quote from: The Guardian on August 27, 2009, 01:13:25 PM

I could live with that. Definitely do not want to see opponents' cards remaining in each others' decks.

So in the end, we have an exchange ability being use to take a card from deck/discard pile A while placing a card in deck/discard pile B. This strike me as an exceedingly strange behavior.

The Guardian was the only "official" person to rule on this, and his support seems to me to somewhat less than enthusiastic and devoted mostly to solving the issue of preventing a foreign card from ending up in an deck. As it stands, I would rule that a borrowed PAB cannot be exchanged because you can't put a second player's card into your own deck, so the exchange cannot work.

Can I get a verification that this ruling (i.e., the "I could live with that" ruling) is correct?

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #13 on:** February 08, 2010, 12:14:49 PM »

Exchange is defined as switching the locations of two cards, right? That means card A goes to location B and card B goes to location A. If card A cannot exist in location B, as is true when exchanging a card into a deck other than that of the card's owner, the exchange cannot take place without creating a rift in the fabric of the universe. To my knowledge, game rule says nothing about moving cards from one deck to another if the card belongs to a different person; it only says the card cannot go there in the first place. It is also my understanding that the Redemption community is against creating rifts in the universe. I would conclude, then, that the exchange simply cannot take place.

Also, doesn't Armor Bearer say "your deck"?

Professoralstad · « **Reply #14 on:** February 08, 2010, 12:24:33 PM »

I still know of no game rule that says a card CAN'T go to non-owner's deck, and even if there was one, SA's often overrule game rules. There IS a game rule that says that when I discard a card from my hand, it goes to my discard pile, but that's not always the case, because another game rule says that if I discard your card (after taking it with Taking Egypt's Wealth) it goes to your discard pile. I view this situation similarly: when I would put PAB in my draw pile for the exchange, I instead put it in your draw pile since you own it.

Quote from: BubbleBoy on February 08, 2010, 12:14:49 PM

Also, doesn't Armor Bearer say "your deck"?

Yes. So when I control someone else's PAB (or in this case, Bill controlled my PAB), "your deck" is my deck. It doesn't say "this card's owner's deck".

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #15 on:** February 08, 2010, 12:34:22 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on February 08, 2010, 12:24:33 PM

Quote from: BubbleBoy on February 08, 2010, 12:14:49 PM
Also, doesn't Armor Bearer say "your deck"?

Yes. So when I control someone else's PAB (or in this case, Bill controlled my PAB), "your deck" is my deck. It doesn't say "this card's owner's deck".

So, you're saying that someone has used SWS to exchange for a PAB? That's the only way I can think of that a card's "ownership" can change.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #16 on:** February 08, 2010, 12:38:38 PM »

Ownership doesn't change then either, I'm pretty sure. But nothing on PAB says owner, it says you. I'm saying when someone bands to my PAB, or in the case we ran into, when Bill used my PAB which he had access to, due to him being in our shared LoB, he becomes the "you" in the special ability.

Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 6 / 6 • Class: Warrior • Special Ability: You may exchange this card with an evil Philistine in your deck or discard pile. Evil Enhancements remain in battle. Cannot be negated. • Identifiers: OT Male Human, Philistia, Fought Earthly Battle • Verse: I Samuel 17:7 • Availability: Faith of Fathers (Set 6)

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #17 on:** February 08, 2010, 01:47:59 PM »

Maybe I'm confused, as usual, but didn't they rule that "your" = ownership + control? In that case, if you control but don't own PAB, the "your deck" does nothing, because no one both owns and controls PAB. However, I thought it was ruled that SWS exchanges "ownership" for game purposes, as "own" is basically a permanent "control."

Professoralstad · « **Reply #18 on:** February 08, 2010, 01:58:37 PM »

The "your" is referring to the deck, not PAB. Thusly, since you own and control your deck, the play violates nothing. "Your" does mean own and control, but "you" means the person who is using the ability, which in this case is not the owner. If it said "You may exchange your Philistine in battle with a Philistine in your deck" then it wouldn't work for the reason you stated.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #19 on:** February 08, 2010, 02:04:52 PM »

Ah, okay. That makes sense. I guess I was confused.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #20 on:** February 08, 2010, 04:41:03 PM »

I don't know what the right answer to this question, but I hope that it will end up that you can't use PAB to get a character out of your draw pile, if you can't end up leaving PAB there afterwards. I agree that having to put him into a different deck than the character exchanged for seems to make a rift in the universe

I also philosophically, would like to minimize manipulation of draw piles other than your own. People build their own deck, I'd like to see them get to use it for the most part.

Korunks · « **Reply #21 on:** February 08, 2010, 04:48:37 PM »

I really think that under no circumstances should it be allowed for some one to end up with another players cards in their deck. Either Errata it our give it a play as, but IMO it is unacceptable to have PAB end up in an opponents deck.

SirNobody · « **Reply #22 on:** February 11, 2010, 12:27:47 PM »

Hey,

There is a rule that says a card can never go to a draw pile or discard pile other than those of it's owner. I think technically the rule is "if a card is ever sent to a draw pile of a player other than the owner of the card, the card goes to the draw pile of the owner of the card instead." (and likewise for discard piles).

As a result using the ability on an opponent's PAB lets you get a philistine out of your deck and send PAB to your opponent's deck.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #23 on:** February 11, 2010, 12:54:37 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on February 11, 2010, 12:27:47 PM

There is a rule that says a card can never go to a draw pile or discard pile other than those of it's owner.

Given the existence of such a rule, then how can use an opponent's PAB to exchange from your deck? The definition of exchange means you place it in your deck (albeit temporarily). Here is the analogy I am working from...

There is a rule that says I cannot control two copies of the same unique character. I am not allowed to do anything that directly causes this rule to be violated (e.g., banding in my opponent's copy of the same character). Why can I intentionally violate the "no opponent's card in my deck" rule, but I am not allowed to intentionally violate the "duplicate character" rule?

Quote from: SirNobody on February 11, 2010, 12:27:47 PM

As a result using the ability on an opponent's PAB lets you get a philistine out of your deck and send PAB to your opponent's deck.

Although I would much prefer that the SA on your opponent's PAB simply not work on your draw/discard pile, this is the sort of verification I was asking about.

SirNobody · « **Reply #24 on:** February 11, 2010, 01:16:48 PM »

Hey,

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on February 11, 2010, 12:54:37 PM

Why can I intentionally violate the "no opponent's card in my deck" rule, but I am not allowed to intentionally violate the "duplicate character" rule?

It's kinda like when you play a remove from game card when Covenant of Eden is active. You try to exchange PAB into your draw pile but it somehow ends up in your opponent's draw pile instead. You never actually violate the "no opponent's card in my deck" rule because it gets rerouted before actually getting to your draw pile.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

News:

Author Topic: Philistine Armorbearer (Read 9341 times)