Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: RTSmaniac on May 28, 2009, 01:45:54 PM
-
if i exchange SWS with an evil character set aside with a setaside enhancment-
what happens to the set aside enhancment?
-
nothing. SWS is simply exchanged for that character. It does not do anything to the set aside enhancement as far as I know. What is the exact play? there may be something in the wording of the cards that might do something but not as far as I can tell
-
my understanding for set aside is that by default when the character targeted by the set aside returns then the enhancment is discarded.
if i set aside a character with large tree and exchange the character with SWS, is the enhancment discarded?
does SWS now increase 1/1 on upkeep?
-
From how I understand the way SWS works, SWS takes the place of the EC. The set aside does not discard itself because it is stil working on an EC, it just happens that that EC is not the one it began with. The Evil Charachter was not "returned" to territory, it was "exchanged" into battle. SWS would continue to get the 1/1 increase each turn.
-
doesnt sound like something that would get a positive response.
-
I don't see why this wouldn't work.
-
Hey,
my understanding for set aside is that by default when the character targeted by the set aside returns then the enhancment is discarded.
This is correct, so when SWS exchanges with the character that was set-aside, the set-aside enhancement is discarded.
SWS would then remain in the set aside area until the player that controls it at that point decides to bring it back. It does not get 1/1 increases each upkeep (in the same way that it would not become poisoned if it was exchanged with a poisoned character). It just sits in the set-aside area and does nothing until it is brought back.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
You've been wrong on a ton of rulings lately. Well, always, but more lately. What are you basing the previous post on?
-
Hey,
You've been wrong on a ton of rulings lately. Well, always, but more lately. What are you basing the previous post on?
My first thought was, "you're right, I have been kinda off lately" but then I looked back at my posts over the last month and only found four threads where people had disagreed with me. One of those four is still being discussed by the Powers That Be so the jury's still out on that one [the John (Promo) thread]. One of those four led to Rob saying "I see Tim's point" and "That argument supports Tim" (and that thread ended exactly how I expected it to, with a rule change in the works so that my point is no longer valid) [the Ignoring from the territory thread]. So I'm not sure I agree with you that I've been wrong a ton lately.
But I also went back and looked at the AIM conversation I had with Mike Berkenpas about a year ago that was the basis of the answer I gave in my previous post and found it less decisive on the matter than I remember it being, but I still believe my ruling is correct based in part on my foreknowledge of the 2009 REG.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Would the set-aside character retain any gained numbers (1/1 type increase, since anything requiring a set number of turns wouldn't be finished) from that set-aside?
-
Set-aside cards remain on the character in the set-aside area until the character is returned to the field of play. ~REG
I think that Tim is correct. ;D
-
Would the set-aside character retain any gained numbers (1/1 type increase, since anything requiring a set number of turns wouldn't be finished) from that set-aside?
Gained abilities from previous turns cannot be lost (until discarded). Since the 1/1 type set-asides say "per turn," I would guess that they keep all gains from previous turns.
-
Set-aside cards remain on the character in the set-aside area until the character is returned to the field of play. ~REG
I think that Tim is correct. ;D
Yes, but don't forget the ruling on Aurioch. At least for that card, exchange abilities replace the previous card exactly. Therefore, either he is able to stop a RA in Rescuer's Choice, SWS becomes the card that was set aside and may benefit from the set-aside card, or there is a ruling inconsistency.
-
You mean Nebuwhatshisface. That may not be constrained by the definition of an exchange ability, but rather by the definition of rescuer's choice (I don't remember).
At least for that card, exchange abilities replace the previous card exactly.
What is "replace exactly"? Take their weapon? Their poison/disease? Their gained abilities? Their "targetedness" (interrupt + exchange to change target of a battle winner)? The artifact they're holding?
-
Location and targeting, which is why Nebu doesn't make a successful block every time he goes out in T2.
-
Please...continue,
-
Hey,
My Belief/Understanding/Opinion is that exchange switches location and current targeting, but not targeting completed previously.
If I play Forest Fire on Gad then play Wheel Within a Wheel and exchange Gad for Jonah (bet you've never seen an example that used only prophets cards before :) ) Jonah doesn't gain the ignore Pale Green ability because it finished targeting Gad before the exchange happened. But if Paul's Girdle is used against Gad and you interrupt the battle and play Wheel Within a Wheel then Gad being targeted by Paul's Girdle is "pending" when the exchange happens so the target is changed to the character that replaces Gad and Jonah gets returned to hand.
With rescuer's choice the battle is still in progress so surrendering the lost soul is still "pending" so the target becomes the new lost soul when the lost souls are exchanged. In the set aside example the targeting was completed when the character was set aside, so when the exchange happens the targeted had completed and does not shift to the exchanged character.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
One of those four led to Rob saying "I see Tim's point" and "That argument supports Tim" (and that thread ended exactly how I expected it to, with a rule change in the works so that my point is no longer valid) [the Ignoring from the territory thread].
It's not a rule change if the scenario is ruled the same way before and after the thread.
That said, whether or not Tim is wrong in other threads, or to what extent, has no correlation to whether this ruling is correct. Either it is or it is not. I believe it is.
-
So what is the verdict here? Does SWS gain the set aside ability or not? I would argue that he does because you targeted a EC with a set aside enhancement and simply switched SWS. Since you exchanged the two the set aside is still going but on SWS because it exchanged itself making it the new target...? I can see this going both ways though, would like a ruling on it though.
-
gad
pauls girdle
inturrupt wheel within wheel
jonah
can an inturrupted girdle retarget another hero?
-
I've always thought you couldn't change a specific target. I know that Zimri retargets the entire field of battle if J's Strength is played, but that is a location, not [a] specific hero[es]. So I disagree with Tim's statement that Paul's Girdle can choose Jonah.
Kirk
-
gad
pauls girdle
inturrupt wheel within wheel
jonah
can an inturrupted girdle retarget another hero?
I'm curious... how did you plan on getting an interrupt and play next on a red hero? ;)
-
gad
...
I'm curious... how did you plan on getting an interrupt and play next on a red hero? ;)
Haven't you heard? Anything is possible with gad... :D
-
True, True... ;D Or maybe it's a spoiler!?!?!? ::)
-
battle cry + ET?