Author Topic: Philistine Outpost vs. the New Naz (Read 5254 times)

adotson85 · « **on:** February 09, 2011, 02:33:08 AM »

Now that search and look abilites have been determined to be different, does Nazareth still stop Philisitine Outpost from getting an evil card from deck?

Philistine Outpost (TP)
Type: Fortress • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: When you are attacked, you may discard this card or an evil card from deck to search discard pile for a generic Philistine and place it in your territory. Protect Sites from being placed beneath decks. • Play As: When you are attacked, you may discard this card or an evil card from deck to search discard pile for a generic Philistine and return it in your territory. Protect Sites from being placed beneath decks. • Identifiers: Play to territory. • Verse: I Samuel 14:12

Nazareth (Di)
Type: Site • Brigade: Green • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Protect cards in your territory and hand from shuffle by an opponent. Protect all decks from search abilities. • Identifiers: Jew • Verse: Matthew 13:57

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #1 on:** February 09, 2011, 02:35:33 AM »

Yes. Your deck is protected from PO's search.

You can pay the cost by discarding PO and searching the discard.

adotson85 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 09, 2011, 02:38:31 AM »

Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on February 09, 2011, 02:35:33 AM

Yes. Your deck is protected from PO's search.

You can pay the cost by discarding PO and searching the discard.

So Naz's ability to discard an evil card from deck is an implied search ability?

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #3 on:** February 09, 2011, 02:39:07 AM »

The Guardian · « **Reply #4 on:** February 09, 2011, 02:49:06 AM »

adotson85 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 09, 2011, 02:51:02 AM »

Thanks. Thought it was a search, but just wanted to make sure.

Korunks · « **Reply #6 on:** February 09, 2011, 09:09:53 AM »

Quote

Now that search and look abilites have been determined to be different

Citation please.

adotson85 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 09, 2011, 11:26:03 AM »

Quote from: Korunks on February 09, 2011, 09:09:53 AM

Quote
Now that search and look abilites have been determined to be different

Citation please.

www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=25328.0;msg=399719

Master Q · « **Reply #8 on:** February 09, 2011, 11:57:51 AM »

If look and search abilities are different, then can I use Search(c) with Naz up?

"Look through draw pile and add a card to hand. Shuffle draw pile."

Granted, that's from memory, but it's basically the same wording as Susanna. I always thought look was the same as search if you're changing something about the deck, like adding a card to hand?

adotson85 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 09, 2011, 12:11:44 PM »

Quote from: Master Q on February 09, 2011, 11:57:51 AM

If look and search abilities are different, then can I use Search(c) with Naz up?

"Look through draw pile and add a card to hand. Shuffle draw pile."

Granted, that's from memory, but it's basically the same wording as Susanna. I always thought look was the same as search if you're changing something about the deck, like adding a card to hand?

Well the FooF version says search so I know that doesn't work. The C deck version has it listed as a search ability in the play as so I would say it doesn't work either.

Master Q · « **Reply #10 on:** February 09, 2011, 01:25:43 PM »

Quote from: adotson85 on February 09, 2011, 12:11:44 PM

Well the FooF version says search so I know that doesn't work. The C deck version has it listed as a search ability in the play as so I would say it doesn't work either.

I know it's classified as a search, I am just wondering why it is different than Susanna or Divination, which apparently are not search abilities. They do the same thing; they even use the same wording! There could be a play-as on Susanna that says: "Search the top X cards of your deck for a card, add it to hand, and place the rest beneath deck. CBN." and it wouldn't change how the card is played.

If the difference between look and search isn't the definition of searching, which I perceive as 'look and move a card out of the deck or discard pile' (which I think should be the determining factor), but in fact the quantity of the searching; as in, 'search abilities pertain to the whole deck, anything else is a look ability', then, imo, that's wrong. You're still searching, no matter the size.

Help me to understand please

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #11 on:** February 09, 2011, 02:02:14 PM »

It would appear to me that the old Search gets around Naz.

Crashfach2002 · « **Reply #12 on:** February 09, 2011, 04:22:01 PM »

Based on the wording, Confusion & Warriors Gabriel also works! WOOT! Deck discard is not dead!

False Peace has the same wording too!

adotson85 · « **Reply #13 on:** February 09, 2011, 04:39:00 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on February 09, 2011, 02:02:14 PM

It would appear to me that the old Search gets around Naz.

After some research I agree. Not sure now much I like look and search being different though. Try explaining to a new player that the non-FooF Search SA is not a search ability, but is instead a look ability.

So this brings me back to my original question. How do we know Outpost is an implied search and not an implied look?

galadgawyn · « **Reply #14 on:** February 09, 2011, 04:58:55 PM »

Either by defeault (search when not stated) or by definition.

I think that Susanna, Divination, etc should be different abilities than searching but the old language kind of confuses this.

If we don't just make them the same then I propose that search is an ability that lets you go through your whole deck and take a card. I would say "look" is more like a subset of reveal where it is only revealed to the one person instead of everyone and either just looks at the cards (John) or looks at a portion of the deck and takes a card from that. To me, that seems to be the difference.

Of course the old language doesn't really fit with this, so maybe it would better for the game to simplify it into variations of one ability.

Gabe · « **Reply #15 on:** February 09, 2011, 05:05:38 PM »

Most of us are aware that old cards like Confusion, Search(c), False Peace, etc. often don't have modern wording. All these examples have play as clarifying that they are in fact a Search ability.

Quote from: galadgawyn on February 09, 2011, 04:58:55 PM

If we don't just make them the same then I propose that search is an ability that lets you go through your whole deck and take a card. I would say "look" is more like a subset of reveal where it is only revealed to the one person instead of everyone and either just looks at the cards (John) or looks at a portion of the deck and takes a card from that. To me, that seems to be the difference.

Noah · « **Reply #16 on:** February 09, 2011, 05:10:52 PM »

What ashame it doesn't work with Nazareth in play

Smokey · « **Reply #17 on:** February 09, 2011, 05:34:13 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on February 09, 2011, 05:05:38 PM

Most of us are aware that old cards like Confusion, Search(c), False Peace, etc. often don't have modern wording. All these examples have play as clarifying that they are in fact a Search ability.

Quote from: galadgawyn on February 09, 2011, 04:58:55 PM
If we don't just make them the same then I propose that search is an ability that lets you go through your whole deck and take a card. I would say "look" is more like a subset of reveal where it is only revealed to the one person instead of everyone and either just looks at the cards (John) or looks at a portion of the deck and takes a card from that. To me, that seems to be the difference.

Don't know why I'm defending Nazereth here but...
That definition is too broad, all search abilities let you look through a portion of your deck (all current search would be look unless it specified you had to look through your whole deck, then it would be search).
Alternatively, if you stricken the definition of look Susanna will become a search (X can be > the amount of cards in your deck).
Side note: What of cards that don't require you to look at or search through your deck what so ever to complete? If I use Bronze Laver, I can fufil PO's SA without looking or searching through my deck.

Crashfach2002 · « **Reply #18 on:** February 09, 2011, 06:02:47 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on February 09, 2011, 05:05:38 PM

Most of us are aware that old cards like Confusion, Search(c), False Peace, etc. often don't have modern wording. All these examples have play as clarifying that they are in fact a Search ability.

Not trying to be rude here, but Susanna & Divination also have a play as that says "search." So to say that the old cards don't work but the new ones do, when they have the exact same wording on the card & play as, doesn't make any since. So either the play as on the new cards needs to be removed or the old cards should work if the new ones do.

Gabe · « **Reply #19 on:** February 09, 2011, 06:28:43 PM »

Quote from: Crashfach2002 on February 09, 2011, 06:02:47 PM

Not trying to be rude here, but Susanna & Divination also have a play as that says "search." So to say that the old cards don't work but the new ones do, when they have the exact same wording on the card & play as, doesn't make any since. So either the play as on the new cards needs to be removed or the old cards should work if the new ones do.

the "play as" on those two cards is wrong and needs to be removed.

Crashfach2002 · « **Reply #20 on:** February 09, 2011, 06:46:21 PM »

Fair enough!

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #21 on:** February 09, 2011, 06:48:33 PM »

Disregard errata disguised as play-as. None of the cards in question here have any ability different than what's printed on the card. Old Search, Confusion, Warriors Gabe and False Peace are all look abilities until they get errata and can work in spite of Nazareth or HSR.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #22 on:** February 09, 2011, 09:02:01 PM »

You could just make Search Abilities the ones that you have to shuffle after and look has a method in which to the order is decided that isn't shuffling, Susanna and Divination (and I guess the John Promo as well) would have look abilities, which are more like reveal, where as search abilities shuffle the deck after.

Korunks · « **Reply #23 on:** February 09, 2011, 09:05:50 PM »

I propose we rule the old search, Gabriel and others the same as we rule Susanna and Divination. For consistencies sake. I see no reason why they should be ruled differently then the new cards.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #24 on:** February 09, 2011, 09:16:48 PM »

I really don't care whether or not Susanna or Divination are search abilities or not, but I do think that False Peace, The Old Search, Warriors Gabriel, etc. should be searches because there is no difference in how it works compared to cards that say "Search"

And I understand the wording issues due to lack of consistency in the older sets, so I would prefer to see abilities be defined by how they work rather than the exact wording (even though it may be confusing to players who are just starting or annoying to some people)

The biggest problem is that we need well defined abilities and people to consistently making it work (and a good place to find the information)

News:

Author Topic: Philistine Outpost vs. the New Naz (Read 5254 times)