Author Topic: ANB Question (Read 6273 times)

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #25 on:** July 07, 2010, 08:08:35 PM »

There was the ANB combo that brought about the additional change to that card... that essentially cleaned house without giving them a turn, though it didn't win in one turn.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #26 on:** July 07, 2010, 08:09:04 PM »

Quote from: Lamborghini_diablo on July 07, 2010, 08:08:35 PM

There was the ANB combo that brought about the additional change to that card... that essentially cleaned house without giving them a turn, though it didn't win in one turn.

And what was that?

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #27 on:** July 07, 2010, 08:13:59 PM »

I think he's referring to this deck:

http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=18817.0

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #28 on:** July 07, 2010, 08:15:56 PM »

Ahh, okay. ANB recursion is for noobs.

crustpope · « **Reply #29 on:** July 07, 2010, 11:11:12 PM »

So are none of the elders going to address my points of dissent? Can someone explain why we seem to have a scitzophrenic approach to how WC enhancements are handled in various situations (capture/Conversion/Protection)

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #30 on:** July 08, 2010, 09:08:38 AM »

I haven't responded because I don't really have a strong opinion on this. I agree with the "other Prof" that if we are going to consider WC enhs to be "part of the character", then they should increase the character's raw abilities (which they don't). It also seems that their SA's would simply become part of the character's SA, and therefore would happen at the first step instead of the 3rd step or whatever (which they don't). These are 2 ways that currently rulings and gameplay indicate that WC-enhs are NOT a part of the character.

However, as I think about actually cases in the Bible where people were protected, I can see Crust's point. When Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednigo were protected from the flames of the fiery furnace, their clothes were protected as well. They were not even singed.

So I guess I can see both sides on this one. It does look like the current status quo would be that the WC enhs are NOT protected. But I wouldn't be upset if that changed.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #31 on:** July 08, 2010, 09:19:18 AM »

Quote from: crustpope on July 07, 2010, 07:10:54 PM

seriously though, I will provide the argument. If weapons follow the EC while they are converted, why dont they recieve the protection that the EC has?

Conversion doesn't affect weapons directly at all, it just affects the character, and since it doesn't make sense for a Hero to hold an Evil Enhancement, the weapon converts to make sense in gameplay.

Quote

Visualize it like this. If I am an EC holding a sword, the sword is an extention of my ability to act. IF I am converted, then I can carry the sword and do good with it.

While that's a good justification and makes sense, I think the real reason weapons convert is because it wouldn't make sense if they didn't, strictly for gameplay reasons.

Quote

IF I am protected from an effect, My sword is always with me so it should be protected as well.

That is not necessarily true. Even if you are wearing impenetrable armor, someone else could knock the sword out of your hand with their sword, leaving you swordless, but still unaffected.

Quote

Do WC enhancements get shuffled if the EC is in a house?(read KotW)

Yes. I see no reason why not. KotW only protects EC's so I see no difference between the two cases.

Quote

How can I be protected from a tornado(read ANB) yet the sword I hold in my hand is magically carried away?

Cement your feet to the ground. You'll stay where you are, but anything you are holding will be carried away, albeit not magically.

COUNTER_SNIPER · « **Reply #32 on:** July 08, 2010, 10:36:43 AM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on July 08, 2010, 09:19:18 AM

Cement your feet to the ground. You'll stay where you are, but anything you are holding will be carried away, albeit not magically.

Win.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #33 on:** July 08, 2010, 12:30:12 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on July 08, 2010, 09:19:18 AM

Conversion doesn't affect weapons directly at all, it just affects the character, and since it doesn't make sense for a Hero to hold an Evil Enhancement, the weapon converts to make sense in gameplay.

I would say that if an evil enhancement did not convert, it would simply fizzle and discard itself. Doesn't that happen if an opponent plays Gold Shield on a hero mid-battle?

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #34 on:** July 08, 2010, 01:33:34 PM »

so how long have we played that WC enhancments convert with the character? and then one day someone asks a question and now they dont? what a game-what a game

but ill have to agree with Lambo on this one and say that they should not convert, fizzle, and fall off.

Lambo!

However the REG states otherwise:

• Weapon-class enhancements stay with a converted character; the special ability continues to function if it does not conflict with the nature of the converted character (see Weapon-class Enhancements in the rulebook [p. 35].

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #35 on:** July 08, 2010, 01:48:31 PM »

Quote from: RTSmaniac on July 08, 2010, 01:33:34 PM

so how long have we played that WC enhancments convert with the character? and then one day someone asks a question and now they dont? what a game-what a game

Nobody is saying that WC-enhs don't convert.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #36 on:** July 08, 2010, 01:58:34 PM »

I am saying that they should not...

Quote from: Lamborghini_diablo on July 08, 2010, 12:30:12 PM

I would say that if an evil enhancement did not convert, it would simply fizzle and discard itself. Doesn't that happen if an opponent plays Gold Shield on a hero mid-battle?

Is this true?

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #37 on:** July 08, 2010, 02:06:50 PM »

Quote from: RTSmaniac on July 08, 2010, 01:58:34 PM

I am saying that they should not...

Quote from: Lamborghini_diablo on July 08, 2010, 12:30:12 PM

I would say that if an evil enhancement did not convert, it would simply fizzle and discard itself. Doesn't that happen if an opponent plays Gold Shield on a hero mid-battle?

Is this true?

Don't quote me on that... oh wait you already did.

In seriousness, I'm not 100% sure on that. I was mostly thinking about non-WC enhs that fizzle because they are not allowed to be there legally, and the same thing would happen if WC enhs did not become good enhs.

Sorry if I confused people.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #38 on:** July 08, 2010, 02:07:08 PM »

Quote from: Lamborghini_diablo on July 08, 2010, 12:30:12 PM

Quote from: Professoralstad on July 08, 2010, 09:19:18 AM
Conversion doesn't affect weapons directly at all, it just affects the character, and since it doesn't make sense for a Hero to hold an Evil Enhancement, the weapon converts to make sense in gameplay.

I would say that if an evil enhancement did not convert, it would simply fizzle and discard itself. Doesn't that happen if an opponent plays Gold Shield on a hero mid-battle?

I don't see why it wouldn't convert to the Hero's new brigade, based on this REG quote:

Quote

If a warrior is converted, weapons remain on the character. The special ability on the weapon continues to function provided it does not conflict with the nature of a Hero or Evil Character.

Gold Shield is a convert just as Holy Grail is, it just converts from one color to another. I couldn't find an explicit mention in the REG of the weapon becoming the new brigade, but as that is the only way characters can use enhancements, it has usually been understood. I hope that it will be explicitly stated in the new REG (maybe it's in the current one, I just can't find it). So if Warrior's Spear is on a red Hero who is converted to blue, I would say that WS becomes blue.

That said, I don't think that's a good argument for immunity transferring to enhancements, it's just an offshoot of a specific type of ability (convert) having a specific indirect effect.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #39 on:** July 08, 2010, 02:22:04 PM »

As I'm still trying to make up my mind, I would like to see both sides respond to the strongest argument for the other side.

Quote from: Professoralstad on July 07, 2010, 04:46:27 PM

If they did became part of the character, then they should increase the character's numbers in territory, right? It has been ruled that the do not (i.e. a 9/7 WC character with a 2/2 Horsie on him can still block Widow)

Lambo, if the WC enh is part of the character, then why don't the character's numbers change?

Quote from: Prof Underwood on July 08, 2010, 09:08:38 AM

However, as I think about actually cases in the Bible where people were protected, I can see Crust's point. When Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednigo were protected from the flames of the fiery furnace, their clothes were protected as well. They were not even singed.

Prof A, why do you not think that personal protection extends to what the person carries considering the Biblical example above?

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #40 on:** July 08, 2010, 02:37:06 PM »

so do weapons get shuffled in with ANB when character is immune?

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #41 on:** July 08, 2010, 03:20:37 PM »

Weapons are confusing. Last time I knew, weapons are shuffled when the characters they are on are shuffled by yourself, but they are discarded when the character is shuffled by an opponent. Is this true? I think it's silly if it is.

Also, I know of times when my opponent has used I Am Grace to get rid of a weapon on a protected character in my territory, so if that is legal, I'm pretty sure ANB would shuffle weapons.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #42 on:** July 08, 2010, 03:49:27 PM »

Which would break Horses in type two even more.. For game play I don't think we can allow it.. Also you could argue that a Damsil in kingdoms with charms on her could not be affected with DON. Besides you cannot exacly say the weapon is a Babylonian or an assyrian, technically they are not.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #43 on:** July 08, 2010, 04:08:10 PM »

No, but I have a strong case for proving that a weapon can be Philistine!

TheJaylor · « **Reply #44 on:** July 08, 2010, 04:57:15 PM »

ANB should not affect weapons for game's sake.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #45 on:** July 08, 2010, 05:12:00 PM »

I think if protection extends to weapons (when it targets characters holding the weapons) I think T2 will become fairly broken with the Horses, not to mention it really doesn't make sense when the cards say they protect CHARACTERS not characters and cards being held, why not apply that to placed enhancements or held artifacts, I just think thats a bad place to go for a card game, not to mention it makes the game more confusing

Player 1: I'm discarding your 2Khorses with I AM GRACE
Player 2: You can't, my Assyrian Camp protects it.
Player 1: But it only says it protects characters.
Player 2: Weapons are part of characters so its also protected.
Player 1: Huh?

At least that's what I would think if that's how it was ruled.

And as far as the Daniel example I would say if they ever made a card called God's Protection in the Furnace (or whatever its called) I would just have it protect characters and good cards placed/held by them.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #46 on:** July 08, 2010, 05:17:18 PM »

(Warrior Class)

(Hero)

Proof from the REG enhancements are characters too.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #47 on:** July 09, 2010, 11:23:06 AM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on July 08, 2010, 02:22:04 PM

Quote from: Prof Underwood on July 08, 2010, 09:08:38 AM
However, as I think about actually cases in the Bible where people were protected, I can see Crust's point. When Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednigo were protected from the flames of the fiery furnace, their clothes were protected as well. They were not even singed.
Prof A, why do you not think that personal protection extends to what the person carries considering the Biblical example above?

I've always viewed the mention of their clothes surviving as something God did as part of the greatness of the miracle: Likely the most flammable thing that went into the fire (their clothes) came out unsinged. I guess I'm not convinced that one example of God's protection should necessarily apply to protection in the game. The Color Guard LS is not God.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #48 on:** July 09, 2010, 12:17:48 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on July 09, 2010, 11:23:06 AM

I've always viewed the mention of their clothes surviving as something God did as part of the greatness of the miracle: Likely the most flammable thing that went into the fire (their clothes) came out unsinged. I guess I'm not convinced that one example of God's protection should necessarily apply to protection in the game. The Color Guard LS is not God.

Most protection is NOT miraculous protection. That is a good point, and gets me to lean toward agreeing with Prof A.

Quote from: Prof Underwood on July 08, 2010, 02:22:04 PM

Quote from: Professoralstad on July 07, 2010, 04:46:27 PM
If they did became part of the character, then they should increase the character's numbers in territory, right? It has been ruled that the do not (i.e. a 9/7 WC character with a 2/2 Horsie on him can still block Widow)
Lambo, if the WC enh is part of the character, then why don't the character's numbers change?

SirNobody · « **Reply #49 on:** July 09, 2010, 02:18:09 PM »

Hey,

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on July 07, 2010, 03:02:01 PM

My opponent has the Color Guard in a green site and some PG ECs with horses on them in his territory. He attacks and plays ANB. The horses are shuffled, correct?

I'm amazed this thread has made it to four pages long. You can take out the weapon on a character in Kingdoms, this has been the rule for several years. This is basically the same ruling just with the Color Guard Soul rather than Kingdoms. Protecting a character does not protect the weapon the character is holding. The weapon is still shuffled by A New Beginning.

And on a side note, mentioning how a ruling will affect a combo and thinking that does/should have any influence on what the ruling ends up being is one of the most annoying things I see in this forum.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

News:

Author Topic: ANB Question (Read 6273 times)

Lamborghini_diablo

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

Lamborghini_diablo

Lamborghini_diablo

TheHobbit13

Lamborghini_diablo