Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: everytribe on July 27, 2009, 12:12:02 AM
-
If I use the Destroyers first ability(Negate the protect ability on an evil Fortress.) but not the second ability
(You may discard a silver Enhancement from hand to discard an Evil Character in a territory.). Do I have to remove him from the game?
The Destroyer
Type: Hero Char. • Brigade: Silver • Ability: 11 / 7 • Class: Warrior • Special Ability: Negate the protect ability on an evil Fortress. You may discard a silver Enhancement from hand to discard an Evil Character in a territory. Then, remove this Hero from the game after battle.
-
No. They are seperate abilities.
-
No,
Its sort of like a double cost = gain ability, except the second cost is worded after the gain.
I read it as:
Negate the protect ability on an evil fortress. you may discard a silver enhancement from the game to discard an evil character in a territory, if you do so remove this character from the game after battle.
It really should have been a Comma instead of a Period there. It would mak the card much clearer.
EDIT: Insta-Posted by Jan.
-
Don't write so much.
-
I like to lay out my reasons as to why I support a particular side, rather than simply agreeing, besides my fingers can use the exercise.
-
Aren't you a fit man.
-
I read it as:
Negate the protect ability on an evil fortress. you may discard a silver enhancement from the game to discard an evil character in a territory, if you do so remove this character from the game after battle.
It really should have been a Comma instead of a Period there. It would mak the card much clearer.
EDIT: Insta-Posted by Jan.
I agree, a comma would have been better. The first sentence says negate the ability on a fortress. The second sentence says you may or may not do this. The third sentence just says Then remove the Hero from thre game.
-
But since cards are ruled by what they say, not what they should have been, I believe Janissary is correct, you can negate the protect on an evil fortress, with out removing The Destroyer from the game.
-
But since cards are ruled by what they say, not what they should have been, I believe Janissary is correct, you can negate the protect on an evil fortress, with out removing The Destroyer from the game.
I don't believe The Destroyer was ever meant to be removed from the game for negating the protect ability on an evil fortress. There are plenty of cards that negate abilities (protect and otherwise) without being removed from the game. I think the issue was the comma should have been in the ability instead of a period to make it a little more clear that the removal of The Destroyer from the game occurs after you discard an evil character in a territory.