Author Topic: Arrogance. (Read 29544 times)

Master KChief · « **Reply #125 on:** February 23, 2009, 05:58:07 AM »

there are obvious flaws in the logic, but oh well.

SirNobody · « **Reply #126 on:** February 23, 2009, 06:37:13 AM »

Hey,

Quote from: Master KChief on February 23, 2009, 05:58:07 AM

there are obvious flaws in the logic, but oh well.

I couldn't help but think of #184 when I read that. It's been too long since I looked at that list.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #127 on:** February 23, 2009, 10:10:15 AM »

Quote from: SirNobody on February 23, 2009, 06:37:13 AM

Quote from: Master KChief on February 23, 2009, 05:58:07 AM
there are obvious flaws in the logic, but oh well.

I couldn't help but think of #184 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.

Quote

It's been too long since I looked at that list.

It is a very funny list.

Master KChief · « **Reply #128 on:** February 23, 2009, 02:11:31 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on February 23, 2009, 06:37:13 AM

Hey,

Quote from: Master KChief on February 23, 2009, 05:58:07 AM
there are obvious flaws in the logic, but oh well.

I couldn't help but think of #184 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?

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #129 on:** February 23, 2009, 02:32:19 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on February 23, 2009, 03:16:33 AM

Hey,

Quote from: cforce44 on February 22, 2009, 10:36:51 PM
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?

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #130 on:** February 23, 2009, 04:26:09 PM »

I agree with Mike and Tim and Tim FWIW

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #131 on:** February 23, 2009, 05:13:14 PM »

Quote from: Lamborghini_diablo on February 21, 2009, 05:39:17 PM

Quote
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.

TimMierz · « **Reply #132 on:** February 23, 2009, 06:13:43 PM »

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.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #133 on:** February 23, 2009, 06:18:23 PM »

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.

TimMierz · « **Reply #134 on:** February 23, 2009, 06:52:06 PM »

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.

SirNobody · « **Reply #135 on:** February 23, 2009, 07:08:51 PM »

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

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #136 on:** February 23, 2009, 07:16:23 PM »

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.

Quote from: SirNobody on February 23, 2009, 07:08:51 PM

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:

Quote

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.

The Schaef · « **Reply #137 on:** February 23, 2009, 08:19:28 PM »

"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.

SirNobody · « **Reply #138 on:** February 23, 2009, 08:25:15 PM »

Quote from: Lamborghini_diablo on February 23, 2009, 07:16:23 PM

We have one other enhancement out that "repeats" its ability, and nobody is confused about how that works.

Are you referring to Heavy Taxes?

Quote

Quote from: SirNobody on February 23, 2009, 07:08:51 PM
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.

Quote

Looking in the REG, i noticed something:

Quote
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

The Schaef · « **Reply #139 on:** February 23, 2009, 08:28:30 PM »

Because it still does suspend initiative. It allows you to play a card without making an initiative check.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #140 on:** February 23, 2009, 09:05:02 PM »

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.

cforce44 · « **Reply #141 on:** February 24, 2009, 10:31:59 PM »

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.

TimMierz · « **Reply #142 on:** February 24, 2009, 10:37:53 PM »

Quote from: cforce44 on February 24, 2009, 10:31:59 PM

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.

cforce44 · « **Reply #143 on:** February 24, 2009, 11:08:27 PM »

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.

The Schaef · « **Reply #144 on:** February 24, 2009, 11:25:01 PM »

Quote from: TimMierz on February 24, 2009, 10:37:53 PM

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.

Gabe · « **Reply #145 on:** February 24, 2009, 11:35:08 PM »

Quote from: The Schaef on February 24, 2009, 11:25:01 PM

Quote from: TimMierz on February 24, 2009, 10:37:53 PM
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.

TimMierz · « **Reply #146 on:** February 25, 2009, 12:07:41 AM »

Gabe's got it.

The Schaef · « **Reply #147 on:** February 25, 2009, 12:29:01 AM »

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.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #148 on:** February 25, 2009, 12:39:58 AM »

Isn't arrogance an ongoing ability regardless?

frisian9 · « **Reply #149 on:** February 25, 2009, 12:58:22 PM »

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

News:

Author Topic: Arrogance. (Read 29544 times)

Lamborghini_diablo

Lamborghini_diablo

Lamborghini_diablo

The Schaef

The Schaef

cforce44

cforce44

The Schaef

The Schaef