Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Jmbeers on April 28, 2012, 05:37:21 PM
-
would his ability capture to a Raiders camp?
-
Bera, King of Sodom (Pa)
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 3 / 4 • Class: None • Special Ability: If an unoccupied Sodom site is in play, capture a red brigade Hero and place in Sodom.
Raiders' Camp (Ki)
Type: Fortress • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: If your human Evil Character captures a Hero, place it here. When opponent makes a successful rescue attempt or battle challenge, instead of surrendering a Lost Soul, release all Heroes from here back to owner. Does not count as redeemed soul.
Not sure, because Raiders' Camp does not say "Instead". If it is not an instead ability, then it should not be able to supersede the rest of the ability on Bera, meaning the hero should go to Sodom. However...after that, perhaps it should be placed in Raiders' Camp? I don't see why not, it doesn't say where they were captured to, just that it was captured.
I would say it would go to Raiders' Camp, but I am not certain.
-
I believe it would go to Raider's Camp. Bera's ability completes and puts the red brigade hero in Sodom, and afterwards, Raiders' Camp kicks in.
-
I'm pretty sure it would work. The reason why Raiders Camp doesn't have an instead is because it doesn't need one. The Heroes are still Captured.
-
I would think yes because all of the original capture cards send characters to camp (like net saying yada-yada, place in your land of bondage yada)
It tells you where to put it but the character still ends up in Raiders Camp.
-
Let's go one step further. I'd also argue that if a person used Dungeon of Malchiah, the hero would still go to Raider's Camp.
-
Let's go one step further. I'd also argue that if a person used Dungeon of Malchiah, the hero would still go to Raider's Camp.
Agreed. After thinking it over, I am firmly in agreement that wherever the character ends up it then goes to Raider's Camp. Not an instead, just changes the eventual location.
-
It works like Assyrian survivor. no matter how it's defeated (barring being removed from the game or shuffled into deck) it will end up in your opponents LoB.
-
Since Sodom would never then be occupied by a capture if you had Raider's Camp active, Bera would get multiple captures (if he survives).
-
Since Sodom would never then be occupied by a capture if you had Raider's Camp active, Bera would get multiple captures (if he survives).
T-Ment, Political Bribes, and Fortify Site makes sure that he stays alive for another use.
This is actually a really fun combo to use in a Red Warriors/Canaanites deck. Another good good combo for that type of deck is Caanan/Caananite/Asahel you can use the ability on Caanan to nail a character in territory, then CTB your black caananite with Asahel ftw.
-
Well now that you guys have picked this apart and declared the deck that I allready made ;)
I'll let you know that it is fun, and I actually (not to be mean but to give the deck some credibility) beat Chris who was useing a garden piles deck.
-
This is actually a really fun combo to use in a Red Warriors/Canaanites deck. Another good good combo for that type of deck is Caanan/Caananite/Asahel you can use the ability on Caanan to nail a character in territory, then CTB your black caananite with Asahel ftw.
This combo does not work. Asahel says "Opponent's male human evil character". Your Canaanite in his territory is not "opponent's" because your opponent does not own it, he only controls it.
-
Are you positive about that? I thought that 'your'
just referred to control.
-
Are you positive about that? I thought that 'your'
just referred to control.
your implies ownership and control.
-
+1
-
Doesn't really matter to me, the deck I made it really based on the self capture, I don't even use Asahel due to playing HHI
-
Are you positive about that? I thought that 'your'
just referred to control.
your implies ownership and control.
You learn something new every day. :)
-
Are you positive about that? I thought that 'your'
just referred to control.
"your" necessitates ownership and control.
FTFY
-
So, to clarify, "opponent's" has the same stipulations as "your?"
-
Yep, unless it says Opponent controls
-
So, to clarify, "opponent's" has the same stipulations as "your?"
Very good question...does that mean that if your opponent bands your hero into battle and you play Hunger, they are not affected? I was not under this impression at all.
-
That is correct. Hunger will not affect a Hero owned by you and controlled by your opponent.
-
That is correct. Hunger will not affect a Hero owned by you and controlled by your opponent.
Good to know. Makes me dislike the rules currently governing control, but good to know at least, thanks :)
-
To answer the original question, it was ruled back in 2006 that Bera's capture ability would put anyone in Raider's Camp. I played a self capture red/black deck that year at nationals and did not do very good! ;D