Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Ken4Christ4ever on August 11, 2009, 11:00:27 PM
-
If my Priest is protected from discard abilities by Covenant with Phinehas and my opponent blocks with Haman, setting him aside to be discarded in 4 turns, does he get discarded?
What about if my Priest (who is still protected) is poisoned or diseased (decrease until */0 or less, then discard)? Is he discarded when his abilities reach */0 or less, or is there a different result?
Thanks!
Ken
Covenant with Phinehas
Type: Covenant • Brigade: Teal • Ability: 2 / 5 • Class: None • Special Ability: Protect your Priests from the house of Eleazar from discard abilities on evil cards. • Identifiers: OT • Verse: Numbers 25:13 • Availability: Priests booster packs (Uncommon)
Haman
Type: Evil Character * Brigade: Brown * Ability: 5/6 * Class: None * Special Ability: Set aside up to three O.T. male Heroes in opponents' territories for four turns. If a female Hero does not make a successful rescue attempt during those four turns, discard those Heroes.
-
I would say for the first example you gave, your priests would just return to your territory because that is a discard ability on Haman. There is a difference between "discard" and "discard ability". I believe (someone correct me if I am wrong) that if you are protected from discard abilities that you can still lose by the numbers and be discarded because it wasn't a discard ability that killed you. For the second example it was a poison that killed you so I would say your priest would get discarded, though maybe that is the same situation as your first example because poisons say "once hero reaches */0 or less discard hero" which could be a discard ability. So I would say under both conditions your priests would live, although as far as the poison is concerned I am not sure what would happen when he reaches */0 if he is protected. May need other ideas on that one that is a good question.
-
Haman is an evil card attempting to discard your priest. Priests would be protected and not discarded.
Reducing a Heroes toughness to 0 or less causes them to be discarded by a game rule. The evil card did the reducing but not the discarding so the priest would be discarded.
-
If they're protected "from discard abilities", then it seems to me by the wording on the card that they are protected from the entire ability. So Haman could not set your Priests aside, and they can't be poisoned by poisons that result in a discard. However, I may be wrong on this. That's just how I see it.
Haman is an evil card attempting to discard your priest. Priests would be protected and not discarded.
The question, though, is whether his Priests can even be set aside by Haman, or can they be set-aside, just not discarded?
-
They're not protected from set aside. They're only protected from discard.
-
Okay, cool.
-
What happens to them after the four turns? Do they stay set aside or do they return to territory?
-
Another similar question, what happens if your priest is discarded from deck via any evil deck discard enhancement? Do they just return to the top of deck since their protected?
-
Priests in deck are not protected I'm pretty sure. I would think that the protection defaults to Priests in play.
Of course, when Haman is trying to discard them, they are set aside. Which leads me to believe that they WOULD be discarded per Haman's ability.
Interesting question.
-
Priests in deck are not protected I'm pretty sure. I would think that the protection defaults to Priests in play.
Of course, when Haman is trying to discard them, they are set aside. Which leads me to believe that they WOULD be discarded per Haman's ability.
Interesting question.
I was going to suggest the same idea. Haman sets them aside and then when they are discarded, they are discarded while in set aside and they would no longer be under the protetion of Covenant of Phineas. I would base this ruling on the assumption that Cov of Phineas protects cards that are in play (as the Discarding priests from the draw pile example tends to show that those NOT in play are not covered by Cov of Phineas).
The only hitch to this is that Haman (with his d/ ability) is still in play and the d/c ability is always in play. If Cov. of Phineas was a prevent and not a protect then I would say that Covenant of Phineas would prevent Haman and his ability from working, but since it is a protections (and the priests were set aside beyond its rotection) I would have to say that even Haman's ability remaining in play does not stop the priests from being discarded.
-
This is an interesting question. The covenant does not specify priests in play. So let me propose this. Say you set your priests aside and Covenant with Phinehas (CwP) is active. Your opponent discards one card set aside. My argument would be that the selected hero simply returns to territory because CwP "Protect your Priests from the house of Eleazar from discard abilities on evil cards." That is a discard ability on an Evil Card attempting to discard your Priest (from the house of Eleazar). So why would Haman be any different? Unless of coarse you disagree with me on my first point.
Reducing a Heroes toughness to 0 or less causes them to be discarded by a game rule. The evil card did the reducing but not the discarding so the priest would be discarded.
+1
-
Priests in deck are not protected I'm pretty sure. I would think that the protection defaults to Priests in play.
Of course, when Haman is trying to discard them, they are set aside. Which leads me to believe that they WOULD be discarded per Haman's ability.
Interesting question.
+1
Because Cov w/ Phin defaults to in play, Priests in set aside areas are not protected. Haman gives no indication that the heroes are returned then discarded; rather, they are discarded from the set aside area, where no protection exists.
I say the Priests are discarded.
That is a discard ability on an Evil Card attempting to discard your Priest (from the house of Eleazar). So why would Haman be any different?
Although Cov w/ Phin seems to protect everywhere, cards that do not specify specific areas always default to "in play". Set aside area is not in play.
-
That is a discard ability on an Evil Card attempting to discard your Priest (from the house of Eleazar). So why would Haman be any different?
Although Cov w/ Phin seems to protect everywhere, cards that do not specify specific areas always default to "in play". Set aside area is not in play.
Oh...ok! Well thanks for that correction I wasn't aware of that rule...in that case I would agree then that Haman discards those heroes. A question I just thought of however...I Am Healing says "Holder may heal all of Holder's Heroes in Play. May be used twice." So that would not heal heroes that are discarded from set aside correct? Now lets just assume that I Am Legend was worded "Holder may Heal all of Holder's Heroes not at full strength. May be used twice per game". This doesn't specify the area so it would be defaulted to play? Meaning that again this wouldn't heal heroes being discarded from set aside? And lastly what about Brass Serpent? "Discard all Poisons and Diseases in play. Heal all of Holders Heroes not at full strength". Again this doesn't specify the area so it is defaulted to play so like I Am Healing you can't use brass serpent to heal your heroes being discarded from set aside?
-
REG: "Unless specifically stated, all special abilities apply to the characters in play, not out of play."
REG: "If a discard special ability does not specify a target area outside the Field of Play, then the effect of the special ability is understood to only be usable on cards “in play.”"
REG: "A character set aside and targeted for discard can be healed. The healing is done after the character has been taken from the set-aside area. The healed character is placed in the owner’s territory."
These should help.
Mike
-
Also from the REG:
If a set-aside card specifies that a character must be set-aside for a specific number of turns, then you must leave the character set-aside for that number of turns. The character returns during the Preparation Phase of the turn when the final counter of all set-aside cards on that character is added (as specified on the set-aside card).
I would say from this that the Priests that Haman set aside in the example must return from set-aside the instant that the fourth counter is placed by the set-aside ability. Once the priests return, the discard ability would try to discard them, but they would then be protected by Covenant with Phinehas.
As another issue, the REG also says:
Set-aside cards remain on the character in the set-aside area until the character is returned to the field of play. When you set aside your opponent's card during a battle, after the battle you must put the set-aside enhancement with the card you set aside.
So does Haman have to be placed in the set-aside area with the Heroes he sets aside for the four turns? He is a set-aside card, so should remain on the character in the set-aside area until it returns?
Or should this part of it only apply to enhancements? Maybe the REG is just inconsistent since sometimes it says "set-aside cards" and other times "set-aside enhancements". I won't even mention what this might mean for the set-aside Lost Soul.
Mike
-
Tim Maly mentioned that part of the REG (set-aside cards go to set-aside with the characters) in a different thread, and said that because the only set-aside cards up until that phrase's formation were enhancements, the term cards was used. It should be true only of enhancements however.
-
I won't even mention what this might mean for the set-aside Lost Soul.
Wow, that would be awesome. I'd put that LS in every deck! ;D I also wouldn't mind seeing my opponent's Haman set aside with my Heroes for 4 turns. ;)
But it's true, that statement only applies to enhancements. ::)
-
Tim is correct - the REG update will have only enhancements go with the cards being set aside. Thanks for pointing it out (I didn't know Tim had posted it some time ago).
Mike
-
I would say from this that the Priests that Haman set aside in the example must return from set-aside the instant that the fourth counter is placed by the set-aside ability. Once the priests return, the discard ability would try to discard them, but they would then be protected by Covenant with Phinehas.
The heroes would gain a counter on the 4th turn, but they do not instantly return to play. They gain the counter in the upkeep phase. Characters return from set-aside in the preparation phase, however. Therefore, the heroes would be discarded in set aside area after gaining a 4th counter.
Kirk
-
Thanks for all the replies! So far, I'm hearing that Haman setting them aside to discard them would work since they are only protected in my territory, and that the poisons/diseases would work since it's a game rule that discards them when they reach */0. Is that correct?
-
Thanks for all the replies! So far, I'm hearing that Haman setting them aside to discard them would work since they are only protected in my territory, and that the poisons/diseases would work since it's a game rule that discards them when they reach */0. Is that correct?
That's what it sounds like to me.
-
Hey,
Gabe explained the poison situation very well in his first post.
Regarding Haman...the current rules state that the characters return from set aside to the field of play during the preparation phase of the fourth turn. The discard ability on Haman kicks in during the upkeep phase of the fourth turn. So according to the current rules, the discard happens while they are set aside, and they are not protected while set aside, so they would be discarded.
BUT...when the new REG comes out the rules will be changed so that the characters return from set aside during the upkeep phase. The discard will still kick in during the upkeep phase. So both happen during the upkeep phase which means the player whose upkeep phase it is chooses the order they happen in. So assuming he doesn't want his priests to die he chooses them to return first then the discard ability would happen and not discard them because they are back in play and protected.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Boo. Oh well, I don't use Haman anyway.