Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Lamborghini_diablo on February 14, 2009, 07:24:43 PM
-
Ok, I may have asked about this before but its long gone in the purge.
How exactly does this card work? Does it "pause" the entire battle, let you play enhancements, then they all sorta activate at once (in the order they were played)?
Or...
Does it simply bypass the transfer of initiative by numbers?
-
You can play away unless you end the battle(like forgotten history kind of cards). So have fun!
Did that answer your question?
-
I believe it's played as a continuous "You may play the next enhancement"
So you play Arrogance, then you may play the next enhancement
Then you play Wages of Sin, and Arrogance says "You may play the next enhancement"
etcetcetc.
-
Heres what I was really looking for.
If I play Arrogance, then Colloseum Lions on a hero in battle, does it kill them immediately and i still can play enhancements, do they get initative to interrupt it, or does CL not activate until i finish playing enhancements?
-
Hm... I don't think so. I think at that time the battle ends. So there's not battle to play enhancements in... :dunno:
-
You dont think what? :P
Of the three options I listed, which one is accurate?
1. Kill the hero and still can play enhs.
2. Kill the hero and they can interrupt.
3. Does not kill the hero until I am finished playing enhancements, then all my enhs activate in the order played. Meaning, they would need a Negate all or something other than "negate last" to stop CL.
-
I believe #2 would be the one that's most accurate. But, I'm not 100% positive.
-
Yes, I agree. :)
-
So you are saying its more like the 2nd of my original two, where it bypasses the transfer of initative by numbers?
-
I agree that #2 is correct. Arrogance's SA trumps normal rules for passing initiative. However, an initiative check is only done if there is a hero and an EC in battle.
From the rulebook (p.17):
If you have a Hero(es) in the Field of Battle and your opponent has an Evil Character(s) in the Field of Battle, you need to check for initiative.
-
Well if it trumps the "normal" rules for initative, would my opponent get a chance to interrupt CL?
Wouldnt playing CL cause an initiative check, because it then triggers the "loosing by removal" part?
How much different is Loosing by an ability vs loosing by numbers? either way the opponent is loosing.
-
Arrogance only trumps the rules of passing initiative. There is no "initiative check" if the only hero is removed. The battle would just end. The rules allow a last ditch effort by the removed character in the form of an "interrupt" or "negate."
-
Heres another question then.
If they have two or more heroes in battle. Can I do whatever I want with my opponents heroes so long as ONE stays in battle?
Example:
Jacob to... Gabriel.
I block with Arioch. Ignoring the special abilities on guys except banding... I play Arrogance, then play Coloseum lions on Gabriel. Would gabriel die, and I still have initiative to play enhancements?
-
Yes. As long as a hero is in battle, your opponent is at your mercy (or lack thereof).
-
Ahh, ok. So as long as one hero and EC remain in battle, I can play any enhancement I want, it activates when played, and I can play another enhancement right after it until I finish, or somehow end the battle.
Awesome.
-
Correct. So, in your other example of playing CL, then a bunch of other enhancements, then transferring initiative, your opponent's "negate last" would not negate CL.
-
One final question.
I know that say, if you RA with ET and play AoCP, your opponent cannot play CM until AFTER ET's sa finishes... or you cant CM someone in the middle of a banding chain to "break" the chain while they are entering battle.
Does this work similarly? Meaning, does my opponent have to wait until I am finished playing enhancements before they can even play a dominant?
-
Yes, absolutely. Another beauty for that card. ;)
-
Does this work similarly? Meaning, does my opponent have to wait until I am finished playing enhancements before they can even play a dominant?
You are correct Sir!
-
Another question:
Arrogance
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Crimson • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Holder may play as many evil enhancements as desired. Initiative passes when holder is done playing enhancements. • Identifiers: OT, Depicts a Weapon, Connected with David • Verse: I Samuel 17:43-44 • Availability: Patriarchs booster packs (Rare)
Can my opponent play AotL while I am playing cards via Arrogance? Abilities must complete before a dom can be played, and the ability of Arrogance continues until the end. What happens?
-
I just asked that exact question.
-
great minds think alike.
-
Hey,
My understanding of Arrogance is that it's like Babel for enhancements. You choose a certain number of enhancements to play put them all into play at once, they then take effect in the order you choose. Once the last enhancement completes you determine initiative normally (giving a character the opportunity to negate their own removal from battle if that is applicable).
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Well, now I'm stuck.
I've heard several explainations from multiple people.... who is right here?
-
I'm not a "moderator," so my opinion is moot. However, I rule according to the rulebook and REG, which says nothing about playing Arrogance like Babel.
-
Well, now I'm stuck.
I've heard several explainations from multiple people.... who is right here?
Its played (to my knowledge):
You play X cards (Take order in order played)
And if you kill the rescuer, well they can ITB :-p
-
And if you kill the rescuer, well they can ITB :-p
That's why you do a super archers band and play a million sin in the camps, confusions, etcetcetc.
-
I'm not sure how you can justify playing enhancements when there is no hero in battle.
-
E.T
Hidden Treasures
-
E.T
Hidden Treasures
A hero would be in battle.
-
Hey,
I'm not sure how you can justify playing enhancements when there is no hero in battle.
Playing an enhancement by a special ability does not require there to be both a hero and an evil character in battle when it happens.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
E.T
Hidden Treasures
A hero would be in battle.
But an evil character isn't. Its just the reverse of it.
-
I don't think theres a game rule stating an EC is not allowed to continue to play enhancements without a hero in battle, its just that no cards allow the situation to happen.
If there were a hypothetical card that said "Discard all heroes in battle. You may play the next enhancement. This ability can not be interrupted."... I would argue that you very well COULD play another enhancement.
The only reasons you cant play EE's without a hero in battle are as I stated above... and the fact that you cant put an EC into battle until a Hero has entered. Find me a quote in the REG that states EE's may NOT be played in battle unless a hero is in battle.
-
Im tempted to make a website called "The REG" just so I can quote it in situations like this.
-
Arrogance's SA trumps normal rules for passing initiative. However, an initiative check is only done if there is a hero and an EC in battle.
From the rulebook (p.17):
If you have a Hero(es) in the Field of Battle and your opponent has an Evil Character(s) in the Field of Battle, you need to check for initiative.
-
Thats just saying you need to check for initiative when both groups are in battle.
Again, how come you can play enhancements BEFORE and Evil Character enters battle? Wouldnt you need to check for initative to play an enhancement then?
Also, you said Arrogance trumps initiative.
Also, for those who say "once the hero dies, the battle is over..." ... How come I am allowed to grab a new evil character using Unknown Nation after my opponent AotL's my only EC in battle? shouldnt the battle have ended as soon as my EC dies?
-
Arrogance's SA trumps normal rules for passing initiative. However, an initiative check is only done if there is a hero and an EC in battle.
From the rulebook (p.17):
If you have a Hero(es) in the Field of Battle and your opponent has an Evil Character(s) in the Field of Battle, you need to check for initiative.
Now to completely shoot down that statement.
Side battle between two evil characters? in that battle (battle is singular(not the field of battle) there is no hero, so no init checks are done and they instantly end?
-
Thats just saying you need to check for initiative when both groups are in battle.
Again, how come you can play enhancements BEFORE and Evil Character enters battle? Wouldnt you need to check for initative to play an enhancement then?
That's the way the rules are set up. The whole purpose of the game is to win Lost Souls. The hero enters first and does what he does. The blocker then comes in (if he can) to try to stop them. From then on, initiative passes back and forth. The rulebook clearly orders this process.
Also, you said Arrogance trumps initiative.
I said Arrogance trumps the passing of initiative. Initiative is not passed if there is no hero in battle, because the battle would be over. The hero starts the battle and there is no battle without the hero. That's the purpose of the game.
Also, for those who say "once the hero dies, the battle is over..." ... How come I am allowed to grab a new evil character using Unknown Nation after my opponent AotL's my only EC in battle? shouldnt the battle have ended as soon as my EC dies?
Heroes are not ECs. Again, the purpose of the game is for the hero to win Lost Souls. That's why when it is your turn, you are the hero. With no hero, there is no battle.
-
Arrogance's SA trumps normal rules for passing initiative. However, an initiative check is only done if there is a hero and an EC in battle.
From the rulebook (p.17):
If you have a Hero(es) in the Field of Battle and your opponent has an Evil Character(s) in the Field of Battle, you need to check for initiative.
Now to completely shoot down that statement.
Side battle between two evil characters? in that battle (battle is singular(not the field of battle) there is no hero, so no init checks are done and they instantly end?
Except that the quote I gave specifically says Field of Battle.
-
Oops XD, well I could still CM your hero. so assuming I do that....same idea as above.
-
I've heard several explainations from multiple people.... who is right here?
I would side with SirNobody on this one. Arrogance explicitly states that the blocker may play as many evil enhancements as desired. After you have finished playing your enhancements, then the initiative passes to your opponent. Even in cases where he wouldn't normally have it, which could hurt the blocker.
While I would agree that by necessity, Arrogance's SA would trump the normal rules for passing initiative, that strikes me as a consequence of the SA and not its end result. Put another way, I can find nothing in Arrogance's SA that says it only trumps normal rules for passing initiative as opposed to the clear statement that you can play as many evil enhancements as you desire.
-
Oops XD, well I could still CM your hero. so assuming I do that....same idea as above.
I would argue that the side battle would end. Initiative can no longer pass since there is no hero in the Field of Battle.
Of course, I'm wrong, so my opinion is worthless anyway. When I am the only one arguing for a certain ruling, that does not bode well for me. Sir Nobody is official, so the ruling he gave sticks. I just want to know why the rulebook did not work in this case.
While I would agree that by necessity, Arrogance's SA would trump the normal rules for passing initiative, that strikes me as a consequence of the SA and not its end result. Put another way, I can find nothing in Arrogance's SA that says it only trumps normal rules for passing initiative as opposed to the clear statement that you can play as many evil enhancements as you desire.
I would argue that the second sentence distinguishes the clarification. But, again, I would be wrong. :'(
-
You play arrogance.
You play as many Enhancements as you want.
Initiative is checked after you declare yourself done. This is because the initial effect of Arrogance is not completed until after you've played all Enhancements of choice, just like you don't check initiative between Reach of Desperation and the "next" Enhancement that goes with it.
If the Hero is discarded, that happens at the time the Enhancement is played but if the blocker keeps going, the discard is still in that weird semi-suspended state where, at the initiative check later, you get a chance to negate-all or interrupt the battle, if possible. Negate-last does not work if there are other cards between the discard and your negate.
-
So for all of you who say I can play as many enhs as desired....
(A) do they all activate WHEN played?
(B) can my opponent interrupt while I am playing, or do they have to sit there until I am done and hope they have a Negate all to hit the kill card i played first?
-
a - yes
b - they have to sit there and then negate all or interrupt the battle.
-
Believe me when I say I'm already plotting things even worse.
-
Sir Nobody is official
Sir nobody isn't official but he is usually right ;)
its ok YMT, I've been in your stance before.
-
Hey,
Of course, I'm wrong, so my opinion is worthless anyway. When I am the only one arguing for a certain ruling, that does not bode well for me. Sir Nobody is official, so the ruling he gave sticks. I just want to know why the rulebook did not work in this case.
Opinions, especially when they are backed up with statements from the REG or rulebook, are never worthless. It is helpful when I see the opinions of others, it gives insight into how things can or should be reworded to make them clearer.
The reason the rulebook did not work is because Arrogance needs some serious play as.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Holder may play as many evil Enhancements as desired. Initiative passes when holder is done playing Enhancements.
I don't know what needs play-as'd. It seems remarkably clear to me given that it came before the recent attempts to tighten up the language.
-
Mabye instead of a Play As.... a little bit of text to clarify all the questions that were brought up in this thread?
-
Come on schaef, you know you wanna make the play as so long the darkness seems like 'Discard a hero in play' ;)
-
You play arrogance.
You play as many Enhancements as you want.
Initiative is checked after you declare yourself done.
Stephen, is initiative merely checked or does it "pass?" That can make a big difference.
@YMT--as a FFotP (Former Fighter of the Power) who has learned to be content as a LotM (Lackey of the Man) it helps to start by learning a few simple phrases. I have found "I am quite sure that The Schaef is correct...," "I would side with SirNobody on this one...," and "Oh noes--The Schaef and SirNobody disagree--what is the Bat Signal to bring Bryon from his lair?" to be three of the most useful. ;)
-
Initiative is checked after you declare yourself done.
Stephen, is initiative merely checked or does it "pass?" That can make a big difference.
Agreed.
If you finish arrogance and you are loosing by the numbers.... would it pass to the opponent due to the card CLEARLY saying "Inititative passes to your opponent"? If so... what happens then? would they get to play one card and initative passes back to me, or would my EC just die?
-
I thought we were trying to move away from situations where one player can do nothing but watch. If Arrogance is played after Love of Money, then you can have removals and discards that cannot be negated if the sequence ends with a Forgotten History type of card. If Arrogance's SA is meant to be taken literally, wouldn't the hero now get initiative after "the battle immediately ends?" Can the battle immediately end if Arrogance's SA is not completed?
Now, if you throw Momentum change in before Forgotten History, this process recycles and becomes exactly the kind of spectator sport that I thought we were fighting in the bigger picture.
-
Hey,
Holder may play as many evil Enhancements as desired. Initiative passes when holder is done playing Enhancements.
I don't know what needs play-as'd. It seems remarkably clear to me given that it came before the recent attempts to tighten up the language.
The second sentence I think need to be removed entirely. And I would probably reword the first sentence slightly, "Holder may play 500 enhancements." would do. That's assuming the card is played as I think it is played.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
I thought we were trying to move away from situations where one player can do nothing but watch. If Arrogance is played after Love of Money, then you can have removals and discards that cannot be negated if the sequence ends with a Forgotten History type of card. If Arrogance's SA is meant to be taken literally, wouldn't the hero now get initiative after "the battle immediately ends?" Can the battle immediately end if Arrogance's SA is not completed?
Now, if you throw Momentum change in before Forgotten History, this process recycles and becomes exactly the kind of spectator sport that I thought we were fighting in the bigger picture.
Isnt it about time DEFENSES could actually strike back like this? Besides, I'd expect that once you play arrogance, you know EXACTLY what you will play and in what order. I doubt it'd take as long as you make it sound. The offensive versions let your draw your entire deck...
Also, Momentum Change + a LOT of enhancements + Forgotten history... unless your opponent has some major numbers on their side... I dont expect you would die easily. Perhaps you meant a card like Bel's Banquet?
-
Hey,
I thought we were trying to move away from situations where one player can do nothing but watch. If Arrogance is played after Love of Money, then you can have removals and discards that cannot be negated if the sequence ends with a Forgotten History type of card. If Arrogance's SA is meant to be taken literally, wouldn't the hero now get initiative after "the battle immediately ends?" Can the battle immediately end if Arrogance's SA is not completed?
Now, if you throw Momentum change in before Forgotten History, this process recycles and becomes exactly the kind of spectator sport that I thought we were fighting in the bigger picture.
Yes the battle can immediately end with other abilities pending. You can only play enhancements that are in your hand when you play Arrogance which significantly limits the one sided options, although I expect the concern over one-sided play would keep a card like Arrogance from being printed if it wasn't already printed.
You just have to be careful about giving a crimson character the initiative to play Arrogance, similar to the way you already have to be careful about giving gray initiative lest they hit you with the false peace chain, bearing bad news, momentum change combo.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
I thought we were trying to move away from situations where one player can do nothing but watch. If Arrogance is played after Love of Money, then you can have removals and discards that cannot be negated if the sequence ends with a Forgotten History type of card. If Arrogance's SA is meant to be taken literally, wouldn't the hero now get initiative after "the battle immediately ends?" Can the battle immediately end if Arrogance's SA is not completed?
Now, if you throw Momentum change in before Forgotten History, this process recycles and becomes exactly the kind of spectator sport that I thought we were fighting in the bigger picture.
Not that I don't agree, but we can't reword old s.a. just because they do differently than what we want.
-
Isnt it about time DEFENSES could actually strike back like this? Besides, I'd expect that once you play arrogance, you know EXACTLY what you will play and in what order. I doubt it'd take as long as you make it sound.
It's not necessarily the timing, but the fact that you can do nothing about it, then it will happen again next turn, and the next, etc.
Also, Momentum Change + a LOT of enhancements + Forgotten history... unless your opponent has some major numbers on their side... I dont expect you would die easily. Perhaps you meant a card like Bel's Banquet?
I was just throwing out general examples off the top of my head. I just meant a bunch of cards that do alot of damage.
You can only play enhancements that are in your hand when you play Arrogance which significantly limits the one sided options, although I expect the concern over one-sided play would keep a card like Arrogance from being printed if it wasn't already printed.
Not if you include cards like Dream (as mentioned earlier) that allow you to draw more cards.
You just have to be careful about giving a crimson character the initiative to play Arrogance, similar to the way you already have to be careful about giving gray initiative lest they hit you with the false peace chain, bearing bad news, momentum change combo.
I guess that's what I am getting at. The modern game is not nearly as fun as it used to be. New players won't survive at tournaments because they will give up initiative. I had many young players in CT that simply stopped playing because they could not beat a professional speed deck. It was simply no fun to play.
I fear that we are driving away newer players while keeping the older loyal fan base interested. I miss the games where both players go back and forth with enhancement after enhancement until the entire table is overrun with cards for a single battle. That was fun, even if you lost the battle.
-
You can only play enhancements that are in your hand when you play Arrogance
Say what?
So for all of you who say I can play as many enhs as desired....
(A) do they all activate WHEN played?
(B) can my opponent interrupt while I am playing, or do they have to sit there until I am done and hope they have a Negate all to hit the kill card i played first?
a - yes
b - they have to sit there and then negate all or interrupt the battle.
according to that, I could play dream and, if this was type 2, play it 5 times to draw 15 cards, then proceed to play whichever cards i want regardless of what i had in my hand to begin with.
-
You can only play enhancements that are in your hand when you play Arrogance
Say what?
So for all of you who say I can play as many enhs as desired....
(A) do they all activate WHEN played?
(B) can my opponent interrupt while I am playing, or do they have to sit there until I am done and hope they have a Negate all to hit the kill card i played first?
a - yes
b - they have to sit there and then negate all or interrupt the battle.
according to that, I could play dream and, if this was type 2, play it 5 times to draw 15 cards, then proceed to play whichever cards i want regardless of what i had in my hand to begin with.
aint t2 swell? :-p
-
I guess that's what I am getting at. The modern game is not nearly as fun as it used to be. New players won't survive at tournaments because they will give up initiative. I had many young players in CT that simply stopped playing because they could not beat a professional speed deck. It was simply no fun to play.
Arrogance has been out since 2002. Therefore the game can't possibly be less fun NOW because of a card that has been exploited since its release. With the release of Kings and Momentum Change in 2004, it gained even more abuse. I would also contest that the game is not nearly as fun as it used to be. When the game was released, it was not very good. Then Warriors came around and saved the game, but FBN took over and EVERYONE played it. Then speed took over a few years down the road and now the meta game is spread out. I would say the game is the most fun that it has ever been before at this point in time. Newer players didn't have any easier of a time stopping FBN decks than they do speed decks, so I don't see what you are getting at. No matter what, new players usually will lose to the more experienced players, that is the how the game works. They simply learn how to build better decks and play the game better before they can succeed. It is the same way in Chess. A new chess player will of course lose at chess tournaments to more experienced players! I don't see why there should be any beef about new players losing in T1 tournaments....
I fear that we are driving away newer players while keeping the older loyal fan base interested. I miss the games where both players go back and forth with enhancement after enhancement until the entire table is overrun with cards for a single battle. That was fun, even if you lost the battle.
These looping one sided battles you speak of have been abused since 2004 when Momentum Change came out. There have been numerous rule changes since then to repeatedly fix the game from being 'broken.' So I don't know why you talk like this is such a big deal right now when it started 5 years ago and the effects are way less powerful now than they used to be...
Kirk
-
Hey,
You can only play enhancements that are in your hand when you play Arrogance which significantly limits the one sided options, although I expect the concern over one-sided play would keep a card like Arrogance from being printed if it wasn't already printed.
Not if you include cards like Dream (as mentioned earlier) that allow you to draw more cards.
You can only play enhancements that are in your hand when you play Arrogance
Say what?
Abilities with multiple targets declare all targets before the effect is carried out on any of them.
This is why I started out with the Babel analogy in the beginning. I play Babel I choose to band in Rabshakeh with Two Thousand Horses, Red Dragon, Goliath, and Emperor Nero. I bring them into battle and activate their abilities. If I draw an evil character with Two Thousand Horses can I choose to band that character into battle too? No. You're done declaring targets since you started bring in the characters and activating their abilities, you can't add any more targets.
Arrogance is the same way. You choose (target) all of the enhancements you are going to play with the ability and then you put them into play and carry out their abilities. If the first enhancement you play with Arrogance's ability is Dream and you draw Great Image and Set Fire you can't decide to play them with Arrogance's ability too for the same reason you can't band the character in with Babel that you drew with Two Thousand Horses, when you draw the card, you're past the declaring targets part of the ability so it is too late to decide to target that card too. (Albeit Dream itself allows you to play an enhancement so you could play one of the cards you draw with Dream as part of Dream's ability. You can also play your chain of Dreams before you play Arrogance since they give you the "play next" ability.)
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
say WHAT?
I dont see anything about targeting enhancements. It just says I may play any enhancements I desire until I am finished.
-
Abilities with multiple targets declare all targets before the effect is carried out on any of them.
If thats so I can block ANY ignore card from hand, now once they get into battle they may be ignored BUT all cards (ignores included) default to play. So the ec in my hand can't be targeted till he hits battle.
-
I miss the games where both players go back and forth with enhancement after enhancement until the entire table is overrun with cards for a single battle. That was fun, even if you lost the battle.
I totally agree with this :)
Abilities with multiple targets declare all targets before the effect is carried out on any of them.
If thats so I can block ANY ignore card from hand, now once they get into battle they may be ignored BUT all cards (ignores included) default to play. So the ec in my hand can't be targeted till he hits battle.
I don't think that this is in line with the current understanding of how ignore works. However, it would solve a LOT of pre-block ignore silliness and would be great for the game :)
-
Hey,
I dont see anything about targeting enhancements. It just says I may play any enhancements I desire until I am finished.
Time for an English lesson :) For abilities that express an interaction between the player and one or more cards the subject of the ability is the player that performs the action (often an understood you), the verb is the ability type, and the direct object is the target.
Example: "Holder may draw a card."
Subject (the player): holder
Verb (ability): draw
Direct Object (target): card
Arrogance: "Holder may play as many evil enhancements as desired."
Subject (the player): holder
Verb (ability): play
Direct Object (target): enhancement
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Hey,
Abilities with multiple targets declare all targets before the effect is carried out on any of them.
If thats so I can block ANY ignore card from hand, now once they get into battle they may be ignored BUT all cards (ignores included) default to play. So the ec in my hand can't be targeted till he hits battle.
We've covered this before, but I don't remember exactly where. There are 4 parts to ignore:
(1) The ignoring card is immune to the cards it ignores (targets the ignoring card).
(2) The ignored card is immune to the card that is ignoring it (targets the ignored cards).
(3) An ignored character in battle is treated as if it were not in battle for purposes of determining the state of battle (targets the ignored characters).
(4) An ignored character not in battle cannot enter battle (doesn't target anyone).
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
The second sentence I think need to be removed entirely.
If you mean that it is redundant, I believe it CAN be removed entirely. But it no more NEEDS to be removed than the second sentence of, say, Prince of This World, and probably less so.
And I would probably reword the first sentence slightly, "Holder may play 500 enhancements." would do. That's assuming the card is played as I think it is played.
That doesn't sound like an accurate description, since I've never seen a deck other than Kevin's monster that has 500 cards, much less Enhancements.
Abilities with multiple targets declare all targets before the effect is carried out on any of them.
So if I play Coat of Many Colors, I can only apply it to the cards in my hand at the time I play it?
-
Hey,
Abilities with multiple targets declare all targets before the effect is carried out on any of them.
So if I play Coat of Many Colors, I can only apply it to the cards in my hand at the time I play it?
Coat of Many Colors targets the selected Hero that can have any color enhancements played on it, not the enhancements.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
+1 with Kirk. Why all of a sudden are we complaining about cards that have been out for about 5 or more years? That to me doesn't make sense at all. The "good ol days" were a time of FbtN crap, that was more overpowered than speed ever was or ever will be. And like it was stated before, pretty much no matter what you do to the game the nOObs are going to lose consistently when playing against veteran players. That's just how things work when it comes to playing games, and if it doesn't work that way something is wrong with the game. The game is more balanced than ever before and that in itself makes it easier for the nOObs to start playing competitively at tournaments.
-
+1 with Kirk and SS. However, I don't see the harm in continuing to balance the equation.
-
Coat of Many Colors targets the selected Hero that can have any color enhancements played on it, not the enhancements.
So "regardless of brigade" targets the Hero but "play next" targets the Enhancement?
-
Ok, let's say I use Battle Cry and I want to band in Captain of the Host (Warriors) and The Strong Angel (Warriors). The Strong Angel's ability would negate Battle Cry, so I essentially decide to band in CotH "first" though technically they are being brought into battle by the same ability at the exact same time, thus their abilities activate at the same time. How does this work out? Can I decide to band in one first?
If so, what if I band Angel at Shur into battle? His ability activates, and I bring out a hero. Can I band in that hero, since Angel at Shur's ability activated first? If not, why can I band CotH in first, and then TSA?
It seems to me that when multiple independent abilities used by the same player activate at the same time, the player should determine in what order they take effect when they effect each other. Is this not how it's supposed to work?
-
+1 with Kirk. Why all of a sudden are we complaining about cards that have been out for about 5 or more years?
1.) There is no "we." I was the only one complaining. Prof Underwood was agreeing with the one scenario I described.
2.) You have been playing Arrogance that way for 5 years, but I have not. I explained how I have always ruled/played it, so my complaint is with the way that all of you have been playing it. For me, this is a new ruling.
3.) We define fun differently. I define fun by the enjoyment of my playgroup. If my kids are having fun, then I am having fun. When they are not having fun, I choose to reassess the fun I am having, whether I'm having a "good day" or not.
When the game isn't fun anymore, it's time to find a new game.
-
Hey,
So "regardless of brigade" targets the Hero but "play next" targets the Enhancement?
English lesson part 2: For abilities that express an interaction between two cards (or two sets of cards) the subject of the sentence is the target, the verb is the ability type, and the direct object is the second card in the interaction. (Note that the verb in pretty much all cases is the ability).
Example: "Hero ignores brown brigade."
Subject (target): Hero
Verb (ability): Ignores
Direct Object: brown brigade [cards]
Coat of Many Colors: "Selected Hero may use enhancement cards from any good brigade until end of current battle."
Subject (target): Hero
Verb (ability): use
Direct Object: enhancement cards from any good brigade
Also, anytime the word "select" or "selected" appears in a special ability it's pretty much a dead give away that the selected card is the target of the ability.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
That doesn't explain why the Enhancements are the target and not the holder. Your English lesson suggests the holder should be the target. Holder - play - Enhancement.
-
Hey,
Ok, let's say I use Battle Cry and I want to band in Captain of the Host (Warriors) and The Strong Angel (Warriors). The Strong Angel's ability would negate Battle Cry, so I essentially decide to band in CotH "first" though technically they are being brought into battle by the same ability at the exact same time, thus their abilities activate at the same time. How does this work out? Can I decide to band in one first?
Nothing in redemption happens "at the same time" (with the possible exception of New Jerusalem rescuing a second lost soul because it's ability says 'simultaneously'). There are two stages to activating an ability: (1) declaring targets, (2) carrying out the effect on each target. Step two happens to one target at a time, starting with the first declared target working it's way to the last.
So in your example, if you want Captain to take precedence over The Strong Angel you target Captain with Battle Cry then you target The Strong Angel with Battle Cry, then you declare yourself done selecting targets and you start carrying out the effect of the ability. The first target, Captain, is brought into battle and his ability activates, then the second target, The Strong Angel, is brought into battle and his ability activates (except it is now prevented by Captain so it doesn't do anything).
If so, what if I band Angel at Shur into battle? His ability activates, and I bring out a hero. Can I band in that hero, since Angel at Shur's ability activated first? If not, why can I band CotH in first, and then TSA?
Once again you declare targets for Battle Cry and you declare just one this time, Angel at Shur, then you declare yourself done declaring targets. You then carry out the effect of the ability so you bring Angel at Shur into battle activate it's ability and search for a hero. You cannot band that hero into battle because you did not declare it as a target in the first stage of activating Battle Cry and you are now in stage two of activating battle cry so it is too late to declare an additional target.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Hey,
That doesn't explain why the Enhancements are the target and not the holder. Your English lesson suggests the holder should be the target. Holder - play - Enhancement.
I believe it does...
English lesson part 2: For abilities that express an interaction between two cards (or two sets of cards) the subject of the sentence is the target, the verb is the ability type, and the direct object is the second card in the interaction. (Note that the verb in pretty much all cases is the ability).
Time for an English lesson :) For abilities that express an interaction between the player and one or more cards the subject of the ability is the player that performs the action (often an understood you), the verb is the ability type, and the direct object is the target.
Does Holder - play - enhancement express an interaction between the player and one or more cards or does it express an interaction between two cards?
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
3.) We define fun differently.
I don't think you and I differ very much at all about what constitutes "fun" when it comes to Redemption. Given that, however, I guess my question is how playing Arrogance the way you interpreted it any more fun than playing it the way it has been ruled? From the let's-sit-down-and-have-a-friendly-game point of view, Arrogance with any ruling tied to what's actually written on the card stinks.
The only solutions I can see would be to ban the card or to give it a "play as" that makes it play completely differently from what is written. Neither of those solutions is particularly "fun" either.
-
I don't think you and I differ very much at all about what constitutes "fun" when it comes to Redemption.
I wasn't talking to you. I was responding to Kirk and SoulSaver, who were addressing me directly.
-
Does Holder - play - enhancement express an interaction between the player and one or more cards or does it express an interaction between two cards?
So what you're really talking about is consistency given conditions that you have arbitrarily put into place to conveniently ignore inconsistencies. The language only applies in select instances when you say it applies.
-
Hey,
So what you're really talking about is consistency given conditions that you have arbitrarily put into place to conveniently ignore inconsistencies. The language only applies in select instances when you say it applies.
There are a lot of conditions to when a letter in the English language is supposed to be capitalized, but the presence of conditions does not make it arbitrary or inconsistent. There are different cases for different types of abilities, but I believe the system I am describing applies in all instances. Can you name any examples that conflict with the structure I have presented?
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
...the presence of conditions does not make it arbitrary or inconsistent.
The fact that the structure you presented exists nowhere outside your own creation makes it arbitrary; that is the very definition of the word. And the fact that you have conjured a means by which you interpret this card differently than every other instance of this type of ability and the normal way in which Enhancements are played, again makes it the very model of inconsistency.
The Hero is not the target of an ignore card because of grammatical structure, but because of the nature of the effect; it protects the Hero from the effects of the stated cards. The ability to play the next Enhancement suspends the rules of initiative and allows you to play additional cards. The player is the target of such an effect because of the nature of the ability (see also: cards that alter your draw phase, or restrict the types of battles you may begin), the subject of the sentence does not impact that, nor do I see any reason that any iteration of that should limit the next Enhancement to cards in one's hand. I have already stated that other play-next Enhancements do not limit you to the cards in hand at the moment you played your card; of that there should be no dispute.
To use verbal gymnastics to try and arrange this card differently is overthinking the plumbing. I don't have the luxury of designating arbitrary rules that do not appear in the rules and cannot be derived from them, and it is not my intention to start advocating rule additions based on sentence structure. All cards of a type will operate within the same parameters that define how they work within the framework of the rules.
-
Arbitrary: "depending on individual discretion (as of a judge) and not fixed by law." ~Encarta world English dictionary
Hope that helps. :)
-
Hey,
The ability to play the next Enhancement suspends the rules of initiative and allows you to play additional cards. The player is the target of such an effect because of the nature of the ability.
When we eliminated human actions I argued that play the next enhancement should be an ongoing ability that was described as "suspending the normal rules of initiative." But I lost that argument and play the next enhancement was categorized as an instantaneous ability. It was Bryon who eventually helped me to understand that play the next enhancement does not target the player or the game rules but the enhancement card that is played.
I have already stated that other play-next Enhancements do not limit you to the cards in hand at the moment you played your card; of that there should be no dispute.
It's not the moment you play the card that matters, it's the moment the play the next enhancement ability activates. How can an instantaneous ability play a card from your hand that is not in your hand at that instant?
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
But I lost that argument and play the next enhancement was categorized as an instantaneous ability.
Because it is instantaneous does not mean it does not suspend initiative. You play one card, and then you play another card, no initiative check is made and no Dominants or triggered cards may be used. The rules of initiative are unarguably suspended.
It was Bryon who eventually helped me to understand that play the next enhancement does not target the player or the game rules but the enhancement card that is played.
Bryon has long tried to argue that no cards ever target players but that is an issue on which I was corrected several years ago. Besides, if the Enhancement card was the target, then either you would not be allowed to play a card you had just drawn, or your logic is not supported by the mechanics of the game, and Arrogance is not limited to cards in hand at that moment.
It's not the moment you play the card that matters, it's the moment the play the next enhancement ability activates.
The two are exactly the same. That's the whole point of instantaneous abilities. You said so yourself.
How can an instantaneous ability play a card from your hand that is not in your hand at that instant?
The same way it is not resolved until the ability of the other card is also completed. Interrupt is also an ability that has a limited duration but it is still instantaneous, because it only suspends the effects of other cards until the secondary ability is completed. Other play-next cards allow you to play cards just-drawn.
-
1.) There is no "we." I was the only one complaining. Prof Underwood was agreeing with the one scenario I described.
Okay, that's cool. You're not the only one to say something about certain cards that "break the game", and make the game not fun. I just don't understand why people would wait for so long to say something when these cards that "break the game" have always been around, and will always probably be. In most card games there are a set of powerful cards that give you an advantage in my experiences.
2.) You have been playing Arrogance that way for 5 years, but I have not. I explained how I have always ruled/played it, so my complaint is with the way that all of you have been playing it. For me, this is a new ruling.
That's interesting, I guess that would be quite a shock to find out what this card can actually do. :o
3.) We define fun differently. I define fun by the enjoyment of my playgroup. If my kids are having fun, then I am having fun. When they are not having fun, I choose to reassess the fun I am having, whether I'm having a "good day" or not.
When the game isn't fun anymore, it's time to find a new game.
Yeah, I guess we do. What is it that makes your kids have fun playing Redemption?
-
Yeah, I guess we do. What is it that makes your kids have fun playing Redemption?
The situation I described earlier about the back and forth:
1. "Discard - you're dead"
2. "No, I'm not - interrupt, now I'm immune."
1. "Oh yes you are -interrupt your immunity, discard again."
2. "Oh no I'm not - interrupt and band in someone else."
etc...
As the battle goes back and forth, they get louder... they start sitting higher in their seat until they are standing.... they start gripping their cards harder so that they warp...
In the end, one player yells "Yesssssssss!!!!!" while the other yells "Noooooooo!!!!!!!!!!" but they both laugh at the epic battle. They, and all the other kids who had stopped their games to watch it.
-----------------------------
Just to clarify, I'm not saying that my reasons are better than someone else's, they are just different. I was commenting earlier from my perspective which is why it came across as overbearing.
-
And then, "KHAAAAANNN!!!!!"
-
just for the record, YMT, we still have those up here in the Northeast ;D
-
Arrogance is the same way. You choose (target) all of the enhancements you are going to play with the ability and then you put them into play and carry out their abilities. If the first enhancement you play with Arrogance's ability is Dream and you draw Great Image and Set Fire you can't decide to play them with Arrogance's ability too for the same reason you can't band the character in with Babel that you drew with Two Thousand Horses, when you draw the card, you're past the declaring targets part of the ability so it is too late to decide to target that card too. (Albeit Dream itself allows you to play an enhancement so you could play one of the cards you draw with Dream as part of Dream's ability. You can also play your chain of Dreams before you play Arrogance since they give you the "play next" ability.)
I agree with this. You have to pick the cards you play as part of Arrogance when you play Arrogance (say, cards A, B and C). However, if one of the cards is Dream (say card B), Dream allows you to draw three cards (say, a, b and c) and play an additional card (say b). The card "b" is not part of the Arrogance cards targeted to play, but instead is played as part of the Dream special ability sequence. Any other cards drawn with Dream (a and c) cannot be played as part of Arrogance card sequence, since they were not targeted when Arrogance was played.
It might be easier to place all the enhancements you wish to play with Arrogance on the table in the order you wish to play them. Once on the table, you go through each card, one at a time, and perform their special abilities, one at a time. Arrogance allows you to play multiple cards without having to check initiative, but limits you to playing cards you had in your hand at the time.
Mike
Mike
-
I'm not sure how you can come up with that interpretation. It says that, "Holder may play as many evil enhancements as desired. Initiative passes when holder is done playing enhancements." I don't see anywhere a limit to cards that are in hand when Arrogance is played.
-
As Tim said several times, you have to select targets right when a card is played, always. Arrogance is no exception.
-
Tim squared. Nice.
Mike
-
so then by that reasoning I can't play an enhancement i draw with any of the "Draw X cards and play the next enhancement" cards because the cards I drew weren't targeted when the card was initially played.
Also, I agree with RR. If Arrogance can't play cards you drew because they weren't initially targeted, then you should be able to block a character that's ignoring a character that's in your hand/deck/darkness anyways because they're not in play to be targeted and the default of targeting is in play.
-
For "Draw and play," the effects happen in order. You draw. Then you choose the card to play. So you can choose one of those you just drew because it comes after.
Ignore targets the ignorer, not the ignoree. Miriam doesn't target everybody gold, Miriam targets Miriam.
-
As noted previously, the wording for Arrogance is horrible, no utterly horrible, if played according the the understanding given.
-
Question, wouldnt Dream interrupt Arrogance's SA anyways, and then once it ends, you could "retarget" the 3 cards you just drew?
Also, if a hero said "Hero may play enhancements of any color"... going off the logic you all are using, he could only play the enhancements that were in your hand to begin with. I dont agree with this at all.
-
Hey,
Question, wouldnt Dream interrupt Arrogance's SA anyways, and then once it ends, you could "retarget" the 3 cards you just drew?
Arrogance is an instantaneous ability, and it is not played by your opponent, thus it would not be interrupted by Dreams "interrupt the battle" ability.
Also, if a hero said "Hero may play enhancements of any color"... going off the logic you all are using, he could only play the enhancements that were in your hand to begin with. I dont agree with this at all.
Read my last post on page 5 of this thread. We already addressed that exact issue.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Coat of Many Colors: "Selected Hero may use enhancement cards from any good brigade until end of current battle."
Subject (target): Hero
Verb (ability): use
Direct Object: enhancement cards from any good brigade
Arrogance: "Holder may play as many evil enhancements as desired."
Subject (the player): holder
Verb (ability): play
Direct Object (target): enhancement
Why is the Subject the target of one, but the Direct Object is the target of the other?
Aside from that, the only main difference I see in your two examples is "Hero" vs "Holder"
Both "target" enhancements. Why do you treat them differently?
-
so then by that reasoning I can't play an enhancement i draw with any of the "Draw X cards and play the next enhancement" cards because the cards I drew weren't targeted when the card was initially played.
I posted the same argument and have yet to receive a satisfactory answer.
-
Hey,
Why is the Subject the target of one, but the Direct Object is the target of the other?
Aside from that, the only main difference I see in your two examples is "Hero" vs "Holder"
Both "target" enhancements. Why do you treat them differently?
See my third post on page six of this thread. Note in particular the bold sentences.
I posted the same argument and have yet to receive a satisfactory answer.
You have gotten two answers from two reliable sources, if those don't satisfy you I don't know what will.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
For abilities that express an interaction between two cards (or two sets of cards) the subject of the sentence is the target, the verb is the ability type, and the direct object is the second card in the interaction. (Note that the verb in pretty much all cases is the ability).
For abilities that express an interaction between the player and one or more cards the subject of the ability is the player that performs the action (often an understood you), the verb is the ability type, and the direct object is the target.
Could you explain where these two quotes came from? Like from the REG... or somewhere else?
Are you basicly saying that a player cannot be a target? If so, what is the target of False Dreams?
-
Somehow I think we are going in circles. Is Mike's (or Tim's) ruling official? If so, then a REG "Play As" may be necessary.
If we are still debating in preparation for a ruling, then I agree with the dissenters. The idea of spreading out the enhancements before activating them is not a clear interpretation.
I also agree that the "draw and play next" cards would be an issue with the current ruling. The word "and" makes it a problem since that could be interpreted as a "simultaneous" action, rather than progressive (i.e. "draw then play").
-
You have gotten two answers from two reliable sources, if those don't satisfy you I don't know what will.
I have received no such thing. My last post restating this conflict appeared at the bottom of page 6 and no reply followed. Ironically, your response immediately prior to that demonstrates the exact conflict I have outlined here, that your logic states targets are supposed to be declared immediately but play-next is not treated that way.
So no, I am not satisfied with the complete lack of any response between that post and my most recent one. I don't think that should be surprising.
-
Hey,
Could you explain where these two quotes came from? Like from the REG... or somewhere else?
They are quotes from earlier in this thread. The idea of using sentence structure to identify targets is not an official idea (but I believe it is accurate in almost all cases thus making it useful despite not being official). After taking a programing languages course in college I played around with defining a redemption "language" and this idea is something that grew out of that. The official way of identifying what is targeted by an ability is looking it up in the REG (although much of the current REG content predates the arrival of the concept of targets in redemption theory so it might be hard to find mention of what some abilities target).
Are you basicly saying that a player cannot be a target? If so, what is the target of False Dreams?
In the current redemption theory players cannot be targeted. So I guess that means False Dreams doesn't have a target. But I wouldn't be surprised if that gets changed in the near future :)
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
In the current redemption theory players cannot be targeted. So I guess that means False Dreams doesn't have a target. But I wouldn't be surprised if that gets changed in the near future
This is not correct and it has not been correct for some time. There are cards that target players rather than cards.
-
They are quotes from earlier in this thread.
Thats not what I meant... lol.
The idea of using sentence structure to identify targets is not an official idea (but I believe it is accurate in almost all cases thus making it useful despite not being official). After taking a programing languages course in college I played around with defining a redemption "language" and this idea is something that grew out of that. The official way of identifying what is targeted by an ability is looking it up in the REG (although much of the current REG content predates the arrival of the concept of targets in redemption theory so it might be hard to find mention of what some abilities target).
So is there any official backing in the REG or somewhere else to verify your english lessons, or are those just how you view it?
In the current redemption theory players cannot be targeted. So I guess that means False Dreams doesn't have a target. But I wouldn't be surprised if that gets changed in the near future :)
Current Redemption Theory? Is this different from the REG?
-
In the current redemption theory players cannot be targeted. So I guess that means False Dreams doesn't have a target. But I wouldn't be surprised if that gets changed in the near future :)
thats basically what this boils down to; your own personal interpretation. conjectures. it doesnt mean its necessarily right (as proven by cards that target players and draw/play next enhancements), and it doesnt necessarily mean that its wrong; its just merely speculation.
-
In the current redemption theory players cannot be targeted. So I guess that means False Dreams doesn't have a target. But I wouldn't be surprised if that gets changed in the near future
This is not correct and it has not been correct for some time. There are cards that target players rather than cards.
All cards that say "shuffle" would have to target the player.
-
All cards that say "shuffle" would have to target the player.
I have to disagree here.
Shuffle would target the card or deck that is being shuffled. The player just has to carry out the actions.
-
Hey,
There are cards that target players rather than cards.
Cool. I didn't realize that. I just know that the current REG says, "In Redemption®, special abilities always target cards." And I know that the next REG will have cards that target players.
Shuffle would target the card or deck that is being shuffled. The player just has to carry out the actions.
Exactly Right.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
"In Redemption®, special abilities always target cards."
So judging from this quote... False Dreams, Burial Shroud, Every Man's Sword, Displeased Phillistines, and several other cards all do nothing, because only cards can be the targets of Special Abilities? For some reason I don't think this will work.
*EDIT*
Also, how about the wording on Angry Mob?
"Spin card sideways (2 full rotations to count). Top of card must be facing a player 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."
-
Hey,
Somehow I think we are going in circles. Is Mike's (or Tim's) ruling official? If so, then a REG "Play As" may be necessary.
Mike, Bryon, and I discussed the issue and Mike's post was the result of that discussion. An REG "Play As" for Arrogance is definitely on the list of things to do.
I also agree that the "draw and play next" cards would be an issue with the current ruling. The word "and" makes it a problem since that could be interpreted as a "simultaneous" action, rather than progressive (i.e. "draw then play").
The REG says (in the glossary under Special Abilities):
"When a single card has more than one special ability (including gained abilities), and an order is not specified, perform the abilities in this order: • First, complete all special abilities in the order written on the card except those that add a character to the battle (banding abilities)."
A draw and play next card (we'll use Book of Hazzai as an example) has two abilities: draw three cards, and play the next enhancement. The two abilities are performed in the order they appear on the card. So the draw ability happens first and the play ability happens second. Declaring targets is the first part of "the ability happens." So the target for the play ability doesn't have to be declared until after the draw ability completes.
The difference between a draw and play ability and Arrogance is that Arrogance only has one ability "play x enhancements." So with Arrogance the targets for the play ability are declared as the first part of making the ability on Arrogance happen, which in the case of Arrogance because it only has one ability is also the first part of carrying out the effect of the entire card Arrogance.
Does that help clarify things at all?
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Unless the cards I listed do nothing because only cards can be targets... I still see it as the PLAYER is the target, and he/she may play as many enhancements as he wants.
-
All cards that say "shuffle" would have to target the player.
As far as I know all shuffles either target something to shuffle INTO the draw pile (which would make that card(s) the target) or is something that happens automatically as part of a search. "Shuffle" is not an ability that needs to target a player.
"Player may not draw cards" targets the player. So does "Player may not start a battle". I think there are one or two others that escape me.
The reference in the REG is geared toward Dove-type rulings that suggest you can target a player to make him discard from hand, which is not the case; the card is the target, the player is simply the person who gets to choose. This is another ruling that I know is right because I was corrected on it. The problem is, it dates back to a time on the EZBoard that I don't think is even archived on there any longer. But Rob stepped in and made it clear that was meant to be a default rule and not an inviolable universal rule.
The difference between a draw and play ability and Arrogance is that Arrogance only has one ability "play x enhancements." So with Arrogance the targets for the play ability are declared as the first part of making the ability on Arrogance happen, which in the case of Arrogance because it only has one ability is also the first part of carrying out the effect of the entire card Arrogance.
Does that help clarify things at all?
No, that does not clarify things because that does not change the nature of the card. Instantaneous cards happen... instantaneously. ALL of a Hero's abilities activate when he enters battle, they are RESOLVED in a certain order. Battle Resolution happens all in a single moment, and not in a time gap where other things can occur, it just RESOLVES in a certain order. That leaves only these possibilites for draw/play:
a). Draw/Play violates the rules applied to other cards by not activating all at once and resolving in order
b). Arrogance violates the rule that Enhancements are played one at a time and resolve one at a time.
c). there is a fault in the logic that says all targets must be declared at the moment the card is played
-
Hey,
So judging from this quote... False Dreams, Burial Shroud, Every Man's Sword, Displeased Phillistines, and several other cards all do nothing, because only cards can be the targets of Special Abilities? For some reason I don't think this will work.
If I ignore gold it stops the gold character in your hand from entering battle. Ignore works just fine without having to target a card (at least that aspect of ignore). The cards you listed are the same way. They don't have to target the player to work. They all do exactly what you think they do.
Also, how about the wording on Angry Mob?
"Spin card sideways (2 full rotations to count). Top of card must be facing a player 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."
The use of the word target in that ability is unfortunate but not surprising, that card was printed four years before target became a redemption word. Angry Mob is played as, "One randomly selected player must discard one hero at random that is not in battle."
On a side note, I didn't realize that Angry Mob could discard a character that was in a set-aside area, I'll have to add it to my deck now :)
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
What card is targeted by ANB's beginning a new turn?
-
So judging from this quote... False Dreams, Burial Shroud, Every Man's Sword, Displeased Phillistines, and several other cards all do nothing, because only cards can be the targets of Special Abilities? For some reason I don't think this will work.
If I ignore gold it stops the gold character in your hand from entering battle. Ignore works just fine without having to target a card (at least that aspect of ignore). The cards you listed are the same way. They don't have to target the player to work. They all do exactly what you think they do.
Wait, what? I never said anything about ignores. Besides, "Ignore gold brigade" could be interpreted as "Ignore all CARDS that are gold brigade."
There is no other way to intepret cards like...
False Dreams: Next player may not make a rescue attempt his next turn
Burial Shroud: Holder may not make a rescue attempt or be attacked. May be used twice.
Displeased Phillistines: Opponent (s) may not draw any cards or search draw pile next turn.
Every Man's Sword: No battle may begin as a battle challenge. (I know it has an errata but its still the same for my argument)
None of those can be interpreted aside from targeting things that are not cards, which would directly violate that quote you provided, which clearly states only Cards can be targets.
-
Hey,
Instantaneous cards happen... instantaneously.
Actually I think, "Instant abilities complete before another ability can be inserted, including dominants" [REG Glossary of Terms under Instant Abilities].
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Can you explain to me why you made that post after I made a lengthy explanation about resolution apart from activation? I can assure you that in the meantime, the sarcasm hasn't moved the conversation forward at all.
Nor has the lack of response regarding the "card" targeted by the phrase "begin a new turn". Same goes for "skip draw phase" and "end the battle". These and others like them all have the same thing in common: they address higher-level game actions and not simple interaction between cards. Cards target cards to do things with cards. When you start talking about affecting phases of a turn, I think that very clearly targets a player, and correspondingly, cannot simply target a card or set of cards.
-
Are we ever going to get an official ruling on arrogance? I am going to have to agree with Schaef on this debate. Arrogance is a unique card that should allow you to play cards that are drawn during the same turn and not only exclusively target the cards currently in your hand at the time you play arrogance. However, there are others that feel it should be able to ONLY target cards in hand at the time arrogance is played. So can we get an official ruling from someone or is it going to be played by house rules for the time being?
-
Agreed. However, this debate seems to have turned into a question of how targeting works.
-
Hey,
Are we ever going to get an official ruling on arrogance?
Mike's post on page 7 of this thread should be considered official.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
there are obvious flaws in the logic, but oh well.
-
Hey,
there are obvious flaws in the logic, but oh well.
I couldn't help but think of #184 (http://ddicerc.tripod.com/id39.htm) when I read that. It's been too long since I looked at that list.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
there are obvious flaws in the logic, but oh well.
I couldn't help but think of #184 (http://ddicerc.tripod.com/id39.htm) when I read that.
That's a bit unfair, Tim, given that most of the posts after Mike's post are discussing perceived flaws in the logic of the ruling.
It's been too long since I looked at that list.
It is a very funny list.
-
Hey,
there are obvious flaws in the logic, but oh well.
I couldn't help but think of #184 (http://ddicerc.tripod.com/id39.htm) when I read that. It's been too long since I looked at that list.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
i figure its a bit unnecessary to state the obvious considering the weight of each counterpoint presented by pretty much everyone else on this thread. i at least extend you that benefit of the doubt, but maybe i was a bit assumptive?
-
Hey,
Are we ever going to get an official ruling on arrogance?
Mike's post on page 7 of this thread should be considered official.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
Not when schaef (Another playtester) disagrees it isn't.
You have yourself and Mike, we have the rest of the boards (including schaef).
Idk but it seems like you've been using arrogance alot more than the rest of us. ;) (I'm joking if it isn't clear)
But seriously, with the ammount of cards in the game that say player...(which you say players are NOT valid targets) (Burial shroud for example) how can you say a card only targets a certain number of cards? As many = As many, or shall all now not = all and any not = any?
-
I agree with Mike and Tim and Tim FWIW
-
The idea of using sentence structure to identify targets is not an official idea (but I believe it is accurate in almost all cases thus making it useful despite not being official). After taking a programing languages course in college I played around with defining a redemption "language" and this idea is something that grew out of that. The official way of identifying what is targeted by an ability is looking it up in the REG (although much of the current REG content predates the arrival of the concept of targets in redemption theory so it might be hard to find mention of what some abilities target).
So is there any official backing in the REG or somewhere else to verify your english lessons, or are those just how you view it?
I'm still waiting for an answer to this question since it got lost in the debate.
Lets simplify this debate a little bit. It seems the problem is that we can't come to agreeance on what Arrogance is actually targeting. I agree that cards should have a target when played, but what is the target on this card?
For some odd reason, the Target in Maly's english examples is the subject in one, but the direct object in the other, and I'm still waiting on an explaination for why this is the case. We need a well written description of what the target of a card is if we are going to get this technical about the writing on cards.
I propose the following:
*edit* added "/when"
*edit* added Complex Targets.
*edit* clarified Multiple Abilities
The target of a special ability is typically the first noun written, provided it is not part of an if/when statement or an action such as "band into battle". The exception to this is when the words Holder, Owner, Player, or any similar words come first. If they can be removed without changing the ability, then they are not the target. Some cards may have complex targets as well. An example of this is Babylonian Forces, which targets "Special Abilities on Red Heroes." Some cards may have multiple abilities in a single sentence. For example, Battle cry is split into two parts. Each part is written in seperate brackets, with the targets underlined: "[Interrupt the battle] and [band into battle as many Heroes from holder's territory as holder chooses]"
More Examples:
Idle Gossip: Holder chooses a Hero in play to fight the rescuing Hero. The loser is discarded.
This could be re-written as: "A Hero in play is chosen to fight the rescuing hero. The loser is discarded." This is the exact same ability. However, some cards could not be re-written in this manner:
False Dreams: Next player may not make a rescue attempt his next turn
This cannot be written any other way, because the player is the target. Another example:
Arrogance: Holder may play as many evil enhancements as desired. Initiative passes when holder is done playing enhancements.
Simply saying "As many evil enhancements as desired may be played." doesnt work. It needs the WHO of the equation, meaning It now lacks a target.
-
When a card says to play one enhancement, you target an enhancement to play. Arrogance says to play any number of enhancements; you target any number of enhancements to play. That's all that's really being said.
-
Hmm, I guess this is true. However, Arrogance does not say "evil enhancements in your hand." It just says "evil enhancements."
So... I guess it does target evil enhs, but it should not be limited to JUST the EE's in your hand, because it does not specify those that are in your hand. If an EC had the ability "May play enhancements from storehouse as if from hand," I would argue he could still play those EE's, because Arrogance targets ALL EE's.
However, does anyone object to my proposed definition for what a Target is? I challenge you all to find me any card that does not follow this definition.
-
To play an enhancement, it must be from a legal place to play it. Almost always, that's from hand. If an EC can play from elsewhere, a "play enhancement" ability can target from there as well too.
Target your enhancements, then play them. That's it.
-
Hey,
On the topic of targeting players, the REG currently says, "In Redemption®, special abilities always target cards." I can say with 99.8% confidence that that statement will not be in the next version of the REG and that the next version of the REG will identify a certain set of cards as cards that target a player (this set of cards will include many of the cards mentioned in the last few pages of this thread such as False Dreams, Burial Shroud, and Every Man's Sword - and I believe will allow Every Man's Sword to return to functioning like it was originally intended to function). I'm also quite confident that the next version of the REG will not change how these cards are played.
On the topic of my "English lessons," no they are not official. It was just me giving my personal explanation for things. It is possible that something similar to my English lessons may become official in a couple months after I've had time to work out what kinks may be in the concept, but right now it isn't official in any way shape or form.
On the topic of the official-ness of Mike's post, as I stated in my first post about Mike's post it was made as a result of a discussion that included Mike, Bryon, and myself. Which means it is supported by both Mike and Bryon. Short of a direct post from Rob, a Bryon and Mike agreement is as official as it gets.
On the topic of what abilities target, while identifying it based on sentence structure or word order is nice and useful as a guide, I fear I have mislead some people by trying to explain targets using sentence structure. The target of an ability is based on what it is that that type of ability always targets (ideally this would be found in the REG section for each ability, for many abilities you will find it there, for the rest of the abilities you will find it there in the next version of the REG). The ability pertinent to the Arrogance discussion is Play an Enhancement abilities which always target the enhancements that are played.
On the topic of Arrogance, I think a lot of people are struggling with it because they are trying to figure out how to play it based on what it says on the card rather than by identifying what type of ability it is. Arrogance is a Play an Enhancement ability. Play an Enhancement abilities target the enhancements that are played. Play an Enhancement abilities have a default condition that their targets must be in the players hand.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Ok, how does this sound for a nice clean reword of Arrogance?
Play the next enhancement. This ability repeats until holder is finished playing enhancements.
We have one other enhancement out that "repeats" its ability, and nobody is confused about how that works. However, this solves the problem of targeting, because after you play one enhancement, it would be able to target any new cards. This seems to be the original intent of the card.
Play an Enhancement abilities have a default condition that their targets must be in the players hand.
Quote and link for this? I couldn't find it in the REG.
*EDIT*
Looking in the REG, i noticed something:
How to Play
The rules of initiative require that the player with initiative may play the next enhancement card or pass. However, ‘play the next enhancement’ cards allow the holder to temporarily suspend the initiative rules until the effect is completed. If playing the next card depends on a condition to be satisfied, the special ability to play the next card may either be delayed or not completed at all. For example, some ‘play next enhancement’ cards cannot be completed until a blocker is presented in battle. In this condition, an enhancement card cannot be played until the blocker is presented and the blocker’s special ability is activated. If no blocker is presented, no enhancement card can be played.
It says nothing about targeting what card you play. It simply changes how Initiative works.
-
"special abilities always target cards" should not be in THIS version. It is an error. I can't think of any more detail or evidence to add beyond the copious amounts already supplied.
It is in no way my desire to see a system where language drives the function of the card. Having argued for top-down rulings for so long, I'm amazed that you would even contemplate this. The function of the card should drive the language, not the other way around.
-
We have one other enhancement out that "repeats" its ability, and nobody is confused about how that works.
Are you referring to Heavy Taxes?
Play an Enhancement abilities have a default condition that their targets must be in the players hand.
Quote and link for this? I couldn't find it in the REG.
I'm going to guess it's not in the reg anywhere. But that is how _everyone_ plays it. I've never seen anyone even try to play an enhancement from say storehouse with a play next ability. Also the phrase "use enhancements here as if played from hand" would support the assumed default condition.
Looking in the REG, i noticed something:
How to Play
The rules of initiative require that the player with initiative may play the next enhancement card or pass. However, ‘play the next enhancement’ cards allow the holder to temporarily suspend the initiative rules until the effect is completed. If playing the next card depends on a condition to be satisfied, the special ability to play the next card may either be delayed or not completed at all. For example, some ‘play next enhancement’ cards cannot be completed until a blocker is presented in battle. In this condition, an enhancement card cannot be played until the blocker is presented and the blocker’s special ability is activated. If no blocker is presented, no enhancement card can be played.
It says nothing about targeting what card you play. It simply changes how Initiative works.
There was a debate a while ago as to whether play next enhancement should be an instantaneous ability or an ongoing ability. The debate occurred primarily on the private part of the message board. In the debate I argued that it should be an ongoing ability and suggested the idea that a play next enhancement ability "temporarily suspends initiative." Mike liked the phrase and put it in the REG despite the fact that I ultimately lost the debate.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Because it still does suspend initiative. It allows you to play a card without making an initiative check.
-
Pretty much, It comes down to this, Do we make it so abilities complete their targeting the instant they activate or Keep it how it is.
Arrogance targets init, as do all play next cards atm.
-
So I suppose Arrogance's special ability does not allow you to target cards that are still in your draw pile. However, once you play Dream, it's special ability allows you to target any of the enhancements you just drew, thus that would allow you to legally play enhancements just drawn.
-
So I suppose Arrogance's special ability does not allow you to target cards that are still in your draw pile. However, once you play Dream, it's special ability allows you to target any of the enhancements you just drew, thus that would allow you to legally play enhancements just drawn.
Dream will in fact allow you to play one of the newly-drawn cards through its special ability, as has been covered earlier in the thread.
-
oh, so it is ok to play cards drawn via dream after playing arrogance? hmmm, if that's so then this whole thread is finally making sense to me.
-
Dream will in fact allow you to play one of the newly-drawn cards through its special ability, as has been covered earlier in the thread.
But the logic that allows one but not the other, has not.
-
Dream will in fact allow you to play one of the newly-drawn cards through its special ability, as has been covered earlier in the thread.
But the logic that allows one but not the other, has not.
Pardon me if this has already been said, I haven't followed the entire discussion. If Arrogance targets the cards that can be played by it's SA when it's played, this might explain why you can still play a card drawn off dream (or even play AoCp when it's drawn from Reach). The ability on Dream, Reach, Words, etc comes in three parts.
1) Interrupt the battle
2) Draw 3 cards
3) Play an enhancement
The play an enhancement portion wouldn't attempt to target the enhancement in your hand until after the cards are drawn, therefore they would be a legal target for the play next ability.
-
Gabe's got it.
-
But that is already after the Enhancement is played and activated, which was the hole in the logic I have been trying to point out this whole time. You are choosing a target after you have already activated the Enhancement.
-
Isn't arrogance an ongoing ability regardless?
-
When a card is played that has multiple SAs, the SAs have to play in order serially, not parallel. That means when you play Dream, you first interrupt the cards already played, you then draw three cards, and you then can play an enhancement. You don't play all three simultaneously Schaef.
Mike
-
There is only one card. Because they resolve in a certain order does not mean the card has more than one activation. One card activates one time. I would also point out an order of resolution when presenting Heroes in battle, and an order of resolution for Battle Resolution, where no one argues that these are more than one event.
-
One card activates one time.
One card can have multiple special abilities that activate sequentially, with the later ones being effected by the first. For instance, Emperor Augustus:
"All N.T. humans in set aside areas must return to owner's territories. All opponents with a N.T. human in territory must discard a card from hand without using it."
Let's say the attacker has no NT humans in territory but had Paul set-aside. When Augustus enters battle, the first ability returns Paul to territory, and then the second ability causes him to discard because at the time of the activation of the second ability, he had a NT human in territory.
Do you disagree? I'm trying to find the point of contention.
-
Hey,
Isn't arrogance an ongoing ability regardless?
No. Arrogance is a "play an enhancement" ability. All play an enhancement abilities are instantaneous abilities.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Ah but the second clause is ongoing because it is trigger, is it not?
-
Do you disagree? I'm trying to find the point of contention.
I don't disagree. I'm only saying the logic being applied to these cards is all over the place.
-
More importantly, it will not be the default logic of most players. Without a "Play As," I fear that this interpretation of Arrogance will be limited to the few players reading this thread or those who have "always played it that way."
-
More importantly, it will not be the default logic of most players. Without a "Play As," I fear that this interpretation of Arrogance will be limited to the few players reading this thread or those who have "always played it that way."
+1
I believe YMT just summed up what's needed. Whether I like the ruling or not, if this is how Arrogance is played it needs a play as. The wording lends itself to say "you can keep playing cards forever" so if that is not the case, then it needs to be changed.
-
Hey,
How about "Play X enhancements." With the identifier "X is whatever number holder chooses."
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
I find it ironic I'm dumbfound that we have an 11 page thread about a card that I've never played, nor seen played in what amounts to well over 1000 games of Redemption over a 3+ year time span. :P
-
Welcome to my world :)
-
I find it ironic I'm dumbfound that we have an 11 page thread about a card that I've never played, nor seen played in what amounts to well over 1000 games of Redemption over a 3+ year time span. :P
And I have no idea why, this card is immensely powerful.
-
I find it ironic I'm dumbfound that we have an 11 page thread about a card that I've never played, nor seen played in what amounts to well over 1000 games of Redemption over a 3+ year time span. :P
And I have no idea why, this card is immensely powerful.
This card COULD be immensely powerful. However, most of the time people don't have enough enhancements to make it worthwhile.
-
I find it ironic I'm dumbfound that we have an 11 page thread about a card that I've never played, nor seen played in what amounts to well over 1000 games of Redemption over a 3+ year time span.
You will, you will *evil laugh* You should come to southeast regionals.
-
I find it ironic I'm dumbfound that we have an 11 page thread about a card that I've never played, nor seen played in what amounts to well over 1000 games of Redemption over a 3+ year time span. :P
And I have no idea why, this card is immensely powerful.
This card COULD be immensely powerful. However, most of the time people don't have enough enhancements to make it worthwhile.
stall decks.