Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: The Guardian on August 04, 2009, 05:00:13 AM
-
I have 3 cards set aside from SWJ. I draw my last two cards in my deck during my draw phase and those 3 get put back in my deck. Do I get to draw my third card for that turn?
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.
-
From the REG/Rulebook:
Draw Phase
On your first turn, skip the Draw Phase and play with your starting hand. On your second turn, and each turn after this, you draw three (3) cards. If you draw a Lost Soul, instead of placing it in your hand, place it in your Land of Bondage and draw a replacement card.
Seems like the drawing of three cards doesn't have to happen all at once. Is it legal to take another action while drawing (ie, opponent playing a dominant, such as Falling Away in hopes of beating their Guardian to the table, or Burial on a soul you drew to stop your Son of God from being able to rescue)? If the cards return during draw phase, I think you should be able to get your third card. If the return must wait for upkeep phase (ie, no other actions during draw phase except drawing), I don't think you get the third card.
-
I think the cards would come back during upkeep phase. If so, you obviously wouldn't get to draw a third card.
-
ok so this is a necropost but this situation came up and i didn't find an answer on the boards. if you only have 1 or 2 cards in draw pile when your opponent use samaritan water jar do you draw your third card from the ones that were set aside?
-
I believe the cards come back during Upkeep Phase, after you have already drawn whatever cards are available in the deck.
-
i disagree. swj says when there are no cards in your deck, return the set-aside cards from swj to deck. if you d2 and run out of deck, you are allowed to return the cards, then d1 more. there is also nothing in the language of the card that suggests it happens during the upkeep...rather a pending trigger.
another important question related to the topic: when the cards come back, are they returned in the order they were removed, or can they return in any order (shuffle)?
-
i disagree. swj says when there are no cards in your deck, return the set-aside cards from swj to deck. if you d2 and run out of deck, you are allowed to return the cards, then d1 more. there is also nothing in the language of the card that suggests it happens during the upkeep...rather a pending trigger.
another important question related to the topic: when the cards come back, are they returned in the order they were removed, or can they return in any order (shuffle)?
I agree that they wouldn't come back during Upkeep; if I run out of cards during the battle phase, they should be put back on top. However, I know there was a discussion awhile back about how nothing besides drawing can happen during the draw phase, not sure how that turned out exactly though.
-
I believe the cards come back during Upkeep Phase, after you have already drawn whatever cards are available in the deck.
+1
-
I believe the cards come back during Upkeep Phase, after you have already drawn whatever cards are available in the deck.
+1
+1
-
I would also agree that the cards would go back in the same order
-
Cards are returned from the set-aside area during the upkeep unless the card that set them aside has another condition. SWJ does have another condition - "When that deck has no cards,..."
The moment your deck runs out of cards the trigger returns the cards set-aside by SWJ during any phase or any players turn.
The cards that were set-aside by SWJ are returned to your deck randomly by shuffling them.
Unless specified otherwise, cards returned to a draw pile are placed randomly inside and the draw pile is then shuffled.
On your first turn, skip the Draw Phase and play with your starting hand. On your second turn, and each turn after this, you draw three (3) cards. If you draw a Lost Soul, instead of placing it in your hand, place it in your Land of Bondage and draw a replacement card.
There is one action in your draw phase during which you draw three cards (and replace Lost Souls drawn). If there are less than 3 cards then you draw as many cards as possible. Once that action is complete you don't get to draw additional cards, even if cards are returned to your deck.
Similarly, if I play Words of Encouragement on Salome to interrupt, draw 3 and play next, if there is only 1 card in my deck I would not draw 1, then return the cards from SWJ and keep drawing. The draw is a one time action.
-
I agree with Gabe. That explanation seems to make the most sense.
-
So they go back whenever you deckout but the cards are shuffled in?
-
Correct. Which makes it easy for you not to have to remember the order when your opponent uses three Water Jars on you...
-
lolz it would be cool to do that in type 1 and get rid of half the deck but alas that is not possible...
-
lolz it would be cool to do that in type 1 and get rid of half the deck but alas that is not possible...
Sure it is. A 150 card T1 deck could do it easily.
-
The cards that were set-aside by SWJ are returned to your deck randomly by shuffling them.
I'm not disagreeing, but more so asking what the reason is behind this. Why would they get shuffled? When cards get revealed to the bottom they go in order of the way in which they were revealed. A player does not reveal 3 evil cards for Bronze Laver, and shuffle those 3 then place them on the bottom, they reveal three and put them in order of how they were revealed. So I would tend to say however the cards are revealed with SWJ they get put back on top.
-
That's because they are placed in the bottom of the deck by special ability. That is a game rule that cards returned to decks get shuffled.
-
Unless the ability says not to.
-
When cards get revealed to the bottom they go in order of the way in which they were revealed.
Is this correct? I've always played that when the Revealer LS shows the top 2 cards that they could be put on the bottom in whatever order is chosen.
-
When cards get revealed to the bottom they go in order of the way in which they were revealed.
Is this correct? I've always played that when the Revealer LS shows the top 2 cards that they could be put on the bottom in whatever order is chosen.
Chosen by whom?
-
Chosen by whom?
I've always played that the order is chosen by the owner of the 2 revealed cards.
-
I'm not disagreeing, but more so asking what the reason is behind this. Why would they get shuffled?
Unless specified otherwise, cards returned to a draw pile are placed randomly inside and the draw pile is then shuffled.
Since SMJ is a return ability the cards are shuffled.
When cards get revealed to the bottom they go in order of the way in which they were revealed.
According to the REG you can choose the order cards you place in your deck if they are returned to a specific location. Your opponent will choose if they're the one revealing and placing.
Cards placed in a draw pile typically specify a particular location in the draw pile (e.g., bottom). If a player must place multiple cards at the same time, that player may choose the order of the cards being placed (e.g., Feast of Trumpets and The Bronze Laver).
-
Cards placed in a draw pile typically specify a particular location in the draw pile (e.g., bottom). If a player must place multiple cards at the same time, that player may choose the order of the cards being placed (e.g., Feast of Trumpets and The Bronze Laver).
I assume that "player" in that quote refers to the holder of the returning card, correct?
-
I assume that "player" in that quote refers to the holder of the returning card, correct?
Correct. If cards are being placed on/under your deck then you choose the order unless the card placing them there gives another player that choice.
-
I assume that "player" in that quote refers to the holder of the returning card, correct?
Correct. If cards are being placed on/under your deck then you choose the order unless the card placing them there gives another player that choice.
Wait a second, you say correct, but then you describe an opposing example...
If I play the revealer, do I get to choose the order of the cards placed on bottom, or does my opponent?
-
Sure it is. A 150 card T1 deck could do it easily.
You are kidding right?
-
Wait a second, you say correct, but then you describe an opposing example...
If I play the revealer, do I get to choose the order of the cards placed on bottom, or does my opponent?
Romans 3:23 (‘Seeker’)
Type: Lost Soul • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: When you draw this card, each opponent must reveal the top two cards of his draw pile. Place each revealed Lost Soul in owner's Land of Bondage. Place the rest beneath owner's draw pile. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Romans 3:23 • Availability: Angel Wars booster packs (Rare)
Your opponent chooses the order.
If you (Bubbleboy) DRAW the Revealer, I (777Godspeed) REVEAL the top 2 cards of MY deck to you and then I (777Godspeed) put them on the bottom of my deck in any order. Nothing on the card indicates that the one who DRAWS the Revealer chooses the order they are put on bottom.
REG > Instant Abilities > Fortify or Place > Special Conditions
Cards placed in a draw pile typically specify a particular location in the draw pile (e.g., bottom). If a player must place multiple cards at the same time, that player may choose the order of the cards being placed (e.g., Feast of Trumpets and The Bronze Laver).
Godspeed,
Mike
-
The cards does not say, "opponent places the rest on the bottom," it says, "place the rest on the bottom," which means the holder of the revealer is the one doing the placing, no?
This should be moot anyway, because it has been ruled that an ability that says "opponent must do this" is not actually being performed by the opponent, but by the holder of the card the ability is on, meaning although my opponent may be the one physically taking the top two cards of his deck and turning them towards all the other players and then picking his deck up and putting those cards at the bottom and putting it back down, it is my card that is performing the action. I am the holder of the card, and I think that means that I should be the one to choose the order of the cards.
-
Revealer Lost Soul - you reveal your cards and you place the cards under your deck so you choose the order.
Seeker of the Lost - your opponent reveals the cards and places the cards under your deck so your opponent chooses the order.
The Bronze Laver - you place the cards under your deck so you choose the order.
Susanna - you place the cards under your deck so you choose the order.
Correct. If cards are being placed on/under your deck then you choose the order unless the card placing them there gives another player that choice.
I was only trying to point out that occasionally there might be a card that allows the opponent to choose the order instead of you, if they're the one doing the revealing and placing. For example, Seeker of the Lost. The player using Seeker does the revealing and the placing so they get to choose the order of the placed cards.
Seeker of the Lost
Type: Hero Char. • Brigade: Red/Gold/Blue • Ability: 4 / 4 • Class: None • Special Ability: Reveal the top three cards of opponent's draw pile. Place all revealed Lost Souls in play. Place the rest beneath owner's draw pile. Cannot be negated. • Identifiers: Generic NT Female Human • Verse: II Timothy 2:
-
I'm agreeing with bb. isn't seeker a glorified revealer? pretty much the exact same ability.
-
The end result is the same but the abilities are slightly different.
Revealer says ..."each opponent must reveal" so the owner of the deck does the revealing and placing of the cards, therefore they choose the order to place the card on the bottom of their deck.
Seeker says "Reveal the top three cards..." so Seekers controller is doing the revealing and placing, therefore Seekers controller chooses the order the cards are placed on the bottom.
-
so if a player using seeker wanted, he could physically reveal the top 3 of opponents deck?
-
That's what the card says to do. :) Other cards like Confusion allow you to handle your opponent's deck so it's not unheard of.
Granted this is not how I've ever seen Seeker played, but by the letter of the law that's what it says to do.
-
well, I think it would be important in this case so your opponent doesn't have knowledge of the order you put them under.
-
This is the first time that I have heard of the presence of the word "opponent" in an ability changing the performer of an action.
-
This is the first time that I have heard of the presence of the word "opponent" in an ability changing the performer of an action.
No performer of action is being changed by the word "opponent" in the ability.
The card and game rules tell you exactly what is to happen.
The same goes for Seeker. The card and game rules tell you exactly what is to happen.
Read the card from your perspective.
Romans 3:23 (‘Revealer’)
Type: Lost Soul • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: When you draw this card, each opponent must reveal the top two cards of his draw pile. Place each revealed Lost Soul in owner's Land of Bondage. Place the rest beneath owner's draw pile.
Apply to this scenario and I am your Opponent.
If you (Bubbleboy) DRAW the Revealer, I (777Godspeed) REVEAL the top 2 cards of MY deck to you and then I (777Godspeed) put them on the bottom of my deck in any order. Nothing on the card indicates that the one who DRAWS the Revealer chooses the order they are put on bottom. Game rules tells us how to complete the action.
Godspeed,
Mike
-
Cards placed in a draw pile typically specify a particular location in the draw pile (e.g., bottom). If a player must place multiple cards at the same time, that player may choose the order of the cards being placed (e.g., Feast of Trumpets and The Bronze Laver).
So in effect, you are saying that the placing player here is referring to the player physically placing the cards, and not the holder of the card that is causing the placing? I could see it going either way.
-
Hey,
well, I think it would be important in this case so your opponent doesn't have knowledge of the order you put them under.
The cards are revealed before they are placed under the deck (so they are visible). They are then placed under the deck one at a time so your opponent will know what over they are in under the deck based on what order they leave the revealed state.
I agree with all of the comments of Gabe in this thread.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
where does it say they are placed one at a time? in fact, 'place the rest' would seem to strongly suggest it is all done in one action.