Cactus Game Design Message Boards

I still think this ruling makes absolutely no logical sense at all. I realize it makes sense from a ruling perspective: if everything is consistent it's easier to rule on; but common sense wise it falls flat. Why would you intentionally create cards with effects like this, that go completely against logic, as you say they did with the Assyrian one?

Logic is not a requirement for Fun & Fellowship. 

It is for me, I'm the kind of person that has the most fun when everything makes sense

I understand that the Assyrian one is for Assyrians, using it outside that strategy would be stupid as it could just be negated, it just confused me why there wasn't something like "If played by an Assyrian" rather than this complicated negation strategy to tie it into an Assyrian strategy (other than to make it better with more Assyrians).

As for Sinning Hand, I know you're right, I just found it strange that balance would be left up to chance (albeit it a very low chance of backfiring). Not that this is bad, just interesting

I basically agree with this.  I have also thought that the key was the definition of discard. 

I understand that you can have zero cards, half of zero is zero, your hand or deck can be zero cards etc.  I don't disagree with the logic or math in those arguments.

The problem for me is that discard is an action word and if nothing happened then you can't logically say that the action happened.  Running 0 miles is the same as not running; it didn't happen.  So it is possible for your hand to be 0 and it is possible to discard your hand which could be zero but if it is zero then no discarding actually happened so any condition that requires the discard to happen is not met. 

So, are you saying that "discard" means different things depending on if it is a cost or a benefit?

Isn't it easier to say "discard zero cards" is possible in both cases?  Why is ET/Authority "discard all evil characters in play" possible when there are no ECs in play, while "discard all evil characters in play to draw a card" is not possible if there are no evil characters in play?

As Tim said, either they need to be treated the same or differently.  Rob+playtesters decided to treat them the same.  If it is possible to have a discard ability discard zero cards as a benefit, then it is possible as a cost as well.

I don't think cost and benefit should be considered the same here.  If someone commands me to run 0 miles, I can do nothing and obey that command.  But if I have to run miles in order to burn calories, I cannot run 0 miles and still expect to lose weight.  It can be a variable cost (some people have to run more than others) but I can't do nothing and get the benefit that comes from doing something.


A hypothetical scenario:  I have previously placed Abomination into my opponent's territory.  I make a rescue attempt with my only hero.  My opponent blocks and has initiative.  They play a new enhancement that makes my hero have no brigade for the rest of the turn (demonic blockade? already does this to sites).  They still have initiative and band in Emperor Vitellius.  Because x = 0 they get to draw 0 cards.  Do I still get to discard one of my choice from Abomination?  Clearly they can draw 0 cards but I don't see how my condition (cost) is met so I can discard.  For Abomination the important part seems to be that fact that they drew cards not how many they drew. 

I understand that the Assyrian card was probably written with your idea in mind but we have had conflicting ideas in the game before and I don't think it would actually be a problem for that card to resolve the game this way.