Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: jbeers285 on October 31, 2016, 02:25:53 PM
-
Red Dragon - immune to humans
Uriah (no David in play) discard abilities are CBN
Gam Speech is in the defending players territory.
Uriah rescues REd Dragon blocks. Uriah plays Bravery of David to negate and discard Red Dragon. Gam speech is used to negated bravery of David.
a. The discard already happened CBN
B. Bravery of David's negate part is negated reinsterting immunity this the discard fizzles?
-
Red Dragon does regain his immunity but it doesn't matter because he has already been discarded by the time Gam Speech can activate. The discard is CBN so the discard can't be undone. That's all the matters in this scenario. If somehow you got RD out of discard and back into that same battle RD's immunity would still work, but that's the only way Gam Speech affects anything here.
-
Wouldn't the blocker have SI, at which time he chooses to play GS to restart the immunity so the discard can't take effect?
-
no, red dragon is discarded cbn and in the discard pile, cbn
-
10-4 thx. Having re-read Kevin's post I see what he's saying. I guess I never thought about the card being in the discard pile as I think about it still being in battle as at other times when SI kicks in when faced with removal from battle.
-
Technically SI kicks in before the removal ability completes (As it does every time your last character is about to be removed from battle) but practically doesn't matter because any card you play during SI has to be able interrupt the removal. The reason I even bring this up is I wanted to mention Gam Speech can't be activated during SI since I see people try to do it sometimes.
-
That was the caveat that I overlooked (only an interrupt/negate card can be played during SI).
To clarify, you mean GS can't be played from hand during SI or can't be played during SI if it was already placed in territory prior to the battle? Because the latter can be done but not the former.
-
Can be played from hand, can't be activated if already in territory. Even in this situation if you had it in hand though, you couldn't play it to restart the immunity during SI since a card played during SI has to specifically interrupt the removal ability, not just do something that saves your character in a roundabout way.
-
I'm actually not sure it could even be played from hand during SI, because it places itself in territory before giving you the option to discard it to negate something.
-
+1 GS cannot be played from hand during SI.
You also cannot activate it during special initiative, but once SI completes and any other abilities complete, you can then activate it and bring your character back (as long as another ability does not interfere).
-
I know if one is already down you can't use it because it gets suspended when SI happens but why does it going to territory first have anything to do with playing it from hand during SI? As far as I know the only restriction on SI in the REG is "Can this card interrupt the removal ability?" and with G Speech the answer is "Yes" so why does anything else matter?
-
Pretty much everyone is saying the same thing about gams..
It can't be used during si (from hand or territory)but after being placed in territory- which is the only place it can be used from- it does negate last so in this case where the dc is cbn it can not negate last after si and before battle resolution to bring red Dragon back because the dc is cbn. It can still negate last! But it won't bring red Dragon back solely due to negating the negate portion of bravery this restoring immunity on an already dead Dragon
I understand what Josiah means about the immunity but it's kind of past the point of mattering if you negate protection of angels then martyr the lone hero gams won't bring them back same situation of cbn discard.. now if they played great image and you want to keep all of your other heroes alive and it wasn't cbn gams could restore that protection if they played a negate but the martyred cbn dc hero stays in dc pile
-
I'm pretty sure everyone understood the original question about Red Dragon after the first couple replies, now I'm just asking about G Speech from hand during SI in a general situation where the removal card is not CBN. I know the reasoning is it doesn't work because it goes to territory first but I'm not clear on what in the REG results in that extra restriction.
-
Sorry for the confusion, the only thing the "place in territory" matters for is that trying to play Gam's Speech from hand during SI doesn't do anything different than trying to use it from play during SI because of the "place in territory" aspect. It has nothing to do with why Gam's Speech can't be used in SI (which is because of the specific guidelines of SI).
-
trying to play Gam's Speech from hand during SI doesn't do anything different than trying to use it from play during SI because of the "place in territory" aspect.
How is it not different? Unless there are extra restrictions I don't know about G Speech can be played during SI because it meets the single requirement of being able to interrupt the removal ability and as long as its played during SI it should have no problem activating because it's not suspended like it would be if it was in territory before SI was triggered.
Gam's Speech can't be used in SI (which is because of the specific guidelines of SI).
The only requirement I know of is the card must be able to interrupt the removal ability and G Speech meets that requirement.
-
Special Initiative
When a player is controlling character(s) in battle and an opponent's activating special
ability, or a game rule that has been triggered by an opponent's activating special ability,
would leave that player with no character in battle when the special ability has completed,
they have Special Initiative.
When this occurs, suspend the card causing the removal, additional abilities waiting to
activate, and any triggers (currently active ongoing abilities remain active). The player with
their character(s) being removed has the opportunity to play an Enhancement that will
interrupt or negate the ability that is causing the removal (or that triggered the corresponding game rule). The enhancement played must be able to interrupt or negate the removing ability. If the card with the removing ability was already removed from play due to its ability, it may still be targeted during Special Initiative by an enhancement that specifically targets its card type.
This only occurs once per activation of an opponent's special ability. If a removing ability is
negated (or cannot reactivate after an interrupt effect is played) and the negate (or interrupt effect that prevented reactivation) is later undone such that the original removing ability reactivates, this would trigger a separate instance of Special Initiative.
SI allows a player to play a card. It does not allow a player to trigger an optional ability that is already active.
Gam's Speech has already been played and it is an optional ability.
There are only a couple scenarios where this makes an actual difference--one such example is Herod Agrippa II playing a "withdraw a Hero" enhancement. After the withdraw enh is played, SI happens (assuming its the only Hero in battle) and if the opponent cannot negate the withdraw enh, then HAII captures the Hero before the opponent has the opportunity to trigger Gam's Speech.
-
SI allows a player to play a card. It does not allow a player to trigger an optional ability that is already active.
Gam's Speech has already been played and it is an optional ability.
Again, I know it doesn't work if G Speech has been played before SI. I'm still hung up though on why G Speech can't be played during SI.
The enhancement played must be able to interrupt or negate the removing ability.
Why does a G Speech being played from hand not satisfy this? It's an enhancement with an interrupt ability that is able to target the card causing the removal.
I know you're right but if I had this situation come up in a tournament I was judging and a player asked me the same questions I'm asking you now, I wouldn't have a good enough explanation for them. I'm not completely sure if the issue is only with me misunderstanding something or if the SI entry might need slight tweaking.
-
Special Initiative
When a player is controlling character(s) in battle and an opponent's activating special
ability, or a game rule that has been triggered by an opponent's activating special ability,
would leave that player with no character in battle when the special ability has completed,
they have Special Initiative.
When this occurs, suspend the card causing the removal, additional abilities waiting to
activate, and any triggers (currently active ongoing abilities remain active). The player with
their character(s) being removed has the opportunity to play an Enhancement that will
interrupt or negate the ability that is causing the removal (or that triggered the corresponding game rule). The enhancement played must be able to interrupt or negate the removing ability. If the card with the removing ability was already removed from play due to its ability, it may still be targeted during Special Initiative by an enhancement that specifically targets its card type.
This only occurs once per activation of an opponent's special ability. If a removing ability is
negated (or cannot reactivate after an interrupt effect is played) and the negate (or interrupt effect that prevented reactivation) is later undone such that the original removing ability reactivates, this would trigger a separate instance of Special Initiative.
SI allows a player to play a card. It does not allow a player to trigger an optional ability that is already active.
Gam's Speech has already been played and it is an optional ability.
There are only a couple scenarios where this makes an actual difference--one such example is Herod Agrippa II playing a "withdraw a Hero" enhancement. After the withdraw enh is played, SI happens (assuming its the only Hero in battle) and if the opponent cannot negate the withdraw enh, then HAII captures the Hero before the opponent has the opportunity to trigger Gam's Speech.
this is exactly the difference i was referring to. in an interrupt scenario from hand there are suspended (almost like slow motion ongoing haha) abilities being interrupted during special initiative, while in a negate last scenario all abilities must complete before gam's may be triggered to negate last - not the same as an interrupt being played during si
-
Normal negate cards that target the last played work just fine during SI, that isn't the problem.
-
oh sorry yeah the reason it doesn't work is because it doesn't interrupt or negate until placed.
place must happen before the rest can occur so if it is played from hand there is only a place occurring, not an interrupt which must happen immediately during si
-
So does that mean other placed enhancements like this one don't work during SI?
(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/3ecdb9_5bd5f5a5faf0433892eeb46977202156.png/v1/fill/w_375,h_560,al_c,lg_1/3ecdb9_5bd5f5a5faf0433892eeb46977202156.png)
-
correct. the placement occurs prior to the negate therefore it does not meet the requirements of si.
-
I would greatly appreciate then if you could clarify where in the REG it says the interrupt portion of the card in question has to be at the beginning of the ability.
-
well see the thing is, if the placement doesn't occur, the negate never targets 'that card'
since the placement cannot happen without interruption, neither can the interruption/negate
-
Why can't the placement occur before the interruption?
-
because the removing ability has completed before placement may, that's the whole concept behind interruption/negate is that you allow for other abilities to occur following that interruption/negate of a removing ability
-
That's how interrupts work outside of SI. During SI the removal ability is suspended by a game rule and doesn't actually complete until you play your interrupt in response. The card you play during SI becomes the "active card" and completes before the original removal ability ever gets a chance to, and since the card fully resolves before the removal is unsuspended, it doesn't matter what portion of the card the interrupt occurs in.
-
because the removing ability has completed before placement may, that's the whole concept behind interruption/negate is that you allow for other abilities to occur following that interruption/negate of a removing ability
this is how it works within si.. there is an ongoing removing ability which may be interrupted or negated- prior to other abilities following. special initiative itself is not what is allowing for a player to keep a character in battle, the interrupt/negate portion of a card which may be played during this time is what does.
in the case of siege works while yes it does meet the criteria of potentially negating, the negate does not come prior to the placement which is a required aspect of suspending the removing ability and therefore does not work during special initiative
-
special initiative itself is not what is allowing for a player to keep a character in battle, the interrupt/negate portion of a card which may be played during this time is what does.
That's just incorrect unless I fundamentally understand SI. If SI didn't suspend the removal and keep your character in battle you would have nothing to play a normal interrupt enhancement on.
1. A removal card is played against you that would (Not does) remove your last character so SI is triggered
2. The card causing the removal is paused by a gamerule and never actually happens until after SI is over
3. You play a SI compliant card and the removal card gets unpaused but now since your card (The SI compliant one) began activating it finishes entirely before the original removal card truly happens
The suspend happens every time a situation involving SI occurs, and it happens before you play your interrupt not if you play your interrupt.
-
this is why gam's speech has been ruled this way, to not work from hand during special initiative
the placement occurs prior to the negate and therefore it may not be played during special initiative from hand to interrupt or negate a removing ability
i mean the rules are the rules there have been changes made to the reg for this reason to increase clarity, i'm speaking from experience so.. i can see why one could think that since it is all part of the same ability it would work but that is not how it has been ruled by the judges and if you play on a competitive level this is what you can expect to find ruling wise
-
special initiative itself is not what is allowing for a player to keep a character in battle, the interrupt/negate portion of a card which may be played during this time is what does.
That's just incorrect unless I fundamentally understand SI. If SI didn't suspend the removal and keep your character in battle you would have nothing to play a normal interrupt enhancement on.
1. A removal card is played against you that would (Not does) remove your last character so SI is triggered
2. The card causing the removal is paused by a gamerule and never actually happens until after SI is over
3. You play a SI compliant card and the removal card gets unpaused but now since your card (The SI compliant one) began activating it finishes entirely before the original removal card truly happens
The suspend happens every time a situation involving SI occurs, and it happens before you play your interrupt not if you play your interrupt.
by that definition you could simply play a discard card with no other abilities and it would work-
special initiative allows for a player to play a card which first interrupts or negates the removing ability..
-
No Gam's Speech doesn't work because it requires extra action from the player (activating it) since it's an ongoing activated ability. It doesn't actually have anything to do with the fact that placement is involved. Enhancements like Siegeworks which directly and without any further action from the player DO work during SI for the exact reasons I mentioned in my last post.
Edit: I noticed you double posted right after I made this. I'll include a second edit which replies to your second post after I read it. Don't make another post until then to prevent us getting unsynced.
Edit2 (Response to your double post):
special initiative allows for a player to play a card which first interrupts or negates the removing ability
Why are you adding that first in there when the REG says nothing of the kind?
And no you couldn't play a normal discard because I said SI compliant card which means it must contain an ability that interrupts the removal at some point.
-
No Gam's Speech doesn't work because it requires extra action from the player (activating it) since it's an ongoing activated ability. It doesn't actually have anything to do with the fact that placement is involved. Enhancements like Siegeworks which directly and without any further action from the player DO work during SI for the exact reasons I mentioned in my last post.
Edit: I noticed you double posted right after I made this. I'll include a second edit which replies to your second post after I read it. Don't make another post until then to prevent us getting unsynced.
well you first posted image of jealousy which i would rule for the same reason does not work during special initiative as gam's speech.. due to the placement occurring before the interruption of the removing ability
-
well you first posted image of jealousy which i would rule for the same reason does not work during special initiative as gam's speech.. due to the placement occurring before the interruption of the removing ability
I changed it because Siegeworks has more stuff that occurs before the interruption so it will make a better general case when this situation gets resolved. Again I ask you where in the REG you are getting the idea that the interruption has to happen at the beginning of the card?
-
No Gam's Speech doesn't work because it requires extra action from the player (activating it) since it's an ongoing activated ability. It doesn't actually have anything to do with the fact that placement is involved. Enhancements like Siegeworks which directly and without any further action from the player DO work during SI for the exact reasons I mentioned in my last post.
Edit: I noticed you double posted right after I made this. I'll include a second edit which replies to your second post after I read it. Don't make another post until then to prevent us getting unsynced.
Edit2 (Response to your double post):
special initiative allows for a player to play a card which first interrupts or negates the removing ability
Why are you adding that first in there when the REG says nothing of the kind?
because as i stated before without the interruption or negate portion occurring prior to the removing ability, the removing ability is allowed to resolve regardless of special initiative..
this is not a new argument and the definition of special initiative has been altered multiple times due to this same kind of confusion..
that's why i'm simply addressing more the way it will be ruled at a tournament rather than going in to technical details of a definition..
it's just like saying that you could play matyr or angel during si which apparently you used to be able to but that's not the intention and that won't work in a tournament
-
because as i stated before without the interruption or negate portion occurring prior to the removing ability, the removing ability is allowed to resolve regardless of special initiative..
The removal ability resolves after you are given the chance to play a card with an interrupt and after that card fully resolves
that's why i'm simply addressing more the way it will be ruled at a tournament rather than going in to technical details of a definition..
If those aren't one and the same thing that's simply bad judging (The exception to this being if the judge as the power to say the currently written definition is incorrect, such as an elder)
it's just like saying that you could play matyr or angel during si which apparently you used to be able to but that's not the intention and that won't work in a tournament
It would be if martyr or angel were enhancements with an interrupt that can target the removal ability otherwise they don't fit the definition of an SI compliant card and obviously aren't what I'm referring to.
-
well if you are really just wondering about one card right now,
siegeworks, i would suggest asking several elders for their opinions on the card for a definite ruling.
i am simply saying from my own perspective for the same reason as gam's
placement happens prior to the negate, and therefore it does not sequentially interrupt or negate to place and negate.. the removing ability
see the difference?
by the way this is a completely different topic at this point but i am there with you. i have been on the side of the table asking 1 2 3 elders for a ruling so
-
i am simply saying from my own perspective for the same reason as gam's
placement happens prior to the negate, and therefore it does not sequentially interrupt or negate to place and negate.. the removing ability
see the difference?
Where are you getting the idea that it needs to interrupt before it can place? SI is what is keeping the removal ability from happening until you play your response card and once your response card is played it is the resolving card and must resolve fully before anything else happens, including the original removal ability.
-
same as gam's bro ask an elder and let me know
-
Gam's doesn't work because it goes like this:
1. Removal ability triggers SI and is suspended
2. Gam's is played (Hypothetically) in response to SI and must now fully resolve
(Removal ability is unsuspended kind of between 2 and 3 but can't resolve until Gam's initial resolution completes)
3. Gam's resolves by simply placing itself and nothing more because the rest of the ability is an activated ability, not part of the initial resolution after being played
4. The removal ability activates since it was unsuspended during the last step and since Gam's resolved
Here is Siegeworks:
1. Removal ability on a site or fortress triggers SI and is suspended
2. SW is played in response to SI and must now fully resolve
(Removal ability is unsuspended kind of between 2 and 3 but can't resolve until SW's inital resolution completes)
3. SW resolves by placing itself on the site and negating the removal ability
4. The removal ability can't resolve because it is negated
The key difference is that the removal ability would get an opportunity to resolve in between the time that Gam's is played and when it is activated since the activation is a separate, optional trigger and thus is not SI compliant. SW works because the initial resolution of the card contains the interrupt and there is no opportunity for another card to resolve in between SW being played and the removal ability being negated.
I appreciate you forcing me to think more about it and understanding exactly why Gam's specifically doesn't work though.
-
well i mean you just answered your own question so lol that's why i had the discussion and said maybe ask an elder if you are still wondering this is a completely different topic now
-
btw got confirmation that siegeworks does not work during special initiative fyi
-
I don't want confirmation, I want whoever made that ruling to come to this thread so I can argue with them. :P
-
well he already answered your question about gam's speech xD i just carried on the discussion
-
I still hold that Gam Speech doesn't work for reasons that don't apply to cards like SW per my post above with the 4 steps for each one.
-
i know but the standing reason is negate/interrupt must happen before placement for the negate (for gams and siegeworks alike)
this is why forest fire simply works where siegeworks won't
-
i know but the standing reason is negate/interrupt must happen before placement for the negate (for gams and siegeworks alike)
Placement is not a factor in Gam's not working. Gam's doesn't work because there is a gap allowing the removal ability to resolve in between playing Gam's and using it (Thereby disqualifying it from being played in SI). SW doesn't have this problem so regardless of the ruling on either one of them, they are completely separate individual rulings on completely different kinds of abilities. The fact they both happen to involve placement is meaningless.
-
the gap is the same..
ie..
{place:} / gap / interrupt or negate..
{ portion of non si qualifying sa }
gams:
{Place this in your territory: }/ gap / You may discard this card to negate and discard the last Enhancement played by an opponent or any other enhancement in play.
siegeworks:
{If you control Isaiah or an Assyrian, place all opposing characters in battle beneath deck and place this card on a Site or Fortress:} / gap / Negate that card.
which card? that card? what card? there wasn't time to place siegeworks on anything to negate when the character was already removed by the opponents special ability
if they simply said interrupt the battle or negate a site or fortress.. yes they would work as immediately as every other interrupt and negate )forest fire as an example) which does currently work under current wording of the reg and outside of that less specifically the intention of game play mechanics
keep in mind i am only explaining this for the community, the ruling stands and would- so you may know what to expect.
-
Ok I'm going to start this over because whatever you're talking about now is just a fundamental misunderstanding of how cards resolve. I'm pretty sure we both know these things but I'm going to list this in detail to find where the disconnect is.
When a card is played, that card fully resolves before anything else can happen. Before a dominant can be played, a trigger can be activate, etc. Most cards abilities all activate at once right when the card is played and even if one card has multiple, separate abilities, they all happen consecutively and as unit are one "action". A commonly played example of an enhancement with two separate abilities that happen consecutively is Samuel's Edict. I'm pretty confident no one would try to say you have a chance to play dominant or activate an ability in between "Negate an evil card" and "Discard an evil character". Another example of this is banding in a character with a special ability. This results in two or more entire separate cards that all activate consecutively, without a chance for any player to do anything before all the abilities on the banded characters resolve, in addition to whatever extra abilities the band card may have.
Now we move on to the cards currently being discussed. Gam's Speech is a card with multiple abilities. However, unlike Sam's Edict or a band ability, these two abilities do not happen consecutively. When you play the card, the only thing that must happen before you can do something else like activate an ability or play a dominant is the placement of the card in territory. The other ability, the actual negate and discard portion, can be activated at any time by the owner, not immediately when the card is played. Because of this, in between the time that the card is placed and when the owner has the option to activate it, dominants can be played, triggers can occur, and other abilities can fully resolve in between the placement of Gam's Speech and the activation of its negate. This is what I have been referring to in past posts as a "gap". This gap is why it cannot be played during SI, as assuming it could be, it would be played and fully resolve without any interrupt taking place and the removal ability would complete.
Next with Siegeworks, we again have a card with multiple abilities. Unlike Gam's Speech, the multiple abilities on Siegeworks function identical to Sam's Edict or a band ability. For the ability to be fully resolved and for dominants to be played, triggers to activate, etc, the card must be placed on a site or fortress and that card negated. The negate is part of the resolution of Siegeworks. It is not a separate, optional trigger like Gam's Speech. Because of this, it can be played during SI, as by the time the card has fully resolved the removal ability has been negated. There is no "gap" in any part of Siegeworks that other cards can resolve in.
Again, one last time, placement has nothing to do with it. The part of G Speech that creates a gap is that half of the card is a separate, optional trigger and the gap occurs in between the card being played and the owner having the option to activate the second half.
I don't have any questions as my only original one was about Gam's Speech and that was figured out a page ago and I'm not sure what to say to you because it seems at this point like you are just operating under a misunderstanding of special abilities in general and I don't know where specifically your misconception is so I'm not sure how to help you. If an Elder could reply to this just to clarify about Siegeworks as I'm sure whichever side is wrong would greatly appreciate a good explanation.
-
A place ability allows you to put a card in a specified location.
An interrupt ability temporarily undoes a previously completed ability or set of abilities and suspends them while activating other abilities on the interrupt card before the suspended abilities reactivate.
A negate ability takes a previously completed ability and undoes the effect of that ability, and it keeps the uncompleted activation of an ability from ever completing.
-
I don't see how any of what I said contradicts those things. I attempted to write everything I could think of about the current subject so you could look through and point out the exact point you disagree on so we can figure it out.
-
a place ability is not an interrupt or negate
this is similar to saying that during special initiative a fruit of the spirit could be placed to protect a hero but that is simply not how special initiative works or is intended to work in the current reg wording
-
I never said a place ability was a negate..I'm still not sure what your point is. In the case of Siegeworks the act of placing the card negates the target but I never said they were the same ability, just two separate abilities that happen consecutively like with Sam's Edict or a band ability.
-
i mean do you think i would just try to mislead you? i have a relationship with elders.. trying to benefit the community here.. you included and others who may read this later on
i'm telling you-
a place ability is not an interrupt or negate.. there is also a sequential order to abilities in redemption. just because there is a negate portion to both gams and siegeworks does not mean that they can be played from hand as such during special initiative which only allows for a negate or interrupt ability to take the action of salvaging a potential rescue/block
-
If anything I said communicated that I think you're trying to mislead anyone I apologize, that has never been my intention. I'm not saying Gam's Speech can be played from hand, quite the contrary. I never thought it could be after Guardian's post, I just wasn't able to put a good explanation into words until I hashed it out some more. Also I never said a place ability was an interrupt or negate on its own. At this current point the only thing I am trying to say is that Siegeworks specifically can be played during SI because it meets negates the removal and there is no chance in between the card being played and the removal being negated in which the removal would have a chance to resolve.