Author Topic: Samaritan Water Jar - Broken in Type 2? (Read 6405 times)

Gohanick · « **on:** August 03, 2009, 01:59:33 PM »

CARD NAME: Samaritan Water Jar [New]
CARD TYPE: Artifact
CLASS:
IDENTIFIERS:
STATS:
BRIGADE COLOR:
Original SPECIAL ABILITY: Discard this card to reveal the top 3 cards of an opponent's deck (or 9 if a Samaritan Hero is in play) and set them aside. Put Lost Souls in play instead. When that deck has no cards, return those cards from set-aside to deck.
SCRIPTURE: The woman then left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men, Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ? John 4:28-29

Are these cards set aside face up? I don't know why they would be set aside face down if it doesnt specify.
If they are set aside face up, that player won't be able to play any duplicate permanents (characters, forts etc) for as long as they are set aside correct?

Sean · « **Reply #1 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:01:11 PM »

They wouldn't be able to play them face up or face down so either way they can't play duplicates.

Lawfuldog · « **Reply #2 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:05:17 PM »

WOAH!

That never even remotely crossed my mind. I was just playing it as 9 cards they couldn't use until they decked out. Awesome!!! Thanks.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #3 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:05:33 PM »

I think Archick is onto something. It makes SWJ a massive deck discard.

Sean · « **Reply #4 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:11:55 PM »

I knew SWJ was OP when Schaef posted it in his spoiler thread. I hadn't thought about duplicates yet though.

Hedgehogman · « **Reply #5 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:17:11 PM »

Never thought about this card in Type 2.

I forsee this becoming the next big staple card that everyone hates with a vengeance.

TechnoEthicist · « **Reply #6 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:18:39 PM »

Maybe now the Luke tin can win in booster draft! HA that was a good laugh...

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #7 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:22:03 PM »

Dude! Whoah! Set aside a total of 27 cards that your opponent can't use duplicates of until he decks out?! ...IN TYPE 2?!!!

...Awesome.

Gohanick · « **Reply #8 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:28:05 PM »

Conversely, what happens if SWJ sets aside something that he already has in play?

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #9 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:30:03 PM »

He could discard the card that was set aside, right?

Hanno102 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:39:18 PM »

Fortunately for all us T2 players, the duplicates rule when referring to set-asides ONLY applies to characters - not artifacts, forts, or any other unique card.

No player may control duplicates of a unique character or cause them to fight each other. This includes unique characters in play, in battle, in a side battle, face down, or in a set-aside area. Character cards with the same card title and the same art or with the same title and the same brigade are considered duplicates for deck building purposes. A player may have only control one of these at any time. The only exception to this rule is non-unique characters with different card art.

Some character cards have different card titles, but are the same character. A player may have only one of these in your territory, in battle, in a side battle, face down, or set-aside at a time.

And when referring to other unique cards:

All Artifact, Covenant, Curse, and Fortress cards are considered unique. A player may control only one of these at any time.

I would argue that when these cards are set-aside the player is not controlling them, and therefore do not apply toward the uniqueness rule. If this is wrong, then yes SWJ is rather broken.l

redemption99 · « **Reply #11 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:41:06 PM »

Even though the cards are set-aside I believe you would still be controlling them.

Korunks · « **Reply #12 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:43:01 PM »

Quote

Even though the cards are set-aside I believe you would still be controlling them.

How? I have no control over them until I deck-out.

redemption99 · « **Reply #13 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:47:50 PM »

It's how the rulebook/REG defines 'controlling'. :/

sk · « **Reply #14 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:48:27 PM »

r99 is correct, you still "control" the cards in set aside.

Hanno102 · « **Reply #15 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:50:47 PM »

Quote from: redemption99 on August 03, 2009, 02:41:06 PM

Even though the cards are set-aside I believe you would still be controlling them.

So if someone hits my Gates of Hell, or Kerith ravine (or any other fortress that plays to the set-aside) with Samaritan Water Jar and because I'm still 'controlling' them, they become active and I can use them?

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #16 on:** August 03, 2009, 02:53:14 PM »

Even though they go to the set aside area when played, they must be put in play to activate, so I would say no.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #17 on:** August 03, 2009, 03:57:18 PM »

I would disagree.

happyjosiah · « **Reply #18 on:** August 03, 2009, 04:09:43 PM »

Quote from: BubbleBoy on August 03, 2009, 02:53:14 PM

Even though they go to the set aside area when played, they must be put in play to activate, so I would say no.

I agree. If your hero gets set aside by something like moses kills egyptian, you can't play set asides on it even though it is in the set aside area. Same idea.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #19 on:** August 03, 2009, 04:12:20 PM »

Well, you can't play set-aside cards on cards already set aside. If it's ruled the other way than ok, but I don't see why a card that works in set aside could go to set-aside and not work.

crustpope · « **Reply #20 on:** August 03, 2009, 04:25:20 PM »

Quote from: Gohanick on August 03, 2009, 01:59:33 PM

CARD NAME: Samaritan Water Jar [New]
CARD TYPE: Artifact
CLASS:
IDENTIFIERS:
STATS:
BRIGADE COLOR:
Original SPECIAL ABILITY: Discard this card to reveal the top 3 cards of an opponent's deck (or 9 if a Samaritan Hero is in play) and set them aside. Put Lost Souls in play instead. When that deck has no cards, return those cards from set-aside to deck.
SCRIPTURE: The woman then left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men, Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ? John 4:28-29

Are these cards set aside face up? I don't know why they would be set aside face down if it doesnt specify.
If they are set aside face up, that player won't be able to play any duplicate permanents (characters, forts etc) for as long as they are set aside correct?

Well every other "reveal" ability places things face down but it is usually at the bottom of the Deck. I think this is one of those things that they will make a ruling on based on how bad it gets. First of all you can only have 3 copies max of SWJ so its not like it is going to hit you all at once. Second There are plenty of card that an undo this such as ANB. Third it is only 27 cards which is about 1/4 of a deck in type 2. I would rather have this than have my entire deck d/c which is what I have had to deal with in the past year. in fact, from my perspective, this card is a blessing compared to that.

I dont think it is broken at all, Just a pain.

happyjosiah · « **Reply #21 on:** August 03, 2009, 04:32:06 PM »

Not to mention on average about four of those 27 will be lost souls (so it's more like 23 set aside).

Gohanick · « **Reply #22 on:** August 03, 2009, 04:33:01 PM »

Yeah but in type 2... about 1/4 of your deck is going to be repeated in the other 3/4ths

happyjosiah · « **Reply #23 on:** August 03, 2009, 04:33:27 PM »

Only matters for uniques though.

lightningninja · « **Reply #24 on:** August 03, 2009, 05:43:04 PM »

HAHAHA. SK, if you want to beat Kurt you can borrow my Water Jar. For now, I'll just be using this card in type I.

crustpope · « **Reply #25 on:** August 03, 2009, 08:09:31 PM »

Seriously, I have seen about three threads already that are screaming that the sky is falling due to "broken" cards in TexP. I am not buying it. None of these cards seem all that crazy yet. and definitely not "broken"

least of all this one.

Lawfuldog · « **Reply #26 on:** August 03, 2009, 08:20:51 PM »

Quote from: crustpope on August 03, 2009, 08:09:31 PM

Seriously, I have seen about three threads already that are screaming that the sky is falling due to "broken" cards in TexP. I am not buying it. None of these cards seem all that crazy yet. and definitely not "broken"

least of all this one.

I agree. Though there are some nice ones, to be honest... I could only see about a third of the set even seeing any play competitively.

egilkinc · « **Reply #27 on:** August 03, 2009, 08:57:16 PM »

Quote from: BubbleBoy on August 03, 2009, 02:53:14 PM

Even though they go to the set aside area when played, they must be put in play to activate, so I would say no.

hey,
I disagree. The RTS list says that Gates has an identifier that it "plays to set-aside area". I can't think of anywhere that says that you play one of the set-aside forts into play first and then set it aside. It is played into the set-aside area directly, then during the prep phase (or another triggered event), the ability activates. This is my understanding.
L8er,
Gil

crustpope · « **Reply #28 on:** August 03, 2009, 09:12:30 PM »

But if they go to set aside face down, then it wouldn't work.

Running along with this theme. if you had several of the Priest setaside cards and you happened to get a hero and onoe of those cards ( like Pentecost) could that bring yoru hero(s) back after one turn because it was setaside, activated the next turn and then fulfilled its SA and could bring them back? THis might be a way to "lessen" the blow of SWJ

redemptioncousin · « **Reply #29 on:** August 04, 2009, 01:30:12 AM »

No... but you could use Darius's Decree to discard your own heroes so you can play them again...

Professoralstad · « **Reply #30 on:** August 04, 2009, 09:21:10 AM »

Quote from: crustpope on August 03, 2009, 09:12:30 PM

But if they go to set aside face down, then it wouldn't work.

I'm curious where this train of thought came from. No other set-aside card sets anything aside face down, except those that specifically say it (Ambush, etc.) Why would this be any different?

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #31 on:** August 04, 2009, 09:36:24 AM »

not broken, but it could be VERY fun...

if you really wanted to spam it, you could throw in some of those guys that can place enhancements, and put on a split alter, side battle ready...

The Warrior · « **Reply #32 on:** August 04, 2009, 09:38:36 AM »

all this TexP cards are great but remember some of them can still be discarded or negated $:-\$

NWJosh · « **Reply #33 on:** August 04, 2009, 09:44:32 AM »

The other part of these cards is you actually have to use them. Many people will talk about having to use all these cards but will soon realize you have to do more then put in the new cards to win games. The new cards are fun, but nothing is super broken as of now.

The Warrior · « **Reply #34 on:** August 04, 2009, 09:49:20 AM »

Quote from: NWJosh on August 04, 2009, 09:44:32 AM

The other part of these cards is you actually have to use them. Many people will talk about having to use all these cards but will soon realize you have to do more then put in the new cards to win games. The new cards are fun, but nothing is super broken as of now.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #35 on:** August 04, 2009, 10:15:07 AM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on August 04, 2009, 09:21:10 AM

Quote from: crustpope on August 03, 2009, 09:12:30 PM
But if they go to set aside face down, then it wouldn't work.

I'm curious where this train of thought came from. No other set-aside card sets anything aside face down, except those that specifically say it (Ambush, etc.) Why would this be any different?

Is there any other card in the game that can set aside an artifact?

I agree it's unlikely the cards are set aside face-down, but when a new card comes out that does something we've never seen before, it's nice to be cautious.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #36 on:** August 04, 2009, 10:45:18 AM »

Yes...any set-aside card that sets aside Simon of Cyrene w/ Crossbeams or a Priest with Priestly Breastplate sets aside an Artifact. I am actually of the opinion that any time a new card comes out with a special ability that exists (i.e. set-aside) we must assume it follows the same rules as any other card with that type of SA unless it says otherwise (as Ambush does).

crustpope · « **Reply #37 on:** August 04, 2009, 12:14:08 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on August 04, 2009, 09:21:10 AM

Quote from: crustpope on August 03, 2009, 09:12:30 PM
But if they go to set aside face down, then it wouldn't work.

I'm curious where this train of thought came from. No other set-aside card sets anything aside face down, except those that specifically say it (Ambush, etc.) Why would this be any different?

My face dowm train of thought came from the "reveal" aspect of hte SA. When cards say to "reveal" they are usually looking for something like LS's and they put those in the LoB (or wherever the targets go) and then the rest of the cards usually go Face down under the draw pile. Here, while the location of their return has changed, it would nto be a stretch to say that revealed cards take a "detour" to set aside, but they are there face down like every other revealed card that is not a target of the reveal.

Now I am sure you caould make an argument that ALL of the cards are the target of the reveal and that the LS just take a detour to the LoB, but every other reveal card usually targets LS's and the rest go face down to wherever their finishing Location is. (there are a few that reveal the top 3 or 6 cards looking for enhancements and such but even they go face down on top of the draw pile)

Professoralstad · « **Reply #38 on:** August 04, 2009, 02:11:50 PM »

I don't know...I can think of examples where you reveal and place into hand, reveal and put into battle, reveal and discard, now we're just revealing and setting aside. Thus, I don't think there is a default for revealed cards, but there is for set-aside cards, as all other cards that get set-aside do so face-up, unless a special ability says otherwise.

redemption99 · « **Reply #39 on:** August 04, 2009, 04:20:04 PM »

this card is very annoying in type II...i just played a game against it and it pretty much made sure i couldn't use a lot of my ec's and i was already having a bad draw on the defense side

crustpope · « **Reply #40 on:** August 05, 2009, 12:49:30 AM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on August 04, 2009, 02:11:50 PM

I don't know...I can think of examples where you reveal and place into hand, reveal and put into battle, reveal and discard, now we're just revealing and setting aside. Thus, I don't think there is a default for revealed cards, but there is for set-aside cards, as all other cards that get set-aside do so face-up, unless a special ability says otherwise.

I was talking to someone today and realized that it doesnt matter whether they are face up or face down. You cannot have multiple copies of a unique character face up or down in territory so it wont matter whether they are face up or down in set asides. the same rules for unique characters apply. I cannot have a KoT face down on my Darkness and have one face up in my territory (know one will know until I reveal on darkness but that is beside the point) so I gues sit doesnt really matter.

Sean · « **Reply #41 on:** August 05, 2009, 08:27:34 AM »

Quote

I was talking to someone today and realized that it doesnt matter whether they are face up or face down.

Quote from: Sean on August 03, 2009, 02:01:11 PM

They wouldn't be able to play them face up or face down so either way they can't play duplicates.

crustpope · « **Reply #42 on:** August 05, 2009, 01:54:48 PM »

Quote from: Sean on August 05, 2009, 08:27:34 AM

Quote
I was talking to someone today and realized that it doesnt matter whether they are face up or face down.

Quote from: Sean on August 03, 2009, 02:01:11 PM
They wouldn't be able to play them face up or face down so either way they can't play duplicates.

So what are you saying Sean? That you are smarter than me?

Thats like saying Chuck Norris could beat up (insert anyone's name here)

Sean · « **Reply #43 on:** August 05, 2009, 02:10:54 PM »

Quote

So what are you saying Sean?

I'm saying that if you read the thread, you'd have had the answer. The fact that I'm smarter than you goes without saying.

happyjosiah · « **Reply #44 on:** August 05, 2009, 02:18:59 PM »

Seems like this is going to encourage more generic characters in Type 2, and only one or two copies of uniques. I think that's pretty cool actually.

SirNobody · « **Reply #45 on:** August 05, 2009, 04:57:11 PM »

Hey,

The cards are set-aside face up. When cards are placed onto the playing surface they are always placed there face up (unless a ability or game rule specifies otherwise).

The uniqueness rule for Artifacts, Covenants, and Curses says that you can only have one copy of them active as an artifact at a time, so setting copies of Artifacts, Covenants, and Curses aside with Samaritan Water Jar will not affect a player's ability to use other copies of those cards.

I'm not sure about Fortresses. My gut says that if you set aside The Gates of Hell it would begin functioning normally, and if you set aside The Garden Tomb it does not function and I cannot put a different copy of The Garden Tomb into my territory. But I'm not overly inclined to trust my gut on this one.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #46 on:** August 11, 2009, 12:49:57 AM »

Any updates on this?

JDS · « **Reply #47 on:** August 11, 2009, 01:27:16 AM »

There are many ways to get heroes back from set-aside (one being Darius Decree plus group Healing), but this not being able to play characters stuff is simply unfun, I think you should be able to elect to play a duplicated character and just choose which gets discarded.

News:

Author Topic: Samaritan Water Jar - Broken in Type 2? (Read 6405 times)

Warrior_Monk