An Innumerable Thread

[Redoubter]

Alright, time to hash this one out.  I have some questions.

Innumerable (AW)
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Silver • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Treat this card as a nameless copy of any angel in battle. When this card leaves battle, discard it.

1. If this card becomes a copy of a unique character, I understand that it has no title.  However, the definition of unique as it pertains to "same title, same card art, same card" only applies to deck-building.  For battle, it is stated that you can only have one of a character in battle, regardless of title (note that some cards are the same even though their names are different and cannot be in battle at the same time).  Thus, if Innumerable is a copy of that character, and that character is unique, I would present that they cannot be in battle at the same time.

Duplicate Cards

No player may control duplicates of a unique character or cause them to fight each other. This includes unique characters in play, in battle, in a side battle, face down, or in a set-aside area.  Character cards with the same card title and the same art or with the same title and the same brigade are considered duplicates for deck building purposes.  A player may have only control one of these at any time.  The only exception to this rule is non-unique characters with different card art.

Some character cards have different card titles, but are the same character.  A player may have only one of these in your territory, in battle, in a side battle, face down, or set-aside at a time:
    Whore of Babylon (L) or Whore of Babylon (UL) or Babylon the Great (Wa), Morg (AW) or Morgan (AW), Saul (Ap) or Paul (Ap), Esau (Pa) or Esau the Hunter (F)

2. This card is not CBI or CBN.  If it is interrupted, is it a character or an enhancement?  Or is the character part inherently CBI?

3. If a card interrupts Innumerable, or ITB, and during the interrupt a capture ability targets Innumerable, and it is still a character at that point (see #2 for that question), then does the enhancement become captured to LoB?  And if so...can it be redeemed?

4. If this card is exchanged to deck, it leaves battle.  Do you then have to pull it from deck to discard it?

*lights fuse*walks away slowly*

[Chronic Apathy]

1. If this card becomes a copy of a unique character, I understand that it has no title.  However, the definition of unique as it pertains to "same title, same card art, same card" only applies to deck-building.  For battle, it is stated that you can only have one of a character in battle, regardless of title (note that some cards are the same even though their names are different and cannot be in battle at the same time).  Thus, if Innumerable is a copy of that character, and that character is unique, I would present that they cannot be in battle at the same time.

Actually, the rules on duplicate characters pretty much say you can. Innumerable has neither the same card art as the character it's imitating, nor the same title. It's only meeting one of the requirements (same ability) and you need two of the three for your proposal to be correct.

2. This card is not CBI or CBN.  If it is interrupted, is it a character or an enhancement?  Or is the character part inherently CBI?

See "Deafening Spirit".

I'm not sure on 3.

[Praeceps]

Alright, time to hash this one out.  I have some questions.

Innumerable (AW)
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Silver • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Treat this card as a nameless copy of any angel in battle. When this card leaves battle, discard it.

There's your answer to question 3 as long as it isn't negated. It works the same as Assyrian Survivor.

[Redoubter]

Actually, the rules on duplicate characters pretty much say you can. Innumerable has neither the same card art as the character it's imitating, nor the same title. It's only meeting one of the requirements (same ability) and you need two of the three for your proposal to be correct.

You missed what I said, then.  The rules on same card, same art only applies for deck-building purposes.  The rule is that you cannot have the same character in battle, even if they have different names.  Morg and Morgan cannot be in battle at the same time, even though they are different cards (by name) and different card art.  The field of battle is restricted in ways that deck is not.

See "Deafening Spirit".

I'm not sure on 3.

Yeah, totally don't know how that all turned out and not sure where to find that thread.  Is there a decision there?

There's your answer to question 3 as long as it isn't negated. It works the same as Assyrian Survivor.

Actually, if he's interrupted and then removed from battle then the last part would not be in effect.

After an interrupt ability completes, the suspended abilities that were interrupted attempt to reactivate.  They attempt to reactive in the same order they were originally activated.  In order to reactivate the suspended abilities, the following conditions must be met:

    the card on which the ability exists must still be in battle

Since the card is no longer in battle, it could not reactivate, and therefore the ongoing ability (which is what that ability is) no longer has any effect.  This differs greatly from Survivor, since he is CBI.


Also, added a question #4.

[Chronic Apathy]

You missed what I said, then.  The rules on same card, same art only applies for deck-building purposes.  The rule is that you cannot have the same character in battle, even if they have different names.  Morg and Morgan cannot be in battle at the same time, even though they are different cards (by name) and different card art.  The field of battle is restricted in ways that deck is not.

Ah, I did miss your point, however, I still think you're wrong. Innumerable isn't creating an exact copy of the character, it's still nameless, and it's still not technically the same unique character. Someone else can probably establish this more eloquently, but I'm relatively confident.

Yeah, totally don't know how that all turned out and not sure where to find that thread.  Is there a decision there?

We never came to a uniform decision. I believe the closest we came was answering the question, "What do we do with Deafening Spirit?" and the consensus was "yes."

4. If this card is exchanged to deck, it leaves battle.  Do you then have to pull it from deck to discard it?

No. For instance, if Sabbath Breaker is shuffled or returned to hand or something, he's not discarded.

[Prof Underwood]

See "Deafening Spirit".

Yeah, totally don't know how that all turned out and not sure where to find that thread.  Is there a decision there?

We're still debating that one on the other side.  However, good news is that I think I'll be returning with the conclusive ruling on Iron Pan / BBH conundrum very soon

[Redoubter]

Ah, I did miss your point, however, I still think you're wrong. Innumerable isn't creating an exact copy of the character, it's still nameless, and it's still not technically the same unique character. Someone else can probably establish this more eloquently, but I'm relatively confident.

I'm just happy we're on the same page now.  Now, we can debate

I would actually argue that it is an exact copy of the character minus the name.  "Treat this card as a nameless copy of any angel in battle."  This has already been established to include SA and identifiers, and it is (by the wording of the card) a copy of that character.  It is that character.   I would argue that you could not use Innumerable on a unique angel for the same reason that Morg and Morgan cannot be in the battle at the same time.

We never came to a uniform decision. I believe the closest we came was answering the question, "What do we do with Deafening Spirit?" and the consensus was "yes."

Awesome.  Will await that.

4. If this card is exchanged to deck, it leaves battle.  Do you then have to pull it from deck to discard it?

No. For instance, if Sabbath Breaker is shuffled or returned to hand or something, he's not discarded.

Ok, I had not been under this impression.  Does this mean that if Ahimelek returns Assyrian Survivor (and thus defeats him), he would not be placed in opponent's LoB?  I had been under the impression that this still occurred, though now that I think about it, resetting when you hit deck or hand makes sense.

However, I still would debate that exchange is different.  The card is removing itself from battle, and it says in that case it should be discarded.

[Korunks]

I would actually argue that it is an exact copy of the character minus the name.  "Treat this card as a nameless copy of any angel in battle."  This has already been established to include SA and identifiers, and it is (by the wording of the card) a copy of that character.  It is that character.   I would argue that you could not use Innumerable on a unique angel for the same reason that Morg and Morgan cannot be in the battle at the same time.
from battle, and it says in that case it should be discarded.

I disagree a copy of a card is not the same thing as a card, lets look at the philosophical side, If there is a copy of me, even though its just like me it is not me.  It is still a separate entity.  It may sound, look, and behave like me, but it is not the same person that went through all of my life experiences, it would only have an actual history separate from my own. I would argue that can use Innumerable on a unique angel, as has been the precedent for years.

However, I still would debate that exchange is different.  The card is removing itself from battle, and it says in that case it should be discarded.

Doesn't matter, The discard would have to wait until the exchange completed, and then since the discard defaults to in play Innumerable is no longer target-able by its own discard.

[megamanlan]

What's to debate w/ Deafening Spirit?
The effect of becoming a Character being CBI was not being debated. The only part I was questioning is if the Negate/Discard could be negated even if the becoming a Character could not.

With it copying a Unique Character, it still doesn't have the verse, pic, or name. It copies the Identifiers, effect and numbers nothing else.

Also, if a card leaves battle, it is Defeated. But as I see it, that part is not CBI so if it's interrupted, and then removed from play ( either to Hand, Deck, Discard, Set-Aside, etc.) the Discard cannot work.

[Chronic Apathy]

What's to debate w/ Deafening Spirit?
The effect of becoming a Character being CBI was not being debated. The only part I was questioning is if the Negate/Discard could be negated even if the becoming a Character could not.

This is incorrect. I don't know if we got an answer for whether the changing of card types was CBI or not, but it was definitely heavily debated.

[Redoubter]

What's to debate w/ Deafening Spirit?
The effect of becoming a Character being CBI was not being debated.

*points up to Elder*

See "Deafening Spirit".

Yeah, totally don't know how that all turned out and not sure where to find that thread.  Is there a decision there?

We're still debating that one on the other side.

Moving to the discussable parts of my questions pending that ruling.

While I appreciate the metaphysical discussion of what a copy is, we're not talking about people or angels, but cards and the rules governing them.  They don't have life experiences

As far as status quo, we know how that's turned out recently for various 'rules', so I don't know that this necessarily applies.  I think it is at least a legitimate discussion to have.

As far as not copying the verse or character, what on the card says it doesn't?  In fact, it is an exact copy sans name.  It is that character.  If I can't have Morg and Morgan both in battle, I shouldn't be able to have Morg and a copy of Morg in battle.

[Korunks]

Regardless of whether or not it is ruled that they are the Same unique character, you would still be able to play Innumerable on a unique character based on the Book of Jashar ruling, which can be found here.  In short, It is at face value an enhancement when determining if it can be played so at The time of play it is an enhancement.  Whether or not one of them has to be discarded is what really needs to be ruled on here, the ruling on whether you can play it has been decided.  I would still argue that because it does not have the same name, it is not the same unique character, that was the main reason (in my understanding) it was worded the way it was.  I guess it depends on what the definition of characterhood is.  I disagree that it logically follows that being identical sans name means they are the same character.  That is what a name is for, to identify the card.  Morg/Morgan is an exception, not the rule.

[Redoubter]

Regardless of whether or not it is ruled that they are the Same unique character, you would still be able to play Innumerable on a unique character based on the Book of Jashar ruling, which can be found here.  In short, It is at face value an enhancement when determining if it can be played so at The time of play it is an enhancement.  Whether or not one of them has to be discarded is what really needs to be ruled on here, the ruling on whether you can play it has been decided.

Conceded and agree.

I guess it depends on what the definition of characterhood is.  I disagree that it logically follows that being identical sans name means they are the same character.  That is what a name is for, to identify the card.  Morg/Morgan is an exception, not the rule.

Reread that section I posted then.  The same name part is specified as only applying for deck-building purposes.  For battle, it states that the same character may not be in battle with a card that is also that character, with examples of cards already printed that have different names but are the same character being provided.

The 'same name' is not mentioned for battle.  Only 'same character'.  If I copy something, it is that character.

[Korunks]

The 'same name' is not mentioned for battle.  Only 'same character'.  If I copy something, it is that character.

And I would argue that is an error in the REG, because it has been ruled differently historically, while that is not definitive in and of its self it is enough, IMO, to request and elder provide guidance because either way could be correct based on current and past play.  The other question that needs to be answered is whether or not the characters ability would trigger before the rule requiring uniques be discarded if that is even correct.  If that character swaps itself out before it can be discarded even by game rule I would say it survives the discard.

[Redoubter]

I agree with you that either the REG is wrong or the current ruling is wrong, and it would be beneficial to get Elder guidance.

I can see both sides of the other questions, but #2 and #3 will have to wait anyway for the Deafening Spirit ruling in any case.

[Korunks]

I agree with you that either the REG is wrong or the current ruling is wrong, and it would be beneficial to get Elder guidance.

I can see both sides of the other questions, but #2 and #3 will have to wait anyway for the Deafening Spirit ruling in any case.

Agreed, however what I am trying to say that even if you are correct and Innumerable is considered the same unique character as the Angel it is played on, I am saying that since its ability has to finish before any other action (Game rule or otherwise) can do anything about it, so if it copies Professor Oak for example, it would be gone before the game rule on duplicates can do anything about, provided I choose to use the exchange.

[Redoubter]

Agreed, however what I am trying to say that even if you are correct and Innumerable is considered the same unique character as the Angel it is played on, I am saying that since its ability has to finish before any other action (Game rule or otherwise) can do anything about it, so if it copies Professor Oak for example, it would be gone before the game rule on duplicates can do anything about, provided I choose to use the exchange.

Interesting, and conceded.

I would then argue that if the character stays in battle, they should be discarded by game rule, and that if they have an ability that exchanges the card somewhere where it clears (deck or hand), that it is no longer discarded.

[megamanlan]

What's to debate w/ Deafening Spirit?
The effect of becoming a Character being CBI was not being debated. The only part I was questioning is if the Negate/Discard could be negated even if the becoming a Character could not.

This is incorrect. I don't know if we got an answer for whether the changing of card types was CBI or not, but it was definitely heavily debated.

I was the one that started the debate. And I saw a consensus that becoming a Character was CBI.

As to it still being the same Character, I'd say it more like a carbon copy of the character, so it's more like a generic clone of a Unique character. That's just how I see it though.

[Redoubter]

I was the one that started the debate. And I saw a consensus that becoming a Character was CBI.

It really doesn't matter who starts a debate, it matters how the elders finish it on these major issues

And even if you saw a consensus forming in that thread, you just saw an elder say it is under debate on their side of the forums.  That means it's under debate

[Prof Underwood]

And even if you saw a consensus forming in that thread, you just saw an elder say it is under debate on their side of the forums.  That means it's under debate

I'm not saying this thread is under debate.  I haven't even read this thread.  I just saw a post regarding the Deafening Spirit ruling, and thought I'd give everyone an update.

[Redoubter]

And even if you saw a consensus forming in that thread, you just saw an elder say it is under debate on their side of the forums.  That means it's under debate

I'm not saying this thread is under debate.  I haven't even read this thread.  I just saw a post regarding the Deafening Spirit ruling, and thought I'd give everyone an update.

No, sorry, it wasn't this thread I was referencing.  I was referring to his assertion that Deafening Spirit was not under debate (character/enhancement CBIness) and quoting your post.  That particular ruling would resolve parts of my questions here as well.

We mainly would like guidance on whether you'd have to discard a copy of a unique character in battle, as the wording from the REG does not define "same character" like deck-building rules, but rather just as them being the "same character", which I'd say would be the same as if you copied (see above).

The rest would wait for Deafening Spirit's ruling.

[megamanlan]

There wasn't even anyone arguing against that, it has to be CBI or else CwD would just make an infinite loop and the battle would never end. That was agreed even w/ the Elders. Thats just not to break the game.
The question was that if the Negate/Discard was CBI because it's no longer an EE. This is what the Elders were arguing, and most likely what the debate is about too.