Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Matman on July 06, 2009, 12:38:15 AM
-
If I have the exchanger in my land of bondage and exchange it with a LS in my opponents land of bondage does my opponent have the ability to use the exchanger during their preperation phase?
-
Yes :)
-
Thanks for the quick response
-
A fun thing to do is exchange for a lost soul that they can't get to right now (e.g. Female only/3-liner that you half rescued) and then use SOG/NJ and rescue the exchanger and another lost soul and then they are stuck :P.
-
What a great stategy.
-
Here's an additional question: Can the Exchanger be used to grab your opponent's Lost Soul that is being held in a site?
-
Yep, but the exchanger also goes into that site.
-
Okay, cool. I was just wondering because when I played Kevin, he had the site discard Lost Soul in a site and I was wondering if I could snag it to make him discard a card. :p But now I know, and knowing is half the battle!
-
Okay, cool. I was just wondering because when I played Kevin, he had the site discard Lost Soul in a site and I was wondering if I could snag it to make him discard a card. :p But now I know, and knowing is half the battle!
You can do that, sure, but I think it only happens when either soul is out of a site. That is, if both the site d/c and the exchanger are in a site already, exchnaging them doesn't make your opponent d/c from hand. That could get messy.
-
name droper LOL ;D
-
Okay, cool. I was just wondering because when I played Kevin, he had the site discard Lost Soul in a site and I was wondering if I could snag it to make him discard a card. :p But now I know, and knowing is half the battle!
You can do that, sure, but I think it only happens when either soul is out of a site. That is, if both the site d/c and the exchanger are in a site already, exchnaging them doesn't make your opponent d/c from hand. That could get messy.
Well, what I meant was if my Exchanger is not in a site but his Site Discard Lost Soul is, could I exchange the Exchanger with his Site Discard, putting my Exchanger in his site and his Site Discard not in a site. Then I was thinking I could put the Site Discard I just exchanged from my opponent into my own site to make him discard. I figure since the Site Removal Lost Soul can remove the Site Discard Lost Soul, then I can put it back into a site to make my opponent discard, the principle might be the same here.
-
Well, what I meant was if my Exchanger is not in a site but his Site Discard Lost Soul is, could I exchange the Exchanger with his Site Discard, putting my Exchanger in his site and his Site Discard not in a site. Then I was thinking I could put the Site Discard I just exchanged from my opponent into my own site to make him discard. I figure since the Site Removal Lost Soul can remove the Site Discard Lost Soul, then I can put it back into a site to make my opponent discard, the principle might be the same here.
Yep that works. My comment was regarding switching between sites. But yes, if you did as you suggested, your opponent would have to d/c from hand.
-
Well, what I meant was if my Exchanger is not in a site but his Site Discard Lost Soul is, could I exchange the Exchanger with his Site Discard, putting my Exchanger in his site and his Site Discard not in a site. Then I was thinking I could put the Site Discard I just exchanged from my opponent into my own site to make him discard. I figure since the Site Removal Lost Soul can remove the Site Discard Lost Soul, then I can put it back into a site to make my opponent discard, the principle might be the same here.
Yep that works. My comment was regarding switching between sites. But yes, if you did as you suggested, your opponent would have to d/c from hand.
Okay, cool. So as long as my Exchanger is *not* being held in a site when the exchange is made, I can put the Site Discard Lost Soul into a site to make my opponent discard?
-
From what I understand, yes. If you exchange for the site d/c from a site, you wouldn't be 'placing' the site d/c in a site, as it was already placed. That's how I see it anyway. But if you ever take the site d/c from your general LoB and place it in a site, your opponent must d/c, no matter how many times it's happened before.
-
Awesome. This will prevent my opponent from exchanging with the Site Discard I just took from him and making me discard again, since he'd be exchanging from a site.
-
I disagree (I believe). To me, placing a lost soul in a site is the act of a lost soul being placed in a site, regardless whether it came from the general LoB or an exchanger. I don't really see the difference.
If I'm wrong, multi just got a lot less fun. :(
-
I disagree (I believe). To me, placing a lost soul in a site is the act of a lost soul being placed in a site, regardless whether it came from the general LoB or an exchanger. I don't really see the difference.
If I'm wrong, multi just got a lot less fun. :(
I just double-checked the Lost Soul in question. It doesn't specify it has to have been put in a site from your Land of Bondage, just that "when this Lost Soul is put in a site" the ability triggers. Hmm. You may be right, Cameron.
-
I disagree (I believe). To me, placing a lost soul in a site is the act of a lost soul being placed in a site, regardless whether it came from the general LoB or an exchanger. I don't really see the difference.
If I'm wrong, multi just got a lot less fun. :(
Honestly, I could go either way. I just think it would be kinda crazy if you and an opponent could go back and forth d/c'ing from each others' hands. So I've always assumed it could only be 'put' in a site from a general LoB, and that switching from site to site wouldn't count. I could be wrong though.
-
Do NOT take this as official, but I can't see any reason why the above wouldn't work. You are putting the soul in a site, so its ability should trigger.
Kevin Shride
-
exchange =! put. That's been the ruling since the exchanger LS was released.
-
exchange =! put. That's been the ruling since the exchanger LS was released.
I am inclined to agree with that, but I can't really find any evidence. I guess we'll have to wait until someone officialer than Kevin says something about it.
-
There's a 4 page discussion (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=9309.0) on this topic already with comments by Bryon, Schaef and Tim.
-
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem an official position was reached in the other thread. Personally, I would be all for allowing the special ability to activate if it was moved from a site to another site by the Exchanger. After all, don't other abilities trigger if you move it from a site to a site, such as the Female-only Lost Soul?
-
hehe, I love how I spent 2 pages a year ago arguing the other way that I do now..... LOL
-
When you switch lost souls by exchanging them then are taken out of one land of bondage and "put" into the other land of bondage. If this means that the discard LS is put into a sight then it would cause your opponent to discard a card from hand.
Rob M
Local, District and State Tournament Host
Not that I am more official but it seems like sound logic to me.
Switch your cards and do what the special ability says. I believe that I have had the deck discard LS exchanged on me, causing me to discard a card from my deck when it was exchanged into my opponents LoB and Site.
-
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem an official position was reached in the other thread.
No official position was reached? :miss:
Tim Mirez, who has an impressive track record for being correct, starts out the thread by saying it works.
Schaef, who is official, says it works.
Tim "SirNobody" Maly says it doesn't work based on the way he wants to define "placed" in the future, not based on current rules.
Bryon who is also official says that it works unless someone can convince him otherwise (there's no indication that happened).
When Schaef and Bryon agree on something there is a less than zero percent chance that they're wrong. That tells me that trading the "Wanderer" LS from a site for the "Site Discard" LS or the "Deck Discard" LS allows the discard ability to take place.
-
Cool, what about the site remover then? does that work?
-
Cool, what about the site remover then? does that work?
I think the ability says "when drawn...". If that's the case it wouldn't work if you exchange for it.
-
Bryon who is also official says that it works unless someone can convince him otherwise (there's no indication that happened).
Bryon ruled this way when I tried the combo at a district early this year.
-
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem an official position was reached in the other thread.
No official position was reached? :miss:
Tim Mirez, who has an impressive track record for being correct, starts out the thread by saying it works.
Schaef, who is official, says it works.
Tim "SirNobody" Maly says it doesn't work based on the way he wants to define "placed" in the future, not based on current rules.
Bryon who is also official says that it works unless someone can convince him otherwise (there's no indication that happened).
When Schaef and Bryon agree on something there is a less than zero percent chance that they're wrong. That tells me that trading the "Wanderer" LS from a site for the "Site Discard" LS or the "Deck Discard" LS allows the discard ability to take place.
Well, I'm just curious: I realize that the people you mentioned are authoritative voices, but if they gave their input then why did an argument ensue for four pages? I mean, if that's the way it is, I'll accept it. Why can't there just be acceptance when an authoritative decision is made?
-
This works whenever a soul is put into that Site in any way for any reason. It is not reliant on a "place" special ability, only the act of going from not-in-the-Site to in-the-Site.
-
Hey,
I stand by my position expressed in the other thread. Exchanging between two sites is exchanging not putting.
If this ruling goes against my position I weep for the future of Type 1 - Multiplayer.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Right, because the present is so great.
-
I stand by my position expressed in the other thread. Exchanging between two sites is exchanging not putting.
I see no reason why it can't be both. Exchange is an ability. Putting something in a Site is just putting it in a Site.
-
I stand by my position expressed in the other thread. Exchanging between two sites is exchanging not putting.
I see no reason why it can't be both. Exchange is an ability. Putting something in a Site is just putting it in a Site.
So, if I use
Nebushasban
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Crimson • Ability: 3 / 3 • Class: Warrior • Special Ability: You may exchange a Lost Soul in opponent’s territory with a Lost Soul in your territory. • Identifiers: OT Male Human,
To exchange my opponents deck discard lost soul with my own (both in sites), do I get to discard two cards from the top of his deck because I am putting both lost souls into sites?
-
So, if I use
Nebushasban
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Crimson • Ability: 3 / 3 • Class: Warrior • Special Ability: You may exchange a Lost Soul in opponent’s territory with a Lost Soul in your territory. • Identifiers: OT Male Human,
To exchange my opponents deck discard lost soul with my own (both in sites), do I get to discard two cards from the top of his deck because I am putting both lost souls into sites?
Assuming Schaef's position to be correct, then it would certainly seem so. This and other potential combos are why I would tend to favor my original position. While I have never really seen widespread abuse of this strategy, it does unsettle me somewhat. Especially since Nebby would be able to do this every block, without your opponent ever getting a chance to do the exchange himself.
-
If exchanging LS between sites counts as "putting" them there, why doesn't exchanging 7Sons with a demon in your DC pile count as "discarding" 7sons?
EDIT: Fixed ._.;
-
If exchanging LS between sites counts as "putting" them there, why doesn't exchanging 7Sons with a demon in your DC pile count as "discarding" 7sons?
I assume that was the question you meant to ask? I think it might have to do with the word 'put' which isn't really defined in Redemption terminology, so we're stuck with plain old English, where it would seem to work as Schaef argued. If it said 'place', I think that an argument could be made, but while I don't like it, I am beginning to think I agree with Schaef et al.