Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: katedid on December 27, 2011, 11:44:50 PM
-
If I have wheel within a wheel in hand and only have one angel in my deck and it is already in play, can I just place WWW on it? If so, do I still have to search my deck, even though I know I dont have any other angels?
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Silver/Green • Ability: None • Class: Territory • Special Ability: Search deck or discard pile for an O.T. angel and put it in play. Place on your angel: That Hero is protected from opponents’ Dominants and has Site access. • Play As: Search deck or discard pile for an O.T. angel and put it in play. Place on your angel. While it remains there, protect that Hero from opponents’ Dominants and has Site access.
-
WWW does not specify that you need to place it on the angel you searched for, so yes. Since the search is nonoptional, you still have to search.
-
Since the search is nonoptional, you still have to search.
Technically correct. However, if you just tell your opponent that you don't have any more angels in your deck, they probably will save you the time by telling you to not bother shuffling.
-
Since the search is nonoptional, you still have to search.
Technically correct. However, if you just tell your opponent that you don't have any more angels in your deck, they probably will save you the time by telling you to not bother shuffling.
I'd argue that in any tournament games (at least at State level and above), the shuffle is obligatory and should be carried out regardless of how much the participants in a game don't want to waste time by shuffling.
-
Since the search is nonoptional, you still have to search.
Technically correct. However, if you just tell your opponent that you don't have any more angels in your deck, they probably will save you the time by telling you to not bother shuffling.
I'd argue that in any tournament games (at least at State level and above), the shuffle is obligatory and should be carried out regardless of how much the participants in a game don't want to waste time by shuffling.
I agree, with cards like Susanna, Divination and Invoking Terror that can change the order of your deck, if there is a non-optional search, in a tournament match there should be shuffling.
-
Thanks I was wondering about the time wasting. I really dont like to waste time and appear to be stalling. I have had some issues with insane stallers in the past I really don't want to be included in that
-
I'd argue that in any tournament games (at least at State level and above), the shuffle is obligatory
If there are any known cards in the deck (ie. something put on the bottom, or Susanna putting stuff in certain order), then CA is totally right. But if your deck is already shuffled and you don't have any angels, then shuffling again serves NO purpose other than wasting time. If I was judging your tournament, I would encourage you NOT to shuffle an already randomized deck.
-
I'd argue that in any tournament games (at least at State level and above), the shuffle is obligatory
If there are any known cards in the deck (ie. something put on the bottom, or Susanna putting stuff in certain order), then CA is totally right. But if your deck is already shuffled and you don't have any angels, then shuffling again serves NO purpose other than wasting time. If I was judging your tournament, I would encourage you NOT to shuffle an already randomized deck.
Well, that's the thing. I've seen it ruled (and have ruled) that if a card says shuffle, you shuffle, unless there's a may ability. Regardless of whether it's stalling or not, I think it's unfair for there not to be an established precedent there.
-
I think it's unfair for there not to be an established precedent there.
There is precedent. There have been several times this has come up on the forum. A couple threads have even been recent. I (and other elders I think) have consistently given the same answer that I've given in this thread.
-
Fair enough. My only problem with that is that it would be extremely easy to abuse. If someone wants to shuffle their deck (via ability) to stall, they can simply carry out the ability that causes the shuffle and feign ignorance to not having X card in deck.
-
Fair enough. My only problem with that is that it would be extremely easy to abuse. If someone wants to shuffle their deck (via ability) to stall, they can simply carry out the ability that causes the shuffle and feign ignorance to not having X card in deck.
Well the extra time it takes to shuffle the deck (even in early game) could potentially change the outcome of the game. Slightly, but possibly.
-
Fair enough. My only problem with that is that it would be extremely easy to abuse.
If you play a card that says shuffle, then you do it. If you don't have any reason to search, and your deck is already random, then you don't have to. If you do anyway, then that's fine, it's just something that players don't HAVE to do if they don't want to. It's not so much a rule as it is a courtesy. And since it's not technically a rule, it can't be abused :)
-
In lower level play, I don't think it matters that much. However, in higher play, there should be a mandatory something.
Thinking about this some, I think that the search/shuffle could be placed under the same umbrella as cutting a deck.
-
oh yes it can cough jds cough waste about 15 minutes of every game with shuffling
-
oh yes it can cough jds cough waste about 15 minutes of every game with shuffling
Hey, let's not name names. Justin's a great player, and some want a better shuffle than others.
-
and i have np with a better shuffle until it eats up 15 minutes of my game
-
I think that's moot considering the time limitations on playing are so generous you can easily stall out a game in just a few turns without violating the letter of the law.
-
Fortunately, most of the time we have judges who are relatively no-nonsense.
Also, Pol, you're looking pretty leeet today.
-
I know that massive time wasting is a violation of common courtesy rules, but is there actually an established rule on stalling. I know alot of other compettive activities I have engaged in have time limits on moves/answeringquestions and its acceptable to stall until the end and encouraged if you know the answer right off the bat, like in Bible quizzing back in the day