Author Topic: Negating the Draw on a Set-Aside Card (Read 1786 times)

Noah · « **on:** July 08, 2015, 10:35:13 PM »

If someone has Iron Pan active or the Pigs lost soul is in play and I play a set-aside card that has a draw ability like Pentecost, Provisions, or Work With Your Hands etc., why is the draw negated when the card's ability takes effect out of play in a future phase? I kind of understand that the draw part of the card is being negated when the set-aside card is "played", but why it doesn't activate in a later phase on a different turn is odd to me.

Praeceps · « **Reply #1 on:** July 08, 2015, 11:53:05 PM »

I don't think the draw is negated until the character comes back and the draw actually triggers.

jbeers285 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 08, 2015, 11:57:23 PM »

I am not a ruling expert but as far as I know if the draw is negated when the set aside card is played you do not get to draw. However if I activate iron pan after you used a set aside draw card you would still draw in the return.

Gabe · « **Reply #3 on:** July 09, 2015, 08:44:53 AM »

There's an old thread that discusses this situation with Pigs and Pentecost. The ruling is that the draw isn't a gained ability. If it's being prevented or negated on return it doesn't happen.

Redoubter · « **Reply #4 on:** July 09, 2015, 11:43:09 AM »

Quote from: Gabe on July 09, 2015, 08:44:53 AM

There's an old thread that discusses this situation with Pigs and Pentecost. The ruling is that the draw isn't a gained ability. If it's being prevented or negated on return it doesn't happen.

The draw hasn't completed until your characters return, so it can be prevented then as well, so I agree with that ruling.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 09, 2015, 01:50:08 PM »

I remember that thread but thought the conclusion was as Josiah said. Honestly I see no reason why draw isn't a gained ability. It always was before the pigs vs Pentecost dispute that's why there was a discussion about it.

Redoubter · « **Reply #6 on:** July 09, 2015, 01:56:07 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on July 09, 2015, 01:50:08 PM

I remember that thread but thought the conclusion was as Josiah said. Honestly I see no reason why draw isn't a gained ability. It always was before the pigs vs Pentecost dispute that's why there was a discussion about it.

Why would it be a gained ability? It is a benefit, not something added to a character.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 09, 2015, 04:04:13 PM »

http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/Set_Aside in the first paragraph it talks about gained abilities being gained by the player not by the hero and in the default section it says nothing about the ability having to be added to the character to be CBN. And that's how it was treated for a long time. Maybe the wiki isn't the most reliable but I can't find the Reg online.

Redoubter · « **Reply #8 on:** July 09, 2015, 04:15:06 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on July 09, 2015, 04:04:13 PM

http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/Set_Aside in the first paragraph it talks about gained abilities being gained by the player not by the hero...

It says no such thing. Since it is actually quoting the REG (linked), and also because the Wiki is not the rules source as noted in your post, I will quote the REG from here on:

Quote from: The REG > General Description

A set-aside ability allows you to remove a card or cards from play and sets them aside in a set-aside area. When you set your own cards aside you usually gain a benefit over a period of turns for having them set aside. When you set an opponent’s cards aside there are no benefits to your opponent.

It says that you gain a benefit, not that there is a "gained ability." Drawing cards is gaining a benefit. This is further described in the next section:

Quote from: The REG > How to Play

A set-aside ability is always followed by or paired with another ability that is not a set-aside ability but rather is an ongoing ability that lasts as long as all of the cards targeted by the set-aside ability remain set aside. The ability that follows or is paired with the set aside ability defines the benefit gained from being set aside or when the cards set aside should be returned (i.e., a duration).

It defines a benefit gained, not a gained ability. Abilities are gained by a character, not by a player. A player cannot 'gain' the draw ability, the player 'receives the benefit' of a draw ability.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 09, 2015, 04:45:52 PM »

I don't think gaining the benefit of an ability is different than a gained ability. If the benefit is an ability that means you gained that ability. The quotes you found say nothing about characters so I'm not sure how that is related. I why can't a player gain an ability? They have been able to for years. I am trying to find the pigs thread but I can't.

Redoubter · « **Reply #10 on:** July 09, 2015, 04:52:25 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on July 09, 2015, 04:45:52 PM

I don't think gaining the benefit of an ability is different than a gained ability.

It is very different. Only characters are ever described as having a gained ability. How can a player "gain an ability?" They just gain the effects of the abilities being performed.

As a player, I cannot 'gain' a draw ability. I draw. It does not work the way you describe in Redemption.

Noah · « **Reply #11 on:** July 10, 2015, 12:06:53 AM »

Quote from: jbeers285 on July 08, 2015, 11:57:23 PM

I am not a ruling expert but as far as I know if the draw is negated when the set aside card is played you do not get to draw. However if I activate iron pan after you used a set aside draw card you would still draw in the return.

This is what I understand it to be, but after reading this,

Quote from: Gabe on July 09, 2015, 08:44:53 AM

There's an old thread that discusses this situation with Pigs and Pentecost. The ruling is that the draw isn't a gained ability. If it's being prevented or negated on return it doesn't happen.

I'm wondering,

1) How a set-aside enhancement could be prevented when it was played in a different phase.

2) How a set-aside enhancement could be negated if it never re-enters play (to my knowledge).

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #12 on:** July 10, 2015, 12:11:00 AM »

Quote from: tripleplayNo3 on July 10, 2015, 12:06:53 AM

1) How a set-aside enhancement could be prevented when it was played in a different phase.

Just like how abilities on placed enhancements can be negated at phases after they've been placed.

Noah · « **Reply #13 on:** July 10, 2015, 12:13:55 AM »

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on July 10, 2015, 12:11:00 AM

Quote from: tripleplayNo3 on July 10, 2015, 12:06:53 AM
1) How a set-aside enhancement could be prevented when it was played in a different phase.

Just like how abilities on placed enhancements can be negated at phases after they've been placed.

I agree with that statement. But I said, "How a set-aside enhancement could be prevented", not negated.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #14 on:** July 10, 2015, 12:22:11 AM »

Quote from: tripleplayNo3 on July 10, 2015, 12:13:55 AM

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on July 10, 2015, 12:11:00 AM
Quote from: tripleplayNo3 on July 10, 2015, 12:06:53 AM
1) How a set-aside enhancement could be prevented when it was played in a different phase.

Just like how abilities on placed enhancements can be negated at phases after they've been placed.

I agree with that statement. But I said, "How a set-aside enhancement could be prevented", not negated.

Same thing just put prevented instead of negated. It's an instant triggered draw ability so if a prevent is in place before the draw is triggered I'd expect it to be prevented... that being said Redemption rules aren't always what I expect.

Noah · « **Reply #15 on:** July 10, 2015, 12:45:39 AM »

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on July 10, 2015, 12:22:11 AM

Quote from: tripleplayNo3 on July 10, 2015, 12:13:55 AM
Quote from: ChristianSoldier on July 10, 2015, 12:11:00 AM
Quote from: tripleplayNo3 on July 10, 2015, 12:06:53 AM
1) How a set-aside enhancement could be prevented when it was played in a different phase.

Just like how abilities on placed enhancements can be negated at phases after they've been placed.

I agree with that statement. But I said, "How a set-aside enhancement could be prevented", not negated.

Same thing just put prevented instead of negated. It's an instant triggered draw ability so if a prevent is in place before the draw is triggered I'd expect it to be prevented... that being said Redemption rules aren't always what I expect.

I get what you are saying, but that to me is the same thing as saying that if I have Nicanor in play, I activate Iron Pan, and my opponent draws a card, Nicanor is being prevented. Now, that doesn't sound right, but I believe it is an accurate parallel. This example, and the example of Pentecost and drawing the Pigs lost soul while Pentecost is set-aside, both have the following things in common (to the best of my knowledge),

1) A card that has been activated in a previous phase/turn that can/will trigger in a future phase.
2) A second card that would prevent the first said card is played before the trigger is met.
3) The card triggers in a future phase when it can only be prevented, not negated.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #16 on:** July 10, 2015, 02:10:54 AM »

From the REG's section on prevent (The REG might be outdated, but I don't believe this has changed)

Quote

If an ability is prevented and its activation has already begun but it has not completed activation (i.e. it is a pending ability), the completion of the activation of the pending ability is skipped (i.e., it is no longer a pending ability even though it did not complete its activation).

This definitely fits how Set Asides like Pentecost work (they have the instant set aside and then a pending ability, in the case of Pentecost a Draw 3). I'm not sure about characters like Nicanor, but to me this quote suggests that all continuous abilities that could be targeted for a prevent would be prevented from that point on, but I'm fairly sure that's not a rule.

Noah · « **Reply #17 on:** July 10, 2015, 09:35:45 AM »

That's an interesting quote there. I always thought that a card could only be targeted by a prevent ability when it was played, not activated (that is, if a delayed trigger counts as "activating"). I guess I thought it was like that because, if you could prevent a pending ability without interrupting it, that seemed to me like you were inserting the prevent ability in the middle of the other card's ability.

Is that how it works with delayed triggers?

If so, consider this scenario,

I play Great Image (pending/delayed trigger) and my opponent bands in Shamhuth (prevents enhancements). Is Great Image negated/prevented? This to me seems like Shamhuth is trying to insert the prevent before Great Image completes.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is, what is the difference between "playing" an enhancement and "activating" an ability, and how do both relate to prevent abilities and set-aside enhancements.

In light of this rather enlightening discussion, I would still like to have the following questions answered or at least more opinions shared.

Quote from: tripleplayNo3 on July 10, 2015, 12:06:53 AM

1) How a set-aside enhancement could be prevented when it was played in a different phase.

2) How a set-aside enhancement could be negated if it never re-enters play (to my knowledge).

Noah · « **Reply #18 on:** July 15, 2015, 03:16:11 PM »

I apologize for double posting, but I would still like elder clarification concerning the following scenarios and questions,

A)

Quote

I get what you are saying, but that to me is the same thing as saying that if I have Nicanor in play, I activate Iron Pan, and my opponent draws a card, Nicanor is being prevented. Now, that doesn't sound right, but I believe it is an accurate parallel. This example, and the example of Pentecost and drawing the Pigs lost soul while Pentecost is set-aside, both have the following things in common (to the best of my knowledge),

1) A card that has been activated in a previous phase/turn that can/will trigger in a future phase.
2) A second card that would prevent the first said card is played before the trigger is met.
3) The card triggers in a future phase when it can only be prevented, not negated.

B)

Quote

I play Great Image (pending/delayed trigger) and my opponent bands in Shamhuth (prevents enhancements). Is Great Image negated/prevented? This to me seems like Shamhuth is trying to insert the prevent before Great Image completes.

C)

Quote

I'm wondering,

1) How a set-aside enhancement could be prevented when it was played in a different phase.

2) How a set-aside enhancement could be negated if it never re-enters play (to my knowledge).

I understand how the draw can be prevented because it has not activated, but I fail to see how it could be targeted by the prevention if, to the best of my knowledge, the set aside enhancement never re-enters play.

If it would be better to have separate threads for each of these let me know and I will do that. Currently I would prefer to keep them all in one place since they all share things in common.

I've had luck in other threads getting fast responses by sorting questions using numbers and letters. Hopefully that might be helpful here.

Thanks.

News:

Author Topic: Negating the Draw on a Set-Aside Card (Read 1786 times)

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13