Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: EmJayBee83 on February 04, 2009, 09:51:14 AM
-
This arose last night in a game, and I promised I would ask--so here goes...
I activated I Am Holy, and proceeded to discard a good card from my hand to make my opponent discard an evil card. My opponent asked if he could play Destruction of Nehushtan. I ruled that he had to discard an evil card or show hand. Following that, since I Am Holy is not CBN, he could play DoN and get his evil card back. Unfortunately for him, the only evil card he had in hand was DoN.
Two quick questions:
1) Was this ruled correctly?
2) What if I Am Holy's SA started with Once per turn instead of Upon activation?
I Am Holy SA Upon activation, holder may discard a good card from hand to make an opponent discard an evil card from hand. If opponent has no evil cards in hand, opponent must reveal hand.
Destruction of Nehushtan SA Discard one active Artifact in play. Artifact's ability is negated.
-
1. I believe it was ruled correctly. The ability of "upon activation" needs to complete before the playing of a dominant. Kinda in the same realm of how Urim and Thummim is... it has to complete before the opponent can react.
2. I believe that it would still be ruled the same way. I could be wrong.
~Marti
-
+1 w/Marti.
Even if it was once per turn the player activating it would get the opportunitty to complete the ability when they turned the Covenant face up on the Artifact pile.
-
+1 with Marti and Gabe.
-
this happened to me once. and the buckler was the card that was discarded... only TheRoc would do such a thing...
-
Yep, the hand was targeted and the SA had to be completed before he could throw a Dominant. Devastating. I love it!
-
Can someone clarify why a Negate is overruled by a non-CBI card? I thought the game rule states that Negate stops an effect unless noted to be CBI/CBN.
-
The ability needed to complete before it was able to be negated. See the aforementioned U&T
-
I don't get that. It's like saying that an EE must finish before u can play Live Coal.
-
That relates to special initiative, which is different. In this case, special initiative doesn't play into it.
-
Can someone clarify why a Negate is overruled by a non-CBI card? I thought the game rule states that Negate stops an effect unless noted to be CBI/CBN.
Because I am Holy's ability has to complete. If DoN is the only evil card in their hand, it must be discarded, and then there's nothing to negate it with. If you had a different evil card to discard, you could then use DoN and get the evil card back.
EDIT: Instaposted...
DOUBLE EDIT: Wait, time stamp is all wrong. Maybe I just didn't read far enough? I guess I further explained things, so I'll leave it.
-
He is actually posting on this thread in reference to a UandT situation.
-
I have another question, because multiple people in this thread have mentioned negating the artifact with DoN and getting their evil card back.
I was under the impression that DoN does NOT interrupt, as it FIRST discards, THEN negates. With this wording DoN only negates ongoing abilities, and any instant abilities already completed stay completed. Can someone please confirm or deny this for me?
-
I was under the impression that DoN does NOT interrupt, as it FIRST discards, THEN negates.
Correct. DoN discards the art before it negates it. This is why Lampstand of the Sanctuary is protected from DoN.
-
I was under the impression that DoN does NOT interrupt, as it FIRST discards, THEN negates.
Correct. DoN discards the art before it negates it. This is why Lampstand of the Sanctuary is protected from DoN.
Right, which in this case would mean an evil card discarded would NOT be returned, correct? That is what I want to make sure I have clarified.
-
I was under the impression that DoN does NOT interrupt, as it FIRST discards, THEN negates.
Correct. DoN discards the art before it negates it. This is why Lampstand of the Sanctuary is protected from DoN.
Right, which in this case would mean an evil card discarded would NOT be returned, correct? That is what I want to make sure I have clarified.
That sounds right to me, but INE.
-
You can still negate it, though I can't tell you why...
-
You can still negate it, though I can't tell you why...
As in "I don't understand it myself" or "Shh...it's a secret"?
Because I don't see how it can negate an instant as opposed to an ongoing ability during the prep phase. I just want to make sure I've seen this ruled correctly so far.
-
As in "I can't quote where the REG says that" because I don't know what section it would be in.
-
You can still negate it, though I can't tell you why...
You can negate discarded cards, so long as the negating card can specifically target a discarded card. So DoN discards an Art, and negates the discarded Art, just like Captured Ark shuffles an Art, and negates the shuffled Art.
-
As much as we complain about "play as", this is actually a very helpful entry:
Destruction of Nehushtan (Pa)
Type: Grim Reaper • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Discard one active Artifact in play. Artifact's ability is negated. • Play As: Discard one Artifact to negate its special ability. • Identifiers: False Religious Practice • Verse: II Kings 18:4 • Availability: Patriarchs booster packs (Ultra Rare).
It uses "cost - benefit" verbiage to explain "no discard = no negate".
-
You can still negate it, though I can't tell you why...
You can negate discarded cards, so long as the negating card can specifically target a discarded card. So DoN discards an Art, and negates the discarded Art, just like Captured Ark shuffles an Art, and negates the shuffled Art.
I'm sorry, I don't think I made my question clear. I don't mean that it cannot negate it because the artifact is discarded by the time the negate occurs. I am asking if it is able to actually negate the instant (and resolved) ability of an artifact in the prep phase.
In this case, an evil card was discarded by said artifact. DoN comes along, discards it, then the negate happens. There is no ongoing ability, and I was not aware that instant, resolved abilities could be negated in the prep phase (or at any point outside of battle with an ITB, interrupt last, negate X, etc.). So, in this case, I was not aware that you could undo the discarding of your evil card, for instance, since the ability has resolved.
Hopefully my question is clearer now, sorry.
-
I am asking if it is able to actually negate the instant (and resolved) ability of an artifact in the prep phase.
Yes you can negate in the Prep Phase. Dominants can be played at any time, so this dominant in played in the same phase that the artifact was activated, so it can be negated. The rule you might be thinking of is the fact that negates can not happen in a later phase. So if the artifact used an instant ability in the Prep Phase, your opponent could not negate it in the Battle Phase.
-
Alright, thanks for clearing that up everyone. Up until now I just thought that instant vs ongoing mattered even in the same phase. Never had it come up, but good to know the ruling.
-
As much as we complain about "play as", this is actually a very helpful entry:
Destruction of Nehushtan (Pa)
Type: Grim Reaper • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Discard one active Artifact in play. Artifact's ability is negated. • Play As: Discard one Artifact to negate its special ability. • Identifiers: False Religious Practice • Verse: II Kings 18:4 • Availability: Patriarchs booster packs (Ultra Rare).
It uses "cost - benefit" verbiage to explain "no discard = no negate".
Except that the Play-As actually changes what DoN does, therefore it's disguised as errata, therefore it is disregarded.
-
Except that the Play-As actually changes what DoN does, therefore it's disguised as errata, therefore it is disregarded.
I'm a bit tired of all the "disregard play-as" talk here on the forum, and this is definitely a case where it doesn't belong. The Play-As for Destruction of Nehustan IS the correct way to interpret the card. It emphasizes that the discard happens first, which is exactly why Lampstand protects from DoN.
-
Except that the Play-As actually changes what DoN does, therefore it's disguised as errata, therefore it is disregarded.
I'm a bit tired of all the "disregard play-as" talk here on the forum, and this is definitely a case where it doesn't belong. The Play-As for Destruction of Nehustan IS the correct way to interpret the card. It emphasizes that the discard happens first, which is exactly why Lampstand protects from DoN.
That's true, however, that's still not what the card actually does. It's a great way to explain it, and I agree that it puts emphasis in all the right places to make the Lampstand v. DoN ruling easier to understand, but DoN does still have two separate abilities, and thus the play-as is, technically, wrong, if only by the letter of the law.
-
The first case of having multiple abilities came in Kings. I don't see how it's two abilities any more than Angry Mob is actually two abilities (which it isn't).
-
The first case of having multiple abilities came in Kings.
Four Horns and Lion Dwelling with the Calf say hi.
-
I don't see what is being questioned here anymore. DoN's errata is just a more precise way of saying what the card does. It discards the artifact in order to negate it. The errata: Play As: Discard one Artifact to negate its special ability.
DoN does not say this: Discard one active Artifact in play. Artifact's ability is negated.
In actuality, it translates, in Redemption language, to this: Discard one Artifact to negate its special ability.
The play as is right, play it as such. DoN came out in Patriarchs! Which is a huge reason as to why errata came into play. Cards made from a decade ago still being vastly played. Rules change, it's not like it's going to mess with them, because you tell them what it does.
-
The important thing to note here is that it's not an errata.
-
The important thing to note here is that it's not an errata.
Exactly. It may seem to be the same thing, but it's not. There are slight differences, in that the original wording still negates the art.
-
The important thing to note here is that it's not an errata.
Exactly. It may seem to be the same thing, but it's not. There are slight differences, in that the original wording still negates the art.
Wait, what? It is the same thing. DoN does not negate the artifact if it does not discard it. The negate is contingent on the discard, since it says "That artifact's", meaning the artifact you discarded. Thus,
Discard one Artifact to negate its special ability.
Maybe I'm just confused at what you're saying Skittens, but it doesn't seem to be the same thing as Mr. Hiatus, so trying to clarify.
-
I've always been told that the negate still works, despite the lack of discard.
-
I've always been told that the negate still works, despite the lack of discard.
if that were the case, DoN could hit lampy.
-
I've always been told that the negate still works, despite the lack of discard.
That would not be true based on the original wording and the Play As.
-
I've always been told that the negate still works, despite the lack of discard.
if that were the case, DoN could hit lampy.
Actually, no it wouldn't. The discard happens before the negate regardless, so if Kittens was correct (which he isn't), DoN could negate Lampy, just not discard it.
However, I'm pretty sure it was ruled that "Artifact's" is referring back to the artifact you discarded and so if you don't discard anything you also can't negate anything.
-
I count negating lampy as hitting it.
-
I count negating lampy as hitting it.
Except DoN doesn't negate it. In the second sentence, when DoN says, "artifact is negated," it's referring to the artifact that was just discarded. Lampstand keeps DoN from targeting any cards with the discard, and since no artifact can be targeted with the discard, the negate doesn't target anything either (since the negate specifically targets whatever was just discarded).
-
I do not see the confusion here Skittens!!??!?!? You discard an artifact. The artifact that you discarded is now negated. That's it.
-
It's like laser targeting in the military. If an object can't be targeted with the laser, it can't be targeted by the missile.
-
Alright, looks like I was wrong. Fortunately, I've never had to rule on that.
-
yeah but i know korunks has wink ;D ;D ;D
-
I count negating lampy as hitting it.
Except DoN doesn't negate it. In the second sentence, when DoN says, "artifact is negated," it's referring to the artifact that was just discarded. Lampstand keeps DoN from targeting any cards with the discard, and since no artifact can be targeted with the discard, the negate doesn't target anything either (since the negate specifically targets whatever was just discarded).
that was an explanation of me responding to randall saying that the negate still takes effect
-
Alright, looks like I was wrong. Fortunately, I've never had to rule on that.
You wouldn't be the first. This is why we have a "Play As" and a "clarification page." DoN has been misinterpreted ever since it came out. ;)
I concur with your second sentence, since I have been lucky to also not have to rule on the majority of message board rulings that I got wrong... too many to count...