Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: browarod on January 25, 2011, 03:23:33 AM
-
So I know this card is treated as good and evil for deck-building purposes and while it's in deck (and presumably hand), but I have these questions:
1. Is it still considered good when played as an evil enhancement (and vice versa)?
--For example, can I discard Philosophy played as a good enhancement for the cost of Grapes of Wrath?
2. Is it always OT and NT, or is it only the one for the alignment of the way in which it is played (NT for good and OT for evil)?
-
1. Is it still considered good when played as an evil enhancement (and vice versa)?
--For example, can I discard Philosophy played as a good enhancement for the cost of Grapes of Wrath?
My thinking is yes you could, but I would ask for others to weigh in because I am by no means certain--that's simply how I would rule "on the spot."
2. Is it always OT and NT, or is it only the one for the alignment of the way in which it is played (NT for good and OT for evil)?
Again, not 100% certain but I believe it could be targeted as either an OT or NT card.
-
I'm going to take the opposite stance here Justin - It's similar to the Covenant being played as an Enhancement/Artifact situation - Once you've played it and determined what it's being treated as you can't target as the other half. You could still target it as a neutral card though (I think)
Because of this, part two is also a situation where it is only being treated as having the O.T. or N.T. reference.
-
I'm going to take the opposite stance here Justin - It's similar to the Covenant being played as an Enhancement/Artifact situation - Once you've played it and determined what it's being treated as you can't target as the other half. You could still target it as a neutral card though (I think)
Because of this, part two is also a situation where it is only being treated as having the O.T. or N.T. reference.
I disagree. With a multicolor card, each player can target it as something else. Say for example I attack with Seraphim banded to Paul (in this case I target Paul as a green Hero). My opponent play Sword of Vengeance and targets Paul as a red Hero. He can do that because Paul is both green and red. Similarly, I can target Philosophy as either good or evil, and later target it as the other. I also don't believe you can ever target Philosophy as a neutral card, except for in deckbuilding (where it is only neutral by nature of being both good and evil). Neutral cards are neither good nor evil. Philosophy is both.
So, it is my opinion that no matter what it is played as, Philosophy can be treated as good, evil, OT, or NT by anyone at anytime.
-
But if I play Covenant with Noah as an enhancement you can't play Destruction of Nehustan to stop it.
I think the dual nature of phiosophy is closer in nature to a covenant/curse than a multi-color enhancement (despite its being so ;) )
Additionally, if it is still both - Suppose that I have lead with Jacob+RTC and ignored black, but you suprised me by blocking with Pale Green, if I play Philosophy am I now ignoring my own enhancement? If so, are my offensive numbers being affected?
-
Considering there is the ruling that you can't ignore/be immune to yourself, I would assume that would also apply to enhancements played on yourself. I'm not positive, though.
-
RDT is correct. Just like when you play a Cov or Curse, you choose which way you're using Philosophy (good or evil) when you play it on a character. If played on a Hero it's NT. If played on a EC it's OT. Similarly you could not discard Philosophy to satisfy Emperor Otho because when it's a gray evil card it is OT.
It would still be treated as both when played into Storehouse though.
Prof A, in your example Paul is being treated as a Hero of every brigade. What you're talking about with Philosophy is the equivalent of allowing a player to treat that same Paul as a gray brigade evil Character.
-
RDT is correct. Just like when you play a Cov or Curse, you choose which way you're using Philosophy (good or evil) when you play it on a character. If played on a Hero it's NT. If played on a EC it's OT. Similarly you could not discard Philosophy to satisfy Emperor Otho because when it's a gray evil card it is OT.
It would still be treated as both when played into Storehouse though.
Prof A, in your example Paul is being treated as a Hero of every brigade. What you're talking about with Philosophy is the equivalent of allowing a player to treat that same Paul as a gray brigade evil Character.
While not in play, can I target it as an OT good enhancement or a NT evil enhancement? Searching from deck, for example.
-
While not in play, can I target it as an OT good enhancement or a NT evil enhancement? Searching from deck, for example.
No. If you target it as a good enhancement it is always NT. If you target it as evil then it is always OT. If you have a good card card that just says "search for a OT enhancement" then you could search for it because it doesn't specify good or evil in the search ability.
-
Does this mean that the "(Good)" and "(Evil)" after the verses are treated as identifiers? I'm cool with the rulings so far, I'm just curious. :P
-
They're not identifiers, they're the verses on the respective halves of the card.
-
But if I play Covenant with Noah as an enhancement you can't play Destruction of Nehustan to stop it.
allowing a player to treat that same Paul as a gray brigade evil Character.
I agree with RDT and Gabe. Once a card that can be two different card types (not different brigades, but types) is chosen to be one, then it can't be targeted anymore as the other.
If Guardian and the "other Prof" agree, then great. If they continue to see it differently, then we should probably move this discussion to the other side of the board until we can reach a consensus.
-
But if I play Covenant with Noah as an enhancement you can't play Destruction of Nehustan to stop it.
allowing a player to treat that same Paul as a gray brigade evil Character.
I agree with RDT and Gabe. Once a card that can be two different card types (not different brigades, but types) is chosen to be one, then it can't be targeted anymore as the other.
If Guardian and the "other Prof" agree, then great. If they continue to see it differently, then we should probably move this discussion to the other side of the board until we can reach a consensus.
Yeah, I guess that makes sense. I retract my previous objections.
-
The one exception to this is when you have certain special types where it actually is one thing at the same time as another.
For example, a Covenant can be played as an Artifact or an Enhancement, but while you can only target EITHER an Artifact OR an Enhancement once you play it as such, you can always target it as a Covenant.
Likewise, "captured character" (-slash-Hero-slash-Evil-Chracter) is a special classification given to characters that are, well, captured. If they are in the Land of Bondage, they can be targeted as a Lost Soul AS WELL AS a captured character, whereas in Raider's Camp they are just captured characters.
In short, cards that are played as X OR Y can only be targeted as one of those two types when chosen, but cards that are treated as X AND Y in special circumstances can be targeted as either/both.