Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: SirNobody on June 11, 2009, 03:36:13 PM
-
Hey,
I have Unknown Nation active and no Evil Characters in my territory. My opponent attacks me with Priests of Christ. I use Unknown Nation, search for Goliath and present him as a blocker. Does my opponent get to search their draw pile for a good dominant?
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
No. Unknown Nation does not bring a chracter from your hand.
Post ablilities :P
-
PoC says: "This Hero is immune to demons. If opponent blocks with any Evil Characters from hand, you may search draw pile for a good Dominant and add it to hand. Cannot be negated."
UN says: "If opponent’s Hero is in battle, you may discard this card to search draw pile for a human Evil Character and add it to battle."
I guess the question is, does the searched card ever enter hand before going into battle?
I say no. I couldn't find any default conditions in the REG to support searched cards making a "pit stop" in the hand before going to their other location. In fact, all cards that say to search for cards have a destination, either printed or in a Play As (like False Peace, "Search deck for any card and put in hand.")
-
I say no also. UN never says anything about a hand, so I would say it is blocking from the deck.
-
Instant Abilities > Band > Special Conditions
• Some cards indirectly band from a draw or discard pile (e.g., Ship to Cyprus); these require you to search for cards and place them in your hand prior to banding them into battle. These are considered “from your hand.”
-
Instant Abilities > Band > Special Conditions
• Some cards indirectly band from a draw or discard pile (e.g., Ship to Cyprus); these require you to search for cards and place them in your hand prior to banding them into battle. These are considered “from your hand.”
Nice find.
-
That seems obscure and obsolete. What would be the reason that ruling should remain in place?
-
I don't necessarily agree with the REG, but I took Mierz' post as a personal challenge. ;D
-
Too bad no banding is happening. So even with the obsolete REG ruling, it works as we all would think it works.
-
It's not a band in the sense that there is not already an EC in the battle, but Unknown Nation is exactly the type of card that entry is talking about.
-
Hey,
• Some cards indirectly band from a draw or discard pile (e.g., Ship to Cyprus); these require you to search for cards and place them in your hand prior to banding them into battle. These are considered “from your hand.”
Does this apply to just banding or would it apply to other abilities as well? I can't think of any reason why we would single out banding and have search-band cards go through the players hand while not having search-play, search-place, or search-discard cards do the same. So my gut would be that this applies to all abilities and not just banding.
That is, if it applies at all.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Ultimately there will need to be discussion as to whether that quote is antiquated or still necessary. Until then, I would read this quote as implying that all search cards would have to follow the same principle. Essentially, all cards taken from the draw pile pass through the "hand." The only exception that I could see would be "reveal." Also to clarify, the card would pass through the hand of the searcher (a.k.a. holder of the search card).
-
Ok so wait. If my hand is protected from discard, and I play Confusion, would the Son of God card I pick to discard stay in my hand? O_o
-
Ok so wait. If my hand is protected from discard, and I play Confusion, would the Son of God card I pick to discard stay in my hand? O_o
Are there cards that just generally protect your hand, or do they protect you from "opponent's" cards?
-
Arianna protects your hand from evil cards. You could possibly make a very convoluted combo to abuse this.
-
Arianna and I Am Mercy protect the hand AND the deck, so you couldn't Confusion anything in the deck anyway.
-
the card would pass through the hand of the searcher (a.k.a. holder of the search card).
If it passes through the hand of the Searcher (AKA the one who plays Confusion) and the Searcher's hand is protected, then it doesn't matter if the deck is protected because you're discarding from your opponent's deck.
-
Hey,
Arianna and I Am Mercy protect the hand AND the deck, so you couldn't Confusion anything in the deck anyway.
I Am Mercy protects holder's hand and draw pile. It does not protect opponent's draw pile.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Neither does Arianna.
I missed something somewhere and didn't read that as the same player controlling Arianna and Confusion (with both active).
Wouldn't that also apply to searching the discard pile, so you could effectively steal your opponent's discard pile (except LS) with Murmuring (http://redemptionreg.com/REG/murmuring.htm)? Or a portion of it with Forgotten History/Wonders Forgotten? (Using Arianna, since she protects the hand from discard and removal.)
-
If this passes then Arianna just got very very VERY broken.
-
Backtracking just a bit:
Instant Abilities > Band > Special Conditions
• Some cards indirectly band from a draw or discard pile (e.g., Ship to Cyprus); these require you to search for cards and place them in your hand prior to banding them into battle. These are considered “from your hand.”
I'm pretty sure this quote is in error/outdated. Otherwise, the wording on Answer to Prayer seems badly worded:
Answer to Prayer
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Blue • Ability: 4 / 3 • Class: None • Special Ability: Search your deck for a good Genesis card and add it to hand or battle. Cannot be negated if used by a Genesis Hero. • Identifiers: OT, Spiritual Gift • Verse: Genesis 24:15 • Availability: Faith of Fathers (Set 4)
They changed the wording from the previously popular "Search for a card and add to hand. You may play next enhancement" type wording, which could have been more in line with the REG quote. Just doesn't seem accurate anymore.
-
They changed the wording from the previously popular "Search for a card and add to hand. You may play next enhancement" type wording, which could have been more in line with the REG quote. Just doesn't seem accurate anymore.
"Search for a card and add to hand. You may play the next enhancement" wouldn't do the same thing. Answer to Prayer currently lets you add a character to battle.
In this case, you could also play a different enhancement. (IE: Play Answer to Prayer, search for Obedience of Noah, play Rueben's Torn Clothes. The current wording would make you play Obedience of Noah)
-
So is there a consensus that if someone uses UN after an RA is begun with PoC then PoC gets to search for a good dominant?
-
I say no also. UN never says anything about a hand, so I would say it is blocking from the deck.
That is how we play it around here, but how...will...they ....rule...at.....NATS.....Can you say which judge will you get??? ;)
-
i still stand by my answer:
a)to search for a card by defaulf is to place in hand
b)to play a card by default is to play ferom hand
-
i agree as well. it seems pretty clear to me. UN might not say anything about a hand, but the REG clearly does.
-
Going with ease of explaining, I vote that UN doesn't allow PoC to search for a dominant. I imagine the following conversation:
Me: I'll make a rescue attempt with Priest of Christ
Kid: I'll discard Unknown Nation to block with an EC from my deck.
Me: I'll search my deck and pull out Son of God
Kid: Wait, I didn't block from my hand, I blocked from my deck.
Me: Yeah, but you used your hand to pull it out of your deck.
Kid" So, in Redemption "hand" is a specific place, not just a part of my arm.
Me: Too bad, it still counts, and I'm playing SoG/NJ, so you lose.
This is NOT a conversation that I want to see happening.
-
It seems like that REG quote should have been removed when "human interaction" was removed from the game with the release of Priests.
-
You know... the simple solution to this is just that every time you use unknown nation you have your trained dog take your favorite EC out of your deck... he doesn't have any hands and he's allowed to be at the table... :)
-
This would be an awesome (yet terrible) combo, IMO, to be able to use Arianna and Confusion to steal your opponent's SoG or NJ or something. Very messed up, yet very effective. Please do tell, "Oh High Ones", if this works or not, for I'm thinking on building a deck to face my dad that will center around this combo. :P Thanks!
-
i doubt it'll be let through. redemption never lets any cool combos go through.
-
I have a question for you MKC. If you hate redemption oh so very much, why do you play? And more importantly, why do you attempt to spoil the favorable opinions that others have for the game? (ok, so that's technically 2 questions, lol)
-
They changed the wording from the previously popular "Search for a card and add to hand. You may play next enhancement" type wording, which could have been more in line with the REG quote. Just doesn't seem accurate anymore.
"Search for a card and add to hand. You may play the next enhancement" wouldn't do the same thing. Answer to Prayer currently lets you add a character to battle.
In this case, you could also play a different enhancement. (IE: Play Answer to Prayer, search for Obedience of Noah, play Rueben's Torn Clothes. The current wording would make you play Obedience of Noah)
Eh, that wasn't the focus of my post.
Previous search cards have said to find a card, then add it to the hand, then optionally use it. Answer to Prayer says to fnd a card, then put in hand OR use it. Had this been the rule, the old wording should have remained.
-
i doubt it'll be let through. redemption never lets any cool combos go through.
Depends on your definition of cool, and I also think that completly broken isn't the same as cool :P
-
I have a question for you MKC. If you hate redemption oh so very much, why do you play? And more importantly, why do you attempt to spoil the favorable opinions that others have for the game? (ok, so that's technically 2 questions, lol)
i have a question for you arch angel. did i ever say i 'hate' redemption? no? ok then, your point is invalid. moving on.
-
Sk? That's Archangel. ???
-
fixed. i have no idea why i thought it was sk. no hard feelings sk! :D
-
It's implied by your seeming distaste for any and every announcement or ruling made regarding the game. So the point stands.
-
fixed. i have no idea why i thought it was sk. no hard feelings sk! :D
I'm sure your feelings of hate for Sk are only like, 0.04%. That's less than 0!
-
I'm sure your feelings of hate for Sk are only like, 0.04%. That's less than 0!
No it's not - it's .04 ABOVE 0. ;) ::)
So, is it atleast permitted for now (until there is a ruling)?
-
It's a pun from an old topic where MKC stated that Magic banned less than 0% of it's card base.
-
The combo is banned in order to maintain a consistent policy of never letting the game do anything cool.
-
Hey,
It's implied by your seeming distaste for any and every announcement or ruling made regarding the game. So the point stands.
I find MKC's willingness to speak his opinion, especially when it is an opinion that isn't going to be well received, refreshing. There are far too many "yes men" on these boards, hearing a divergent opinion is nice from time to time. MKC is more knowledgeable about the CCG industry in general than the vast majority of people on this board, so he often has insight from a unique perspective that many of the rest of us lack.
Also don't misinterpret his choice to voice his opinions when he disagrees and not voice his opinions when he does agree as an indication that he disagrees with everything.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
The combo is banned in order to maintain a consistent policy of never letting the game do anything cool.
I take it ET + AoCp being banned will follow soon?
-
Hey,
I'm sure your feelings of hate for Sk are only like, 0.04%. That's less than 0!
No it's not - it's .04 ABOVE 0. ;) ::)
Ah but he said 0! which as every good mathematician knows is 1, and .04 is quite definitely less than 1 :D
So, is it at least permitted for now (until there is a ruling)?
In the long run no, this will not be legal. Making dominants reusable is very much against the direction TPTB intend to take the game.
But if you want to build the deck and use it against your dad at the next WildCard I'll be happy to play along and claim that it's legal.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Also don't misinterpret his choice to voice his opinions when he disagrees and not voice his opinions when he does agree as an indication that he disagrees with everything.
His tone and choice of phrase often has more to do with it than what he chooses to critique.
-
Ah but he said 0! which as every good mathematician knows is 1, and .04 is quite definitely less than 1 :D
Woo-hoo for factorials! ;D
As for the other, what ruling are we talking about? Are we no longer talking about Unknown Nation at this point?
-
Ah but he said 0! which as every good mathematician knows is 1, and .04 is quite definitely less than 1 :D
Are we no longer talking about Unknown Nation at this point?
apparantly not, my 'tone' (which is either non-existent or easily misconstrued on the internet, natch) and slight mathmatical errors are now the topic of discussion. i suppose hardly anyone on this board really matures.
-
I figured it was better than listening to Maly and someone else run over the same points about 20 times followed by a lock.
-
The main question is, "When does a searched card go to hand?"
a. always
b. only if no other destination is given
In designing some cards in the last couple sets, I worded some abilities (Assyrian Spoilers, etc.) "Play X from your discard pile." A couple of the other playtesters said it should be rewritten, since we don't really play cards from discard piles, or at least not with out searching for them first. And if the search happens, it should be stated. So the cards ended up something like, "Search discard pile for X and play it."
So, a second question that goes along with the first is, "Can cards be played from a discard pile without searching?"
Searching has a targetable zone (the deck or discard pile), and a target (the card you look for), and a destination (default is hand, but other options may be printed on the card).
Consider Dungeon of Malchiah vs Net. They both capture. Capture has to target a card, and has a default destination. Does the captured character go to your land of bondage first, and then in the Dungeon case gets transfered to the opponent's Land of Bondage? Or, does the captured hero go straight to opponent's land of bondage?
-
As much as the idea of searched cards going through the "hand" may seem logical to some, I do not think it is inherent. The "hand" is only referring to the cards that we hold unrevealed. I think that it is more likely that most of us put our "hand" down when we search for cards in our draw/discard pile. Therefore, I see no reason that a searched card can not be played directly from where it was searched from. I think that forcing it to "pass through" the hand is laborious and unnecessary.
Ergo, I vote "b."
-
As much as the idea of searched cards going through the "hand" may seem logical to some, I do not think it is inherent. The "hand" is only referring to the cards that we hold unrevealed. I think that it is more likely that most of us put our "hand" down when we search for cards in our draw/discard pile. Therefore, I see no reason that a searched card can not be played directly from where it was searched from. I think that forcing it to "pass through" the hand is laborious and unnecessary.
Ergo, I vote "b."
I like the 'math'. "b"
-
I'm in agreement that the ruling should be "B" if only to prevent super broken combos like recycling SoG/NJ.
-
After reading the various opinions expressed in this thread, B makes the most sense.
Kirk
-
If it does not go to hand then you should not be able to use your hands to search for the card...perhaps your feet or face could be used... ;D
-
B seems intuative to me. That's the way I've always assumed it works and the way I've always played it.
-
B seems intuative to me. That's the way I've always assumed it works and the way I've always played it.
Motion from the floor.....
Anyone who uses big words (intuative) must supply the definition. In Oklahoma I learned all 20 letters of the alphabet but our math lessons stopped there. ;D
-
As much as I hate joining a bandwagon, I also think "b" is the most intuitive (def = naturally obvious) and consistent.
-
As much as I hate joining a bandwagon, I also think "b" is the most intuitive (def = naturally obvious) and consistent.
Whose tent? ???
-
Therefore, I vote "a".
-
Therefore, I vote "a".
You would. ::) At least you didn't say it in ALL CAPS so it's not official. ;)
-
I am not without mercy. ;)