Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Noah on March 31, 2011, 07:31:51 PM
-
Does the pigs lost soul prevent draw abilities in set aside, like Fishing Boat or the draw set aside good enhancemets? I remember a post came up about the Enhancements and that they are gained abilities thus making them CBN. And I thought that cards in your set aside area couldn't be targeted unless refering to a specific card? If so, I was wondering if the ability to target a specific special abilty would work on a card in your set aside area.
-
Pigs does not prevent Fishing Boat. As to the set-asides, well....
-
umm randall i think your wrong fishing boat is not a hero so you can't use it to draw if pigs is out
-
umm randall i think your wrong fishing boat is not a hero so you can't use it to draw if pigs is out
Pigs LS defaults to in play. Boat is not in play, therefore Pigs LS can't touch it.
-
blah whatever disciples are stupid anyway
-
If pigs defaults to in play, why doesn't lampstand?
-
If pigs defaults to in play, why doesn't lampstand?
Who says it doesnt?
-
If pigs defaults to in play, why doesn't lampstand?
That has been asked and answered in previous threads.
Lampstand does not default to in play because it specifies where it targets: "not in battle."
If you are unsatisfied with that answer, then please read the entire thread regarding that ruling before deciding it necessary to bring it up again. :)
-
Does anyone happen to have the thread handy where the ruling was made that DoN can't touch Lampstand? I've learned to accept it, and even use it in a deck of mine, but the ruling has always sort of bothered me.
-
The general rule is that negate always beats protect.
However, because of the way DoN is worded, DoN discards the art first and it then negates the artifact that was discarded. Since the discard ability must happen for the negate to happen, Lampstand is safe from DoN.
Slightly complicated? Yes. Consistent? Yes.
If DoN said "Negate and discard an active artifact" then it could indeed take out Lampstand.
-
That actually makes sense, and satisfies me. Thanks.
I guess I've always assumed the rationale was something along the lines of "BUT IT'S PROTECTED", which is what bothered me.
-
The general rule is that negate always beats protect.
However, because of the way DoN is worded, DoN discards the art first and it then negates the artifact that was discarded. Since the discard ability must happen for the negate to happen, Lampstand is safe from DoN.
Slightly complicated? Yes. Consistent? Yes.
If DoN said "Negate and discard an active artifact" then it could indeed take out Lampstand.
OK then by that definition, I can play DoN on lampstand to negate (but not discard) it for whatever phase (battle, prep etc) in order to martyr someone in territory or play mayhem, but then Lampstands ability would reactivate during the next phase. correct?
-
The general rule is that negate always beats protect.
However, because of the way DoN is worded, DoN discards the art first and it then negates the artifact that was discarded. Since the discard ability must happen for the negate to happen, Lampstand is safe from DoN.
Slightly complicated? Yes. Consistent? Yes.
If DoN said "Negate and discard an active artifact" then it could indeed take out Lampstand.
OK then by that definition, I can play DoN on lampstand to negate (but not discard) it for whatever phase (battle, prep etc) in order to martyr someone in territory or play mayhem, but then Lampstands ability would reactivate during the next phase. correct?
Nope.
Although I argued (fervently) against the ruling the final decision from the elders said that SA should be written. "Discard an active artifact. That (one specific) artifact (that was just discarded) is negated."
-
The general rule is that negate always beats protect.
However, because of the way DoN is worded, DoN discards the art first and it then negates the artifact that was discarded. Since the discard ability must happen for the negate to happen, Lampstand is safe from DoN.
Slightly complicated? Yes. Consistent? Yes.
If DoN said "Negate and discard an active artifact" then it could indeed take out Lampstand.
OK then by that definition, I can play DoN on lampstand to negate (but not discard) it for whatever phase (battle, prep etc) in order to martyr someone in territory or play mayhem, but then Lampstands ability would reactivate during the next phase. correct?
I also considered that, but if I understand this correctly, no. The wording on the card, to me, reads as the card that would be negated is identified as the card being discarded, if that makes sense. It reads as, "Discard this, and while you're at it, negate it too!"
-
If pigs defaults to in play, why doesn't lampstand?
That has been asked and answered in previous threads.
Lampstand does not default to in play because it specifies where it targets: "not in battle."
If you are unsatisfied with that answer, then please read the entire thread regarding that ruling before deciding it necessary to bring it up again. :)
Hey, I'm sorry if this is a sore issue. I saw a topic that seemed to tie into something I was curious about, so I decided to ask the question. :) I have now read several threads lampstand though I'm not sure that I've seen the one you're talking about. I would disagree with what I have read though. "Not in battle" is not a target, it has a target area that it does NOT target, which should exclude the target area from the default, not expand the default area. I mean I love my lampstand the way it is played as much as anyone, but the wording on the card just doesn't work for me.
-
So Angry Mob can pull out all heroes in set aside, hands and deck to choose from? ;D
-
So Angry Mob can pull out all heroes in set aside, hands and deck to choose from? ;D
Please post SAs...
Angry Mob SA: Spin card sideways (two full rotations to count). Top of card must be facing a player over halfway to count. If not, spin again. Targeted player turns all Heroes not in battle upside down and then mixes them up. Pick one hero to discard.
Lampstands of the Sanctuary SA Protect all cards not in battle from evil Dominants (grim-reaper icon cards).
Hmmmmmmm...the wording seems strangely similar.
Lampstand does not default to in play because it specifies where it targets: "not in battle."
New combo possibilities all around that.
-
But what factor does Que play in connection with Angry Mob? Hmmmmmm
-
So Angry Mob can pull out all heroes in set aside, hands and deck to choose from? ;D
Please post SAs...
Angry Mob SA: Spin card sideways (two full rotations to count). Top of card must be facing a player over halfway to count. If not, spin again. Targeted player turns all Heroes not in battle upside down and then mixes them up. Pick one hero to discard.
Lampstands of the Sanctuary SA Protect all cards not in battle from evil Dominants (grim-reaper icon cards).
Hmmmmmmm...the wording seems strangely similar.
Lampstand does not default to in play because it specifies where it targets: "not in battle."
New combo possibilities all around that.
OH SNAP CHILDREN
-
Angry mob apparently has an errata: Spin card sideways (two full rotations to count). Top of card must be facing a player over halfway to count. If not, spin again. Targeted player turns all Heroes in territory and set-aside upside down and then mixes them up. Discard one of those Heroes.
Sorry folks.
New combo possibilities are still potential, though, since even the errata says "all Heroes" not "all their Heroes" meaning regardless which player it points at, Angry Mob should turn upside-down and mix up every hero in every territory and every set aside.
-
They Errata'd it because they didn't want that to happen. It was either that or change lampstand from how it has been played.
-
Angry mob apparently has an errata: Spin card sideways (two full rotations to count). Top of card must be facing a player over halfway to count. If not, spin again. Targeted player turns all Heroes in territory and set-aside upside down and then mixes them up. Discard one of those Heroes.
Sorry folks.
New combo possibilities are still potential, though, since even the errata says "all Heroes" not "all their Heroes" meaning regardless which player it points at, Angry Mob should turn upside-down and mix up every hero in every territory and every set aside.
Sweet. Going back to Ambush, it has long been ruled that face down heroes count towards uniqueness requirements. The rest in fill in the dots...
-
.... Nice try MJB - I was told at Natz the get flipped back up after battle when Angry Mob's SA isn't active anymore.
Basically what Kevin told me is that Angry Mob has really fancy wording for "Discard a random hero from the territory this card is facing"
-
.... Nice try MJB - I was told at Natz the get flipped back up after battle when Angry Mob's SA isn't active anymore.
Basically what Kevin told me is that Angry Mob has really fancy wording for "Discard a random hero from the territory this card is facing"
Yea, I heard the same thing and I wasn't even there...I assumed it was common knowledge. My bad.
-
.... Nice try MJB - I was told at Natz the get flipped back up after battle when Angry Mob's SA isn't active anymore.
Basically what Kevin told me is that Angry Mob has really fancy wording for "Discard a random hero from the territory this card is facing"
+1 though it also targets set-aside area.
-
.... Nice try MJB - I was told at Natz the get flipped back up after battle when Angry Mob's SA isn't active anymore.
I'm not talking about the fact that the new errata still says nothing about flipping the heroes back up after the SA completes. I am specifically talking about the targeting issue--given that the uniqueness rule takes precedence even over completing an SA.
Basically what Kevin told me is that Angry Mob has really fancy wording for "Discard a random hero from the territory this card is facing"
That's cool, except Angry Mob was given its errata *after* what Kevin told you. Since the errata was specifically written to correct the issue of targeting, it should override any on-the-spot ruling at an earlier Tournament. Right? For example, if I were given a ruling at the Cali Nats that ANB didn't have to be removed from the game to shuffle in all cards, do I get to keep using that ruling?
If the idea was that Angry Mob is supposed to target all of the selected player's Heroes in territory and set-aside then the errata could have been written that way, but it isn't. Instead it says all Heroes in territory and set-aside, which is a different thing. On the broader topic, if Angry Mob's SA is just fancy wording for "Discard a random hero from selected player's territory and set-aside" why doesn't the errata just say that?
-
Just to clarify:
For Angry Mob, would everyone's hero's get flipped upside down or just the one's in play controlled by the player it's facing? And do they stay flipped until after the battle?
-
"In territory" has been ruled to be singular in Redemption (as opposed to "in a territory") as per the Reheboam rule (on the original Reheboam, the Heroes have to come from the same territory).
-
"In territory" has been ruled to be singular in Redemption (as opposed to "in a territory") as per the Reheboam rule (on the original Reheboam, the Heroes have to come from the same territory).
I didn't know this was a general rule. I thought Rehoboam was covered by a specific Play As that made the territory singular.
So following the Rehoboam pattern you are saying that the errata should be read to say... "Targeted player turns all Heroes in a territory and set-aside upside down and then mixes them up." Do I have that correct?
-
Since it's talking about a specific player, it's safe to assume the ambiguous English should be interpreted (in his) not (in a).