Author Topic: Shuffler LS vs Thorns LS (Read 3992 times)

Josh · « **on:** July 24, 2011, 09:51:01 PM »

If I SoG/NJ and target Thorns LS with SoG and Shuffler with NJ, do all souls get shuffled?

II Samuel 23_6 (Pi)
Type: Lost Soul • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: While this card is in play, protect each Lost Soul in play from being shuffled, placed under draw pile, or exchanged.

Ezekiel 31_14 (Ki)
Type: Lost Soul • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: When this Lost Soul is rescued, all other Lost Souls not held in Sites are shuffled into each player's own draw pile.

Bobbert · « **Reply #1 on:** July 24, 2011, 09:57:45 PM »

I would think so. Thorns is no longer in play, it's in the LoR. I'm not the most reliable source, though

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #2 on:** July 24, 2011, 09:59:33 PM »

I would vote no due the simultaneous nature of SOG/NJ.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #3 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:01:36 PM »

AO is correct.

Ryupeco11 · « **Reply #4 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:02:29 PM »

I agree with Alex

Arch Angel · « **Reply #5 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:03:41 PM »

Are you guys sure? Because with "simultaneous" banding you choose the "order" things activate. Couldn't you similarly target Thorns first, then Shuffler, causing Shuffler to technically trigger after Thorns is no longer in play?

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #6 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:04:34 PM »

Quote from: Arch Angel on July 24, 2011, 10:03:41 PM

Are you guys sure? Because with "simultaneous" banding you choose the "order" things activate. Couldn't you similarly target Thorns first, then Shuffler, causing Shuffler to technically trigger after Thorns is no longer in play?

No, because both leave play simultaneously.

browarod · « **Reply #7 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:24:34 PM »

It depends on what the definition of "when rescued" is. If it means "when this card is selected as the target of rescue for a successful rescue attempt or good dominant" then Alex is right. If it means "when this card is on its way to the land of redemption after being rescued" or "when this card is placed in a land of redemption after being rescued" then Alex would be incorrect and Lost Souls not in sites would be shuffled.

I'm inclined to lean towards the latter since I've never had anyone activate "when rescued" abilities while the Lost Soul they're rescuing is still sitting in territory.

Arch Angel · « **Reply #8 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:27:54 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on July 24, 2011, 10:04:34 PM

No, because both leave play simultaneously.

But with the Banding example, they all technically enter battle at the same time, but their abilities resolve in a specific sequence.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #9 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:29:08 PM »

Quote from: Arch Angel on July 24, 2011, 10:27:54 PM

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on July 24, 2011, 10:04:34 PM
No, because both leave play simultaneously.
But with the Banding example, they all technically enter battle at the same time, but their abilities resolve in a specific sequence.

There is no example you can compare to SOG/NJ. I have been told it's the only truly simultaneous action in the game by an elder.

browarod · « **Reply #10 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:36:03 PM »

Whether or not they leave play simultaneously isn't really the question here, though. The question is whether "while this is in play" stops before or at the same time that "when rescued" triggers.

I honestly don't see why it WOULDN'T shuffle. Lost Souls in territory/play are not rescued, rescued Lost Souls are not in territory/play, therefore a Lost Soul that triggers upon rescue by definition shouldn't be stopped by a Lost Soul that needs to be in play to protect.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #11 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:38:02 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on July 24, 2011, 10:29:08 PM

There is no example you can compare to SOG/NJ. I have been told it's the only truly simultaneous action in the game by an elder.

You must play the cards simultaneously, but that does not imply that the LSs leave play simultaneously. NJ says to rescue an "additional" LS, so there had to be a previous one, by definition.

What have the elders to say? [spoken with an Old English accent]

Arch Angel · « **Reply #12 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:38:27 PM »

What I was told is that it's the only time 2 cards are ever played simultaneously, but that their abilities still activate separately because nothing in redemption is truly simultaneous.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #13 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:44:59 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on July 24, 2011, 10:38:02 PM

What have the elders to say? [spoken with an Old English accent]

Search is our friend

Quote from: Gabe on January 24, 2009, 07:27:57 PM

Right after Priests came out Bryon ruled that souls will not shuffle if you rescue the "Shuffler" and "Thorns" LS with SoG/NJ.

browarod · « **Reply #14 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:48:45 PM »

What was his reason for ruling that way?

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #15 on:** July 24, 2011, 10:50:24 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on July 24, 2011, 10:44:59 PM

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on July 24, 2011, 10:38:02 PM
What have the elders to say? [spoken with an Old English accent]
Search is our friend

It's not my friend. I can't find anything with that.

Quote from: Gabe on January 24, 2009, 07:27:57 PM

Right after Priests came out Bryon ruled that souls will not shuffle if you rescue the "Shuffler" and "Thorns" LS with SoG/NJ.

This ruling was years ago. If the REG and rulebook are outdated, then I suggest that any post before Nats 2010 is also outdated.

Gabe · « **Reply #16 on:** July 24, 2011, 11:42:25 PM »

I agree with Prof, who quoted Gabe, who paraphrased Bryon.

browarod · « **Reply #17 on:** July 25, 2011, 12:09:31 AM »

Again, what is the reasoning behind that decision? By the time shuffler is rescued thorns is no longer in play so I don't see why it wouldn't shuffle.

*feels ignored, puts enhancement on Golgotha....*

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #18 on:** July 25, 2011, 12:14:19 AM »

Quote from: browarod on July 25, 2011, 12:09:31 AM

*feels ignored, puts enhancement on Golgotha....*

That's funny

As for the reasoning, I'm guessing that it has to do with the "unique situation" of the simultaneous play of SoG/NJ. You'd really have to ask Bryon to know for sure what his reasoning was. However, unless any elder wants to post that they disagree with this standing ruling, then it is unlikely to be discussed on the other side to overturn it.

I can see it both ways, and don't really care which way it goes, so I'm fine with the status quo.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #19 on:** July 25, 2011, 12:26:22 AM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on July 25, 2011, 12:14:19 AM

...so I'm fine with the status quo.

You obviously have not seen The Schaef's avatar lately....

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #20 on:** July 25, 2011, 12:34:18 AM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on July 25, 2011, 12:26:22 AM

You obviously have not seen The Schaef's avatar lately....

Actually I have. And I think it was his avatar that originally led to my watching of Dr. Horrible's Sing-a-long Blog

TechnoEthicist · « **Reply #21 on:** July 25, 2011, 12:36:45 AM »

How is this different than using SOG/NJ to rescue let's say a generic lost soul and Shuffler simultaneously? How is that any different? if they are simultaneous then only one should be rescued. If not then they are in fact NOT simultaneous and you choose to rescue the generic and THEN the shuffler.

browarod · « **Reply #22 on:** July 25, 2011, 12:59:34 AM »

Even if they are rescued simultaneously, they would both leave play and be "rescued" at the same time, so I still don't see why the shuffler couldn't shuffle. As far as I know, leaving play happens before they are assigned the "rescued" status in which case thorns is no longer in play when shuffler triggers.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #23 on:** July 25, 2011, 12:23:45 PM »

I agree that the current ruling is that shuffler doesn't shuffle (as has been ruled for years), however, I'm not 100% sure if I understand why. Both the shuffle of the shuffler and the ceasement of protection of Thorns could be considered to be triggered abilities (or ceasement of an ability, in the Thorns case), in which case, wouldn't the person who triggered them get to choose which happens first? I'm not necessarily trying to change the status quo, I just think that a good explanation from those who made/agree with the original ruling would help clarify the confusion of myself and the others here.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #24 on:** July 25, 2011, 03:23:00 PM »

Cessation?

Professoralstad · « **Reply #25 on:** July 25, 2011, 03:49:00 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on July 25, 2011, 03:23:00 PM

Cessation?

Sure. Whatever. Englishes are a dumb langauges anyway...

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #26 on:** July 26, 2011, 09:01:29 AM »

I like Prof. explanation best as i see these as triggered abilities also and the player activating these triggers should choose which activates first.

Daniel TS RED · « **Reply #27 on:** July 26, 2011, 09:11:51 AM »

If this doesn't work, then using SoG/NJ on the shuffler and fbtn LS doesn't either right? ( In regards to shuffling all the LSs. )

Arch Angel · « **Reply #28 on:** July 26, 2011, 10:13:02 AM »

Quote from: Daniel TS RED on July 26, 2011, 09:11:51 AM

If this doesn't work, then using SoG/NJ on the shuffler and fbtn LS doesn't either right? ( In regards to shuffling all the LSs. )

That won't work regardless. FBTN's ability doesn't stop the moment it leaves play. It stops the phase /after/ it leaves play. Just like an artfact.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #29 on:** July 29, 2011, 12:28:47 AM »

Thorns wasn't negated. Therefore, it's still active until the end of the round.

Master KChief · « **Reply #30 on:** July 29, 2011, 12:31:29 AM »

thorns actually says 'while this card is in play'.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #31 on:** July 29, 2011, 12:51:13 AM »

My point still stands, it's still active, but the trigger isn't triggered, so my point's useless.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #32 on:** July 29, 2011, 11:03:36 AM »

so whats the ruling on thorns+shuffler w/ SoG+NJ?

Gabe · « **Reply #33 on:** July 29, 2011, 11:50:52 AM »

Quote from: RTSmaniac on July 29, 2011, 11:03:36 AM

so whats the ruling on thorns+shuffler w/ SoG+NJ?

The same as it's always been.

TechnoEthicist · « **Reply #34 on:** July 29, 2011, 12:24:09 PM »

Can we get some clarification as to why this is the case and how this is different than using SoG and NJ on shuffler and any other soul?

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #35 on:** July 29, 2011, 01:03:08 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on July 29, 2011, 11:50:52 AM

Quote from: RTSmaniac on July 29, 2011, 11:03:36 AM
so whats the ruling on thorns+shuffler w/ SoG+NJ?

The same as it's always been.

So we can rule it same as we always have? Awesome!

So here in Florida, you can rescue the Thorns with SoG, then the Shuffler with NJ, to shuffle all remaining LSs not in sites.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #36 on:** July 29, 2011, 01:06:13 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on July 29, 2011, 01:03:08 PM

Quote from: Gabe on July 29, 2011, 11:50:52 AM
Quote from: RTSmaniac on July 29, 2011, 11:03:36 AM
so whats the ruling on thorns+shuffler w/ SoG+NJ?

The same as it's always been.

So we can rule it same as we always have? Awesome!

So here in Florida, you can rescue the Thorns with SoG, then the Shuffler with NJ, to shuffle all remaining LSs not in sites.

Unfortunately, not. It's the same as its been since Bryon ruled on it years ago. I still would like some clarification though, and maybe I'll be just the kind of guy who will end up picking a fight about it on the other side of the boards.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #37 on:** July 29, 2011, 01:08:11 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on July 29, 2011, 01:06:13 PM

I still would like some clarification though, and maybe I'll be just the kind of guy who will end up picking a fight about it on the other side of the boards.

WOO-HOO! Professor, Professor, he's our man, if he can't do it, no one can! Goooooooo Professoralstad!!

browarod · « **Reply #38 on:** July 29, 2011, 07:41:18 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on July 29, 2011, 01:08:11 PM

Quote from: Professoralstad on July 29, 2011, 01:06:13 PM
I still would like some clarification though, and maybe I'll be just the kind of guy who will end up picking a fight about it on the other side of the boards.

WOO-HOO! Professor, Professor, he's our man, if he can't do it, no one can! Goooooooo Professoralstad!!

I agree with this sentiment. Hopefully we can get some kind of explanation ~~so we can proceed to argue it and get the ruling changed~~ so we can sleep better at night.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #39 on:** August 01, 2011, 09:43:03 AM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on July 29, 2011, 01:06:13 PM

It's the same as its been since Bryon ruled on it years ago. I still would like some clarification though, and maybe I'll be just the kind of guy who will end up picking a fight about it on the other side of the boards.

It looks like this will stay the same for Nats (to be consistent). However, you can expect an announcement to be made at Nats regarding how this will be played in the future

SomeKittens · « **Reply #40 on:** August 01, 2011, 10:43:01 AM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on August 01, 2011, 09:43:03 AM

Quote from: Professoralstad on July 29, 2011, 01:06:13 PM
It's the same as its been since Bryon ruled on it years ago. I still would like some clarification though, and maybe I'll be just the kind of guy who will end up picking a fight about it on the other side of the boards.
It looks like this will stay the same for Nats (to be consistent). However, you can expect an announcement to be made at Nats regarding how this will be played in the future

Oh the suspense!

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #41 on:** August 02, 2011, 06:39:32 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on August 01, 2011, 09:43:03 AM

Quote from: Professoralstad on July 29, 2011, 01:06:13 PM
It's the same as its been since Bryon ruled on it years ago. I still would like some clarification though, and maybe I'll be just the kind of guy who will end up picking a fight about it on the other side of the boards.
It looks like this will stay the same for Nats (to be consistent). However, you can expect an announcement to be made at Nats regarding how this will be played in the future

This is Elder Speak for "Rob has decided to ban New Jerusalem." Problem resolved; please move along.

News:

Author Topic: Shuffler LS vs Thorns LS (Read 3992 times)

browarod

browarod

browarod

browarod

browarod

browarod