Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: TheJaylor on July 07, 2011, 06:05:25 PM

Title: 2 questions....
Post by: TheJaylor on July 07, 2011, 06:05:25 PM
1. When a friend and I were playing and I attacked him. He defended and played an enhancement to kill me. I, in turn, played an interrupt and discard to discard him. Would he then be able to play Grapes to discard his enhancement that he played even though the evil character has left battle?

2. If I attack with Abashai banded to Asahel to Caleb and they block with Goliath from hand all of they are giant-slayers or can't withdraw so none go back until he negates banding. Once Asahel and Caleb go back do I get to add another hero because it says "opponent may add a new hero" or what exactly is the order of things that happen there?
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: SomeKittens on July 07, 2011, 06:50:08 PM
1.) Nope.  Grapes won't interrupt the discard.

2.) There are two ways I could see this playing out.  One, presenting a new hero only happens if there aren't any left in battle.  (25% chance of happening).  Otherwise, there's nothing stopping you from adding a new hero.  (75%)
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Rawrlolsauce! on July 07, 2011, 07:09:36 PM
1.) I'm fairly certain that you can use Grapes. ~85%.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Professoralstad on July 07, 2011, 07:10:41 PM
Kittens is correct on 1. For 2, you may bring in a new Hero to join Abishai.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Rawrlolsauce! on July 07, 2011, 07:19:18 PM
Are enhancements discarded when all characters leave the battle then? I thought they just hung around until resolution.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Professoralstad on July 07, 2011, 07:23:27 PM
Ive never heard of that and don't have a reason to believe that to be the case.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: SomeKittens on July 07, 2011, 07:32:36 PM
Enhancements are put on a character.  Thus, placed cards follow.

/Not an Elder...
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Rawrlolsauce! on July 07, 2011, 07:34:27 PM
Enhancements aren't placed on a character. The rulebook explains discarding enhancements played during battle in the section about battle resolution, but that's obviously outdated. However, I haven't seen anything that suggests otherwise until today.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: YourMathTeacher on July 07, 2011, 08:03:57 PM
I agree with Rawrlolsauce! The discarding of enhancements from battle should happen during battle resolution. Enhancements are played on characters, but the REG/rulebook mention passing enhancements to a banded character if the played-on character is removed. The enhancements are not "attached" to the character, per se.

I have always ruled that if a lone character is removed from battle, but that player has Unknown Nation active, they can bring in the new EC and use the enhancements in battle to boost their numbers.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: TheJaylor on July 07, 2011, 09:51:13 PM
Kittens is correct on 1. For 2, you may bring in a new Hero to join Abishai.
And that wouldn't be considered "banding" according to Goliath then?
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Gabe on July 07, 2011, 09:55:51 PM
#1 - Enhancements do not remain in battle if there is not a character of matching brigade. They are discarded with the character if no other characters of matching brigade remain in battle.

For further clarification please check out the Use Other Enhancements (http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/default.htm?turl=howtouse2.htm) page in the REG.

Quote from: REG
Although the restrictions of matching brigade is relaxed for these card types, each enhancement card must still be activated on a specific character.  That character retains the enhancements while the character is in battle.  If a character is removed or withdraws before the end of the battle, the enhancements are discarded unless there is another character currently in the battle or immediately replaced in battle that can use them.  The remaining cards unused are then discarded.

#2 - I'd like to point out that Caleb is NOT a giant slayer. Once the banding is negated Abashai remains in battle and you're allowed to add another character to the battle per Goliath's ability. Yes it's considered banding but Goliath is CBN so he doesn't negate himself.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: YourMathTeacher on July 07, 2011, 10:15:29 PM
Quote from: REG
Although the restrictions of matching brigade is relaxed for these card types, each enhancement card must still be activated on a specific character.  That character retains the enhancements while the character is in battle.  If a character is removed or withdraws before the end of the battle, the enhancements are discarded unless there is another character currently in the battle or immediately replaced in battle that can use them.  The remaining cards unused are then discarded.

That quote allows the opportunity to replace the character (i.e. Unknown Nation). If there is opportunity to replace the character, then how can there not be an opportunity to play a dominant? We have always allowed the playing of dominants during Battle Resolution.

Redemption® Rulebook > Diagram of a Turn > Battle Resolution > Hero Wins
                           
Your Hero wins if one of these condi­tions is met:

•      The Hero’s strength is greater than or equal to the Evil Character’s toughness, and the Evil Character’s strength is less than the Hero’s toughness. The Evil Character is discarded, and your Hero withdraws to your territory.

•      The Hero ignores the Evil Character. The Hero and the Evil Character each withdraw to his owner’s territory.

•      All blocking Evil Characters were removed from bat­tle. Surviving Heroes return to their owners’ territories.

All enhancements played during the Battle Phase  (except set-aside or weapon-class enhancements, or cards placed on other cards during battle) are discarded  to the respective owner’s discard pile. Assuming no dominants are played during Battle Resolution to prevent it, the rescue attempt is successful, and your opponent must select and surrender to you one available Lost Soul from his Land of Bondage.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Gabe on July 07, 2011, 10:31:34 PM
It doesn't allow you to add a character via Unknown Nation but I see how you might draw that conclusion. The reason that doesn't work is that you have to complete all abilities before another ability can activate. If you have Claudia + ET in battle with one blue and one purple enhancement played and I CM ET the purple enhancement is discard too. You don't get to leave it there while you play a banding card on Claudia to add another purple character.

The portion I think you're looking at and drawing the conclusion that you can use Unknown Nation to keep enhancements is only referring to cards that exchange one character for another. For example Wheel within a Wheel and Temptation.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: TheJaylor on July 08, 2011, 01:29:40 AM
Alright, thanks guys. That's all I needed.
#2 - I'd like to point out that Caleb is NOT a giant slayer.
Really? Oh. Is there a list of them somewhere because I didn't see "giant-slayers" in the REG?
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Gabe on July 08, 2011, 09:12:41 AM
A list of Giant Slayers can be found here (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/ruling-questions/giant-slayers/msg422900/#msg422900).
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Prof Underwood on July 08, 2011, 12:22:59 PM
The portion I think you're looking at and drawing the conclusion that you can use Unknown Nation to keep enhancements is only referring to cards that exchange one character for another. For example Wheel within a Wheel and Temptation.
I'm not actually sure that Unknown Nation (or Madness or discarding GoH) wouldn't be another way to "immediately replace" a character in battle of matching brigade.  However, it's not important enough to me to start a discussion on the other side until at least after Nats.  There's just too many other fish to fry.  I'll just leave this here so someone will remind me in August to think about this some more :)
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: TheJaylor on July 08, 2011, 01:14:55 PM
A list of Giant Slayers can be found here (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/ruling-questions/giant-slayers/msg422900/#msg422900).
Thank you for clearing that up about Caleb. I read the verse and figured that "drove out" implied that he killed them and I was positive that the Anakites were giants.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Professoralstad on July 08, 2011, 01:57:49 PM
The portion I think you're looking at and drawing the conclusion that you can use Unknown Nation to keep enhancements is only referring to cards that exchange one character for another. For example Wheel within a Wheel and Temptation.
I'm not actually sure that Unknown Nation (or Madness or discarding GoH) wouldn't be another way to "immediately replace" a character in battle of matching brigade.  However, it's not important enough to me to start a discussion on the other side until at least after Nats.  There's just too many other fish to fry.  I'll just leave this here so someone will remind me in August to think about this some more :)

No special ability can immediately follow another one, unless they are on the same card, or are triggered abilities with a trigger that went off. Unknown Nation is neither. It seems this would be a fairly easy issue to solve.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: SomeKittens on July 08, 2011, 02:03:13 PM
What about something in the case of Reach -> AoCP?  What is the definition of "immediately follow"?
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Gabe on July 08, 2011, 02:24:41 PM
What about something in the case of Reach -> AoCP?  What is the definition of "immediately follow"?

That means it's part of, or tied to, the same ability. In the example you provide of Reach + AoCp, part of the ability on Reach allows you to play an enhancement. If AoCp is that enhancement it's tied to Reach's ability.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: YourMathTeacher on July 08, 2011, 04:20:48 PM
No special ability can immediately follow another one, unless they are on the same card, or are triggered abilities with a trigger that went off. Unknown Nation is neither. It seems this would be a fairly easy issue to solve.

So either the REG quote did not mean "immediately" (most likely scenario), or there is a way to immediately replace a hero who is being "removed or withdraws." What is an example of the latter, since exchange is not listed in that quote?
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Gabe on July 08, 2011, 04:34:06 PM
So either the REG quote did not mean "immediately" (most likely scenario), or there is a way to immediately replace a hero who is being "removed or withdraws." What is an example of the latter, since exchange is not listed in that quote?

As I mentioned previously, Temptation is one example. There are other cards that do the same thing, like any choose the blocker or choose the rescuer.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: YourMathTeacher on July 08, 2011, 04:39:04 PM
So either the REG quote did not mean "immediately" (most likely scenario), or there is a way to immediately replace a hero who is being "removed or withdraws." What is an example of the latter, since exchange is not listed in that quote?

As I mentioned previously, Temptation is one example. There are other cards that do the same thing, like any choose the blocker or choose the rescuer.

CTB/CTR are not considered removal or withdrawal abilities. In fact, the REG entry for CTB specifically states that it is not a withdraw ability.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Gabe on July 08, 2011, 05:02:08 PM
Temptation is not a CTB/CTR card, it's a withdraw card.

But I though the question was whether or not enhancements hung out after a character leaves battle? The answer is that yes they do, provided the same ability or set of abilities that made them leave battle adds another character that has the ability to use the brigade. If not they are discarded with the character. CTR and CTB both apply in that situation.

*edit* I can't really tell if you don't understand what I'm saying or if you just disagree. If it's the former I'd like to help. If it's the later that's OK too but I'll withdraw from the conversation because I don't care to turn this into a debate.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: YourMathTeacher on July 08, 2011, 05:43:38 PM
I'm not actually sure that Unknown Nation (or Madness or discarding GoH) wouldn't be another way to "immediately replace" a character in battle of matching brigade.  However, it's not important enough to me to start a discussion on the other side until at least after Nats.

I think that there are enough people that use Grapes and Unknown Nation that this should be addressed now rather than later.

I can't really tell if you don't understand what I'm saying or if you just disagree. If it's the former I'd like to help. If it's the later that's OK too but I'll withdraw from the conversation because I don't care to turn this into a debate.

I've already told you how I have been ruling it, so my intentions should have been clear. If I am ruling it wrong, then I need to understand why. The more obvious place to look for this ruling is in the Battle Resolution section, which indicates that dominants can be played. You have brought up a quote that I have never seen, since it is part of the "Use Other Enhancements" ability. Why would I look there for a question about Grapes or Unknown Nation?

I think you are treating this more trivially than it should be treated, especially with Regionals taking place. I admit that I am unsettled about this ruling, but I have already explained why I am concerned about making correct rulings at major tournaments. I have Southeast Regionals coming up in one week, with players in the top .001% that I really would rather not have to face-off with.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Gabe on July 08, 2011, 06:02:25 PM
Sorry, YMT. Sometimes I have difficulty telling if people are trying to gain understanding or simply debating an issue. That's my fault and text with no tone doesn't seem to help me much. I've seen many conversations turn into arguments. For the most part I feel that is unfruitful so I try not to participate. But I don't want to entirely drop out of a conversation without warning and leave you hanging because I get the wrong impression about how it's going. I'd rather ask and look dumb I guess.

I understand why you want to make sure you have the correct ruling. I also agree with you that this clarification is not in the most obvious place. I can tell you that's because it was written and added to the REG before Grapes and Unknown Nation existed. We both know that points to a deeper issue - THE REG NEEDS UPDATED!!! WHEN WILL WE SEE THE NEW REG??!?! I say that tongue in cheek but I feel your pain.

I'm certain that what I'm telling you is correct. Professor Alstad has also confirmed it. The fact that Prof Underwood is unsure of himself is no reason not to take our word on this. If you rule as I've explained at your Regional tournament you have two scapegoats if it turns out to be wrong. If you rule differently you do not.

For your sake I will post this on the elder boards. As most discussions there don't happen quickly over there I cannot promise that we can report back before it really matters to you.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: YourMathTeacher on July 08, 2011, 06:26:43 PM
Thank you for being patient with me.

I'm certain that what I'm telling you is correct. Professor Alstad has also confirmed it.

This is what I needed to know. There are times that rulings have been passed down through the years between people that meet regularly (or at least annually). Unfortunately, people like me have not been fortunate enough to meet you or the Alstads (for example). Therefore, we unknowingly make rulings that become habit for our playgroup. It is not until a thread like this brings the discrepancy to light that we are aware of what we were doing wrong. That is inherently why the New REG is so imperative, but I agree that complaining about that will accomplish nothing positive.

If you rule as I've explained at your Regional tournament you have two scapegoats if it turns out to be wrong. If you rule differently you do not.

I always rule with what is official on the boards, whether I agree or not. We have a method for generating official rulings, notably the Two-Elder Rule, so I will change my ruling accordingly.

For your sake I will post this on the elder boards. As most discussions there don't happen quickly over there I cannot promise that we can report back before it really matters to you.

I appreciate the effort, and I understand the necessary delays.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Prof Underwood on July 08, 2011, 07:10:13 PM
I'm certain that what I'm telling you is correct. Professor Alstad has also confirmed it. The fact that Prof Underwood is unsure of himself is no reason not to take our word on this. If you rule as I've explained at your Regional tournament you have two scapegoats if it turns out to be wrong. If you rule differently you do not.
I agree with Gabe that you should rule his way at this time.  There are 2 elders in agreement, and none in disagreement (I'm not disagreeing, just unsure).  So that is official for now :)
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: browarod on July 08, 2011, 11:45:34 PM
If it would help, I could add this at the top of my Cheat Sheet with the other recent ruling changes so people have more ready access to it.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: YourMathTeacher on July 08, 2011, 11:48:49 PM
If it would help, I could add this at the top of my Cheat Sheet with the other recent ruling changes so people have more ready access to it.

You can, but it is possible that I was the only one ruling it wrong. Of course, that affects playgroups in two different states....  :(
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Gabe on July 12, 2011, 04:07:31 PM
YMT, the discussion on the other side of the boards received a response from two additional elders who both confirmed the ruling the Professor Aldstad and I provided. No elders have contradicted that ruling. We will work to make this more clear in the REG/Rulebook. That should be released sometime around 2033.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Bobbert on July 12, 2011, 04:13:26 PM
We will work to make this more clear in the REG/Rulebook. That should be released sometime around 2033.

That soon?
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: YourMathTeacher on July 12, 2011, 04:15:51 PM
We will work to make this more clear in the REG/Rulebook. That should be released sometime around 2033.

That soon?

How can you say that? I can't believe I have to wait until 8:33pm for this to be changed. BTW, is that Eastern Time?
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: spicynumber1 on July 12, 2011, 04:47:43 PM
I have Southeast Regionals coming up in one week, with players in the top .001% that I really would rather not have to face-off with.

 8)

What exactly is the new/updated/correct ruling?
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: YourMathTeacher on July 12, 2011, 05:26:31 PM
What exactly is the new/updated/correct ruling?

If a character is removed from battle, then any enhancements played on that character that cannot be transferred to another character currently in battle are discarded immediately, and therefore cannot be used to satisfy Grapes of Wrath's discard ability. Also, a player cannot use Unknown Nation to bring in a new character that could have used those enhancements.
Title: Re: 2 questions....
Post by: Professoralstad on July 12, 2011, 05:36:07 PM
What exactly is the new/updated/correct ruling?

If a character is removed from battle, then any enhancements played on that character that cannot be transferred to another character currently in battle are discarded immediately, and therefore cannot be used to satisfy Grapes of Wrath's discard ability. Also, a player cannot use Unknown Nation to bring in a new character that could have used those enhancements.

Gabe is correct.

Err...Uh...nvm.

 ;)
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal