Author Topic: Ruling Questions (Read 6442 times)

Kyp Henderson · « **Reply #25 on:** July 26, 2009, 11:22:53 PM »

WHAAAAT?

Kyp Henderson · « **Reply #26 on:** July 26, 2009, 11:23:48 PM »

o got it

didn't see earlier posts lol

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #27 on:** July 26, 2009, 11:25:00 PM »

Sadly I don't have an answer to question 2.

FresnoRedemption · « **Reply #28 on:** July 27, 2009, 04:49:42 AM »

Quote from: RedemptionAggie on July 26, 2009, 10:43:14 PM

Unless something specifies to put it in battle, the default is to put it in territory, I think.

I'm pretty sure that it would specify to band her in (or add her to battle) if you could add her to the battle. I would think you would add her to your territory.

But here's a follow-up question:

If you return a Hero to your opponent's hand, does that count as a withdrawal? I seem to remember a discussion on this but I'm not sure if a consensus was ever reached. I would think it does count as a withdrawal since you can play a hero from your hand directly into the field of battle to make a rescue attempt or battle challenge, but I also heard the argument that only a return to territory would constitute a withdrawal. But here's the thing: You can't "return" to territory if you were never there in the first place.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #29 on:** July 27, 2009, 06:43:32 AM »

I disagree. I see no reason why she can't be put in battle. It's in play, isn't it?

Now, it's altogether likely that this card will get a play-as or a ruling against it, but as it stands it just says to put her in play, and battle is in play.

happyjosiah · « **Reply #30 on:** July 27, 2009, 10:00:10 AM »

This has all been gone through before. A lot of cards say to put something in play when they really mean "your territory". Look at it this way: do you think this card would allow you to put Athaliah into your opponent's land of bondage as a lost soul? Of course not, even though that is technically in play. Treating something as a lost soul requires a capture ability. By the same token, banding someone into battle requires a banding ability. "return hero(s) to play" always means "to your territory" unless a card specifies they can be added to battle or something else. And I agree, it's very confusingly worded.

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #31 on:** July 27, 2009, 10:06:20 AM »

I think King Ahaziah needs a Play As similar to Midwives (w). She was worded the same way, but they made a play as to say in territory.

Midwives
Type: Hero Char. • Brigade: Green • Ability: 7 / 6 • Class: None • Special Ability: Each time Midwives enter the Field of Battle, return to Field of Play all Green Brigade Male Heroes from all discard piles. • Play As: Return all green brigade male Heroes from all discard piles to owner’s territories.

Kirk

happyjosiah · « **Reply #32 on:** July 27, 2009, 10:18:41 AM »

By that logic, consider this nasty brown combo:

block with King Omri: Search your draw pile for one Samaria Site and put in play. Land Purchase cannot be negated.

Put it into your opponenents LOB (which is IN PLAY) and then use Bad Decison (If opponent has an empty single color site, capture any Hero in play and place there.) to capture.

Not saying that's completely broken or anything, but do you really mean to suggest that should be legal?

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #33 on:** July 27, 2009, 10:43:20 AM »

Quote from: happyjosiah on July 27, 2009, 10:18:41 AM

By that logic, consider this nasty brown combo:

block with King Omri: Search your draw pile for one Samaria Site and put in play. Land Purchase cannot be negated.

Put it into your opponenents LOB (which is IN PLAY) and then use Bad Decison (If opponent has an empty single color site, capture any Hero in play and place there.) to capture.

Not saying that's completely broken or anything, but do you really mean to suggest that should be legal?

LOL!!

happyjosiah · « **Reply #34 on:** July 27, 2009, 10:49:03 AM »

Back in the day, I asked the very same question given above and was told I was being a rules lawyer and of course you couldn't do that. Return to play always means your territory. How times change.

Not that anyone uses this either, but a card like raising of lazarus which returns a hero from potter's field to "PLAY" as far as I know does not allow a band into battle either.

Bottom line, there are a TON of poorly worded (generally old) cards like this. My understanding was that rather than give all those old cards "play as" we were just treating "to play" as "to your territory."

Kyp Henderson · « **Reply #35 on:** July 27, 2009, 01:27:35 PM »

So should I consider this as a final ruling? I see your point but I want an errata or official ruling just to make sure. This has saved my defense several times playing this way

SirNobody · « **Reply #36 on:** July 27, 2009, 04:25:34 PM »

Hey,

Based on the Play as for Midwives, I'd say it's safe to assume King Ahaziah is played the same way; that "put in play" means "place in your territory."

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #37 on:** July 28, 2009, 01:40:02 AM »

That's where you're wrong. You're not safe to assume anything that's not backed up by the rules. Midwives has a play-as, this guy doesn't. If anything, that strengthens the argument for allowing them to enter battle.

FresnoRedemption · « **Reply #38 on:** July 28, 2009, 01:58:39 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on July 28, 2009, 01:40:02 AM

That's where you're wrong. You're not safe to assume anything that's not backed up by the rules. Midwives has a play-as, this guy doesn't. If anything, that strengthens the argument for allowing them to enter battle.

From what I understand, only one character is allowed to enter battle and no other characters can enter battle except through a banding ability. If the card isn't specific, I'm pretty sure it defaults to your territory.

SirNobody · « **Reply #39 on:** July 28, 2009, 02:15:58 AM »

Hey,

Quote from: Minister Polarius on July 28, 2009, 01:40:02 AM

That's where you're wrong. You're not safe to assume anything that's not backed up by the rules. Midwives has a play-as, this guy doesn't. If anything, that strengthens the argument for allowing them to enter battle.

I know the major judges, the rules, and the process well enough that there are actually quite a few things that I have safely assumed over the last couple years. Very little that comes from the PTB surprises me anymore.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

The Schaef · « **Reply #40 on:** July 28, 2009, 06:35:58 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on July 28, 2009, 01:40:02 AM

That's where you're wrong. You're not safe to assume anything that's not backed up by the rules. Midwives has a play-as, this guy doesn't. If anything, that strengthens the argument for allowing them to enter battle.

That doesn't make any sense. The Play As for Midwives sets a precedent. That's a perfectly valid reason to make the assumption that he makes, and by no means does it strengthen the case for allowing them to enter battle. If he is wrong, that means cards with the same wording would be played two different ways, and that IMO is the wrong assumption to make.

The Field of Battle is part of the Field of Play, yes, but there are only two stipulations the rules give for placing a character there: presenting the initial Hero/EC, and special abilities that band/add to battle. To put something "in play" is to put it in your territory; that is the entire reason your territory exists: to have a place for cards that you put into play. Just because there are multiple locations in the Field of Play does not mean that part of the ability allows you to just put it anywhere. I have yet to meet someone who has tried to put characters down in another player's territory, or their Land of Bondage, under the idea that those are also "in play".

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #41 on:** July 28, 2009, 10:06:26 AM »

this type of gameplay is safe for the game.
fun? no.
safe? wake me up when its over...zzz

CountFount · « **Reply #42 on:** July 28, 2009, 10:09:06 AM »

Quote from: RTSmaniac on July 28, 2009, 10:06:26 AM

this type of gameplay is safe for the game.
fun? no.
safe? wake me up when its over...zzz

Amen and Amen

Kyp Henderson · « **Reply #43 on:** July 28, 2009, 11:16:36 AM »

Quote from: FresnoRedemption on July 28, 2009, 01:58:39 AM

Quote from: Minister Polarius on July 28, 2009, 01:40:02 AM
That's where you're wrong. You're not safe to assume anything that's not backed up by the rules. Midwives has a play-as, this guy doesn't. If anything, that strengthens the argument for allowing them to enter battle.

From what I understand, only one character is allowed to enter battle and no other characters can enter battle except through a banding ability. If the card isn't specific, I'm pretty sure it defaults to your territory.

Well Gabriel meets Zecharis lets a person join the battle. I am pretty sure this is not a banding ability.

Gabriel meets Zecharias 2/3 Luke 1:11 Multi HE Search deck for a N.T. Hero and add it to hand or battle. Prevent the special ability on the next evil card played this battle.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #44 on:** July 28, 2009, 11:20:11 AM »

Add to Battle = Band (when there is a character already in battle)

Cameron the Conqueror · « **Reply #45 on:** July 28, 2009, 11:20:14 AM »

They actually are. Cards that add characters to battle actually are banding.

Quote

If the Evil Character is added to a battle that already contains an Evil Character, then treat The Darkness as a banding card.

This is not the quote I was looking for, but it works. If a character is in battle, any card that adds another is a banding card.

The Schaef · « **Reply #46 on:** July 28, 2009, 11:22:23 AM »

Adding a character to battle is a banding ability if it is added with a character already in battle.

REG entry

Also, instaposted.

Kyp Henderson · « **Reply #47 on:** July 28, 2009, 11:25:08 AM »

Ok that makes sense. I just thought a card has to have "band" in the special ability to make it a "banding" card.

The Schaef · « **Reply #48 on:** July 28, 2009, 12:31:00 PM »

Nope, "add to battle" is a quasi-band card, and only quasi because it gives you the additional option of putting the character in even if no others are with him.

Kyp Henderson · « **Reply #49 on:** July 28, 2009, 12:38:16 PM »

kk thanks for making that clear

News:

Author Topic: Ruling Questions (Read 6442 times)

Lamborghini_diablo

FresnoRedemption

Lamborghini_diablo

FresnoRedemption

The Schaef

The Schaef

The Schaef