Author Topic: Stuff. (Read 4964 times)

Rawrlolsauce! · « **on:** November 12, 2010, 11:44:33 PM »

I play Land Dispute. It takes an occupied site. Does the soul follow? I've always played it as no, however I'm pretty sure the only exception to the soul not following the site is discard.

My TSA is discarded and goes to chamber. A turn later, someone IoJs chamber. Does the angel return to deck after the 2 turns are up?

Can I reveal my hand if no ability allows me to?

The mighty Wanderer plays Birth Foretold and searches for Son of God. He the plays Mayhem, not realizing his SOG isn't protected from his own cards, so he then shuffles it back in. Then, on the feeble Ring Wraith's turn, he draws SOG and plays Mayhem.... keeping SOG in his hand beings Birth Foretold protected it. Is this epic? Y/Y.

Master Q · « **Reply #1 on:** November 12, 2010, 11:57:53 PM »

1. I think Land Dispute would say something like Hormah, where the wording would be "site and its contents". You only take a site, not anything in a site, same as Jacob's Dream.

2. You can't IoJ chamber, so this is impossible.

3. Why not? Just 'accidentally' place your cards face up on the table (but why would u want to

)

4. The protection on Birth Foretold doesn't carry over to the opponent's turn, so you'd have to get SoG and Mayhem off of the opponent's Mayhem draw.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #2 on:** November 13, 2010, 12:07:28 AM »

1.) It doesn't need to specify. It should carry over unless there is a game rule that says no, and I can't find one in the REG.
2.) Good point. Theoretically, if there was a chamber that wasn't set aside........
3.) That doesn't answer my question.
4.) I was told birth foretold's turn = round, similar to pentecost.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #3 on:** November 13, 2010, 12:31:07 AM »

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on November 13, 2010, 12:07:28 AM

1.) It doesn't need to specify. It should carry over unless there is a game rule that says no, and I can't find one in the REG.

The REG is out of date.

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on November 13, 2010, 12:07:28 AM

3.) That doesn't answer my question.

It kinda does. He can't find a reason that it wouldn't work.

Quote from: Master Q on November 12, 2010, 11:57:53 PM

4. The protection on Birth Foretold doesn't carry over to the opponent's turn, so you'd have to get SoG and Mayhem off of the opponent's Mayhem draw.

http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=23640.0

Master Q · « **Reply #4 on:** November 13, 2010, 01:03:40 AM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on November 13, 2010, 12:31:07 AM

Quote from: Master Q on November 12, 2010, 11:57:53 PM
4. The protection on Birth Foretold doesn't carry over to the opponent's turn, so you'd have to get SoG and Mayhem off of the opponent's Mayhem draw.
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=23640.0

In that topic, Maly also said this, which seems to follow my thought process on the whole turns/rounds mess:

Quote

Anything that is counting turns really means rounds. Other mention of turn (I can't think of any other than "end of turn") really means turn.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #5 on:** November 13, 2010, 09:25:57 AM »

Quote from: Master Q on November 13, 2010, 01:03:40 AM

In that topic, Maly also said this, which seems to follow my thought process on the whole turns/rounds mess:

Quote
Anything that is counting turns really means rounds. Other mention of turn (I can't think of any other than "end of turn") really means turn.

"Search deck for Isaac, Samson, John the Baptist, or Son of God. Protect cards with those titles from opponents' cards this turn."
Doesn't say "End of turn." It says "this turn" which is essentially counting one turn.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #6 on:** November 13, 2010, 10:16:56 AM »

1. The general default for occupied sites that leave the LoB is that LSs stay and everything else is discarded.

Instant Special Abilities > Discard or Remove > Default Conditions
• If a site, artifact, or character is discarded or returned to hand, discard all cards placed on it. If a card leaves the Land of Bondage, discard all evil cards placed on it other than Lost Souls or captured characters.

2. Chamber cannot be targeted by IoJ, so there is no need to discuss this.

3. No.

Instant Special Abilities > Search, Reveal, or Exchange > Special Conditions
• A card can only be revealed based on a special ability.

4. Maly's quote above said "other mention of turn," which "this turn" would qualify under. "Counting turns" means to do something for a set number of turns.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #7 on:** November 13, 2010, 07:16:21 PM »

What about cards that say next turn? Would that be for the whole next round? When does next turn begin?

Besieging the City (Ki)
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Gold • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Opponent may not draw cards or make a rescue attempt next turn. • Play As: Restrict opponent from drawing cards next turn and from making a rescue attempt next turn. • Identifiers: None • Verse: II Kings 24:11 • Availability: Kings booster packs (Common)

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #8 on:** November 13, 2010, 07:51:23 PM »

I would say that "next turn" is still under the "other mention of turn" category. Again, the "counting turns" category would only be for SAs that specifically state a number of turns.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #9 on:** November 13, 2010, 08:39:11 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on November 13, 2010, 10:16:56 AM

4. Maly's quote above said "other mention of turn," which "this turn" would qualify under. "Counting turns" means to do something for a set number of turns.

"This turn" is the same as "one turn."

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #10 on:** November 13, 2010, 08:39:49 PM »

Matt sooooo called the second one, only he said Journey to Sweden..

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #11 on:** November 13, 2010, 08:46:43 PM »

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on November 13, 2010, 08:39:49 PM

Matt sooooo called the second one, only he said Journey to Sweden..

Problem is, they still haven't answered the "hypothetical" question...so...answer for the second one?

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #12 on:** November 13, 2010, 11:16:09 PM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on November 13, 2010, 08:39:11 PM

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on November 13, 2010, 10:16:56 AM
4. Maly's quote above said "other mention of turn," which "this turn" would qualify under. "Counting turns" means to do something for a set number of turns.
"This turn" is the same as "one turn."

Is that what Maly said? I would disagree.

Quote from: Ring Wraith on November 13, 2010, 08:46:43 PM

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on November 13, 2010, 08:39:49 PM
Matt sooooo called the second one, only he said Journey to Sweden..
Problem is, they still haven't answered the "hypothetical" question...so...answer for the second one?

Answering a hypothetical question about a card as unique as Chamber of Angels seems pointless. If there is a desired result that you are looking for, then you will have to use real cards with real special abilities.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #13 on:** November 13, 2010, 11:34:47 PM »

Its pretty much just the idea: place here, do X after Y turns. It is negated before Y turns are up. Does X occur.

Nero's Realm would work too. I assume the answer is X does occur, otherwise set asides wouldn't make sense to me.

browarod · « **Reply #14 on:** November 14, 2010, 08:17:50 AM »

An example I can think of that seems to fit the "hypothetical question" is this:

If a hero is set aside via Mildewed House and MH is removed before those turns are up, does the hero still return after 2 turns?

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #15 on:** November 14, 2010, 10:17:32 AM »

Quote from: browarod on November 14, 2010, 08:17:50 AM

An example I can think of that seems to fit the "hypothetical question" is this:

If a hero is set aside via Mildewed House and MH is removed before those turns are up, does the hero still return after 2 turns?

A set-aside card is not required to keep a character in set aside (see also the Shame LS and Nebuchadnezzar's Pride). Mildewed House is an example of a card that sets aside a character, but does not go with them to the set aside area. The ability that set aside the character is an instant ability that completed on a previous turn (or phase in the same turn), so it cannot be negated, and removing it would not negate the ability anyway.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #16 on:** November 14, 2010, 12:44:28 PM »

That does not answer my question in the slightest.

-I set aside a hero with provisions. Provisions is discarded, my hero is set aside for two turns. Later, provisions is no longer active. My heroes still come back, because provisions said so.
-I set aside a hero via chamber. Chamber is negated later via an image of jealousy that says set aside. Does it act like provisions? (Coming back, beings it said so at one point)

If you don't want to answer a hypothetical question please don't post, as it isn't helpful. There will be someone out there who is willing.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #17 on:** November 14, 2010, 01:08:41 PM »

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on November 14, 2010, 12:44:28 PM

If you don't want to answer a hypothetical question please don't post, as it isn't helpful.

I was answering a specific scenario that was posted. If you don't like the answer then don't post.

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on November 14, 2010, 12:44:28 PM

There will be someone out there who is willing.

Apparently not. There is a reason for that. Hypothetical questions like the one you are asking are used to try to get the PtB to make a hypothetical ruling that can later be used against them. I would guess that the two of you have an idea in mind, but in order to make it work you need a quote from an elder from an unrelated ruling. There simply is no incentive for the PtB to give in to your guile.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #18 on:** November 14, 2010, 01:31:33 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on November 14, 2010, 01:08:41 PM

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on November 14, 2010, 12:44:28 PM
If you don't want to answer a hypothetical question please don't post, as it isn't helpful.

I was answering a specific scenario that was posted. If you don't like the answer then don't post.

He's probably more referring to Browarod. We have a specific scenario and want a specific answer. It'd help if an elder showed up.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #19 on:** November 14, 2010, 11:09:06 PM »

Chamber of Angels and Dust and Ashes are unique in that they are the only set-aside cards that specify a certain amount of turns that aren't discarded after the turns are up, and specify something other than the default for returning characters from set-aside. D&A is CBN, so it doesn't really matter in this situation.

Currently, there are no cards that can negate Chamber, however, if they could, I would rule that since the non-optional method of leaving the Fortress is negated, then you would be able to return Angels from Chamber like you would from any Fortress with a "Holds" identifier without a non-optional method of leaving the Fortress (like Disciples from Fishing Boat).

As to the other questions: LS's do not follow Sites for any reason, unless something like "and contents" is included in the ability affecting the Site.

There is no rule allowing you to reveal your hand whenever you feel like it. This could be an issue in multiplayer games, when there may be some advantage to letting an opponent know what you have, as a form of table talk. However, in a two-player game, I can't imagine anyone being upset that you showed him or her your hand. But according to a strict reading of the rules, it is not allowed.

"This turn" refers to only the time between the draw phase and the discard phase of one person. It is not the same thing as "one turn". So the BF situation described does not work.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #20 on:** November 15, 2010, 04:42:32 AM »

Quote

But according to a strict reading of the rules, it is not allowed.^{[citation needed]}

SomeKittens · « **Reply #21 on:** November 15, 2010, 10:35:43 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on November 15, 2010, 04:42:32 AM

Quote
But according to a strict reading of the rules, it is not allowed.^[1]

Quote from: Professoralstad on November 14, 2010, 11:09:06 PM

Currently, there are no cards that can negate Chamber, however, if they could, I would rule that since the non-optional method of leaving the Fortress is negated, then you would be able to return Angels from Chamber like you would from any Fortress with a "Holds" identifier without a non-optional method of leaving the Fortress (like Disciples from Fishing Boat).

So I could negate my own Chamber to return the Angels to play? (If such a card existed).

Professoralstad · « **Reply #22 on:** November 15, 2010, 11:25:52 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on November 15, 2010, 04:42:32 AM

Quote
But according to a strict reading of the rules, it is not allowed.^{[citation needed]}

Strict reading meaning that if there's no allowance for it in the rules, it is not allowed. As opposed to a loose reading, meaning that if there's no prohibition of it in the rules, it is allowed. I tend to favor the first option, though I won't necessarily say it is correct.

Like I said, in multiplayer I would say revealing your hand is akin to table talk, and as a judge I would rule it as such. In 2-player, I can't see any advantage to yourself of revealing your hand to your opponent, so even if it's not technically allowed, I, and most other players, probably wouldn't complain to a judge or anyone else if my opponent revealed his hand.

If there was a card to negate your Chamber and you played it, you could remove your Angels from there during your next Prep phase (or the same Prep phase if you negated Chamber during that phase) as with any Fortress with a Hold identifier that has no non-optional provision for removing characters from the Fortress.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #23 on:** November 15, 2010, 11:46:19 AM »

Is there any rule against talking (hypothetical question, there actually isn't)? If I ever start hosting tournaments again I'm going to let Multiplayer participants talk to their hearts' content, same goes for teams (although they'll probably want to use code).

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #24 on:** November 15, 2010, 12:01:43 PM »

This question stemmed from a multi game, although it didn't matter in my scenario. I was planning to reveal my hand to all players, but letting everyone know my hand could theoretically be an advantage.... so....

SomeKittens · « **Reply #25 on:** November 15, 2010, 02:27:31 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on November 15, 2010, 11:25:52 AM

If there was a card to negate your Chamber and you played it, you could remove your Angels from there during your next Prep phase (or the same Prep phase if you negated Chamber during that phase) as with any Fortress with a Hold identifier that has no non-optional provision for removing characters from the Fortress.

The Promo Panic Demon wouldn't work here, would it...
Panic Demon (P)

Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Orange • Ability: 2 / 4 • Class: None • Special Ability: Negate the special abilities on opponents' N.T. Fortresses. Evil banding abilities cannot be negated by good cards or artifacts. May band to Panic Demon. • Identifiers: Generic NT Male Demon • Verse: II Timothy 1:7 • Availability: Promotional cards (2008 Local Tournament)

EDIT: Just realized it said "opponents'". Drat.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #26 on:** November 15, 2010, 05:45:15 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on November 15, 2010, 11:25:52 AM

Quote from: Minister Polarius on November 15, 2010, 04:42:32 AM
Quote
But according to a strict reading of the rules, it is not allowed.^{[citation needed]}

Strict reading meaning that if there's no allowance for it in the rules, it is not allowed. As opposed to a loose reading, meaning that if there's no prohibition of it in the rules, it is allowed. I tend to favor the first option, though I won't necessarily say it is correct.

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on November 13, 2010, 10:16:56 AM

Instant Special Abilities > Search, Reveal, or Exchange > Special Conditions

• A card can only be revealed based on a special ability.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #27 on:** November 15, 2010, 05:49:34 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on November 15, 2010, 11:46:19 AM

Is there any rule against talking (hypothetical question, there actually isn't)?

The M · « **Reply #28 on:** November 15, 2010, 06:03:23 PM »

Talking is fine,
Tabletalk is frowned upon.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #29 on:** November 15, 2010, 06:17:05 PM »

Quote from: The M on November 15, 2010, 06:03:23 PM

Talking is fine,
Tabletalk is frowned upon.

Telling people what you have in your hand is not a problem with the rules.

browarod · « **Reply #30 on:** November 15, 2010, 06:37:21 PM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on November 15, 2010, 06:17:05 PM

Quote from: The M on November 15, 2010, 06:03:23 PM
Talking is fine,
Tabletalk is frowned upon.
Telling people what you have in your hand is not a problem with the rules.

YMT proved it is.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #31 on:** November 15, 2010, 06:44:30 PM »

Actually, "reveal" is a special ability that refers to facing your card toward your opponent so that they can view it. There is no official rule against talking or verbally letting your opponents know what is in your hand. This then becomes a trust/bluff issue, since you cannot legally prove that have what you say you have.

I agree that "tabletalk" is frowned upon, except in TEAMS.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #32 on:** November 15, 2010, 07:59:58 PM »

If I recall correctly, the teams rules allowed for a card to be revealed from hand, as long as it was universal.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #33 on:** November 15, 2010, 08:58:28 PM »

Quote from: SomeKittens on November 15, 2010, 07:59:58 PM

If I recall correctly, the teams rules allowed for a card to be revealed from hand, as long as it was universal.

I am somewhat new to TEAMS, but I was not aware of such a rule.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #34 on:** November 16, 2010, 12:06:54 AM »

http://ggamestore.com/home/teamsrules

Quote

If you choose to reveal a card or cards from your hand it must be universal disclosure.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #35 on:** November 16, 2010, 07:56:41 PM »

Oh, well that explains it. Silly New Englanders, playing by their own rules.

Live free or die!

SomeKittens · « **Reply #36 on:** November 16, 2010, 10:59:08 PM »

There was a large debate about the rules before Nats 2010

News:

Author Topic: Stuff. (Read 4964 times)

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk

Rawrlolsauce!

Warrior_Monk

Rawrlolsauce!

browarod

Rawrlolsauce!

Warrior_Monk

Rawrlolsauce!

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk

browarod