Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: BubbleBoy on March 31, 2011, 01:49:18 PM
-
I've wondered this ever since I saw Birth Foretold: If I play Birth Foretold to search for Son of God, and then my opponent plays Mayhem, does Son of God get shuffled? If not, then I assume I would not get to draw 6 new cards, because my entire hand was not shuffled.
-
OH SNAP.
-
Protect only targets cards in play, unless specified otherwise. For an example of a list of otherwises, see Thad.
-
The thing is that Birth Foretold targets specific cards. I though there was a rule about that.
-
The thing is that Birth Foretold targets specific cards. I though there was a rule about that.
I agree. See Prince of the Air and Chamber.
-
The thing is that Birth Foretold targets specific cards. I though there was a rule about that.
I agree. See Prince of the Air and Chamber.
And Job + Dust and Ashes
-
The thing is that Birth Foretold targets specific cards. I though there was a rule about that.
I agree. See Prince of the Air and Chamber.
I thought we solved that issue by giving errata/play as to Prince of the Air.
The thing is that Birth Foretold targets specific cards. I though there was a rule about that.
I agree. See Prince of the Air and Chamber.
And Job + Dust and Ashes
Dust and Ashes isn't a protect.
-
The thing is that Birth Foretold targets specific cards. I though there was a rule about that.
I agree. See Prince of the Air and Chamber.
I thought we solved that issue by giving errata/play as to Prince of the Air.
The thing is that Birth Foretold targets specific cards. I though there was a rule about that.
I agree. See Prince of the Air and Chamber.
And Job + Dust and Ashes
Dust and Ashes isn't a protect.
So are you saying the rule is that abilities only target cards in play unless specified otherwise or targeting specific cards, except when that ability is a protect ability?
-
Prince of the Air (Pi)
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Orange • Ability: 10 / 11 • Class: None • Special Ability: Return an angel in battle (except warrior class) to owner’s territory. If block is successful, place one Chamber of Angels and its contents beneath owner’s draw pile. Cannot be negated. • Play As: Return one non-warrior class angel in battle to owner’s territory. If block is successful, place one Chamber of Angels and its contents beneath owner’s deck. Cannot be negated. • Identifiers: NT Male Demon • Verse: Ephesians 2:2 • Availability: Priests booster packs (Rare)
I don't see how the play as changes things...
-
Found the errata here: http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=24.0
Special abilities only target cards in play, unless another location is specified.
The second sentence of Dust and Ashes does not target anything. It only replaces the effect of another card that targeted Job. The other card did the targeting. Dust and Ashes only replaced the effect.
-
"Dust and Ashes" and "Chamber of Angels" are face up on the table (although not in play) so they might be more targetable than cards in your hand. I'm not actually sure how the ruling on this will go. But it if it is ruled that SoG in your hand is protected by Birth Foretold, then you are correct that Mayhem would NOT shuffle your entire hand, and therefore the draw 6 would NOT happen either.
The second sentence of Dust and Ashes does not target anything. It only replaces the effect of another card that targeted Job. The other card did the targeting. Dust and Ashes only replaced the effect.
I think they are referring to the ruling that D&A targets Job even if Job is harmed when he is currently set-aside.
P.S. I also thought I remembered PoA getting an eratta.
-
Alright, that makes sense.
-
If Birth Foretold only targets cards in play, why does it even include SoG in the protection clause since SoG will never be in play?
-
If Birth Foretold only targets cards in play, why does it even include SoG in the protection clause since SoG will never be in play?
I'm guessing it's because the wording was shorter that way.
-
Adding "(except Son of God)" wouldn't have added more than one additional line to a 4-line ability, and they have tons of other 5-line abilities, so it seems like it would have been worth it to prevent confusion.
-
If Birth Foretold only targets cards in play, why does it even include SoG in the protection clause since SoG will never be in play?
That is a good point. I think I would lean toward saying that SoG IS protected in your hand that turn. It seems the more intuitive way to play the card in the case of your opponent blocking you and playing High Priests Plot. Therefore, I think this could be the one risk of using Birth Foretold to get SoG before you plan on actually playing it.
Of course, if you play Birth Foretold to get SoG and have NJ already in your hand, then you would get to play it first (responding to your own action) before your opponent played Mayhem, as long as you move quickly.
-
Dominants are why Redemption needs a Stack.(FILO)
-
If Birth Foretold only targets cards in play, why does it even include SoG in the protection clause since SoG will never be in play?
That is a good point. I think I would lean toward saying that SoG IS protected in your hand that turn. It seems the more intuitive way to play the card in the case of your opponent blocking you and playing High Priests Plot. Therefore, I think this could be the one risk of using Birth Foretold to get SoG before you plan on actually playing it.
Of course, if you play Birth Foretold to get SoG and have NJ already in your hand, then you would get to play it first (responding to your own action) before your opponent played Mayhem, as long as you move quickly.
However, after you use Birth Foretold and then your opponent play or band someone that randomly discard card from hand, what if happen to be Son of God? Thanks.
ML.
-
If Birth Foretold only targets cards in play, why does it even include SoG in the protection clause since SoG will never be in play?
I'm guessing it's because the wording was shorter that way.
Exactly.
-
If Birth Foretold only targets cards in play, why does it even include SoG in the protection clause since SoG will never be in play?
I'm guessing it's because the wording was shorter that way.
Exactly.
No offense, but that's a silly reason. It's thinking like that which gets us cards like Split Altar that don't work properly. I really don't think most players would care if one more centimeter of the image was slightly covered by another line of text that makes the card make sense (or work at all in the case of Split Altar). After all, if people wanted to see the entire art of their card, they could always use enhancements with no special ability ;).
-
I too agree that if a card needs to be made longer to avoid confusion, it should be.
-
Why we upgrade our cards into a new form, so that way more words can be fit in cards. Thanks.
-
Historically speaking, clarifiers have been more confusing than helpful. ::)
Seriously though, I don't see why we need to put game rules on cards. In starter decks, yes, but in expansion packs, no. It's a less known rule, but regardless, special abilities don't override game rule.
-
If Birth Foretold only targets cards in play, why does it even include SoG in the protection clause since SoG will never be in play?
I'm guessing it's because the wording was shorter that way.
Exactly.
No offense, but that's a silly reason. It's thinking like that which gets us cards like Split Altar that don't work properly. I really don't think most players would care if one more centimeter of the image was slightly covered by another line of text that makes the card make sense (or work at all in the case of Split Altar). After all, if people wanted to see the entire art of their card, they could always use enhancements with no special ability ;).
I know you said you didn't mean to offend, but calling my reason silly is kind of offensive. That's like saying "I'm not meaning to hurt you while I strike you with my bat." :)
Split Altar was messed up because not a single playtester remembered that "all artifacts" defaulted to "all artifacts in play," or else, no playtester read it closely enough to notice that it was written that way. That was a proofreading error. That has nothing to do with not wanting to clutter a card with (except Son of God).
In fact, "(except Son of God)" would have caused MORE confusion, not less. Players would ask "How can you protect Son of God anyway? It isn't even in play!" We would have said "Protect cards with those titles in play and in hand from..." if we wanted to protect Son of God in hand.
Someday, there may be a way to place your Son of God card on a Manger artifact for some really nice effect. When that is possible, it might be very nice to play Brith Foretold first. ;)
-
I know you said you didn't mean to offend, but calling my reason silly is kind of offensive. That's like saying "I'm not meaning to hurt you while I strike you with my bat." :)
I'm sorry, I figured common sense would allow the understood "seems like" between "that" and "a silly" to not need to be typed considering my statement was an opinion. Apparently not everything can be omitted without causing confusion. :)
Split Altar was messed up because not a single playtester remembered that "all artifacts" defaulted to "all artifacts in play," or else, no playtester read it closely enough to notice that it was written that way. That was a proofreading error. That has nothing to do with not wanting to clutter a card with (except Son of God).
I never said (except Son of God) should have been added to Split Altar, that makes no sense. I was merely pointing out that, in my opinion (I'm explicitly stating it since you missed it last time), having a "less is more" attitude seems more harmful in the long run than just writing what you need to know on each card. When people train themselves to write things using the least number of words possible, they are more inclined to put too much less on the occasional card (see: Split Altar). I'm not saying every rule regarding the special ability should be printed on each card, but in a game where abilities are everything (and can override (certain) game rules) it seems like the occasional card with a little too much information is better than ending up with cards that don't function (see again: Split Altar). If you disagree, fine, but that's the way I see it.
In fact, "(except Son of God)" would have caused MORE confusion, not less. Players would ask "How can you protect Son of God anyway? It isn't even in play!" We would have said "Protect cards with those titles in play and in hand from..." if we wanted to protect Son of God in hand.
Confusion? Perhaps. Threads in Ruling Questions (like this very one)? I doubt it. As I said above, in my opinion, having momentary confusion about the oddly specific nature of a card seems to be better than uncertainty about how the card works at all as the former doesn't require needing to ask for a ruling.
-
If the reason was to shorten it, I think things like that should be avoided. It wouldn't have ruined the card to change it a bit. Knowing the history of split altar, even dozens of playtesters seem to forget things default to play. How do you expect hundreds of other players, specifically ones that don't follow the boards well, to know this?
-
having a "less is more" attitude seems more harmful in the long run than just writing what you need to know on each card.
I really do appreciate your concern for clarity. We try our best to be very clear. However, we also try our best NOT to state things that are redundant with the rules. Otherwise, it might sound to some players that this is a special case, rather than the default rule.
I am thankful that we have rules for the defaults (the "what you need to know"), and that we don't need to write them on the cards. That way, we can write the abilities on the left, rather than the ones that follow.
"capture a hero" - take a hero in play prisoner and place in your land of bondage. hero is treated as a lost soul
"discard a hero" - discard a hero in play
"discard an evil card" - discard an evil card in play
"protect a hero" - protect a hero in play
"protect cards with those titles" - protect cards with those titles in play
-
Knowing the history of split altar, even dozens of playtesters seem to forget things default to play. How do you expect hundreds of other players, specifically ones that don't follow the boards well, to know this?
First, there were no "dozens of playtesters" for that set. There were 8 proofreaders, and less than half of us playtested with our playgroups.
Second, that was in 2007-2008, 3 years ago. Playtesters are much more aware of the default "in play" rule now.
Third, I'd be willing to bet that many of us DID remember that rule when we wrote and proofread the card. We just didn't notice that it wasn't there. If you don't catch an error the first time you read it, and then nothing on that card changes in several drafts, you tend not to look at that card again, assuming that everything is "still fine." In retrospect, we should have had more eyes on that project. 8 proofreaders/playtesters back then (plus Rob) was probably not enough. In fact, I never actually playtested Split Altar personally. If I had, I might have caught it. For some reason, seeing the card on my mockup, or writing it out on a post-it note, and also using it in a game, makes me notice wording a lot more than just reading it on a computer screen.
Fourth, I apologize again for not catching it myself. Players sometimes think that they would not make mistakes if they were playtesters. I used to think that, too. ;)
Finally, I am very, very happy with our current playtest team. The dozen or so gentlemen that Rob has assembled include rules experts, grammar pros, detail-watchers, at least one very careful spelling checker, people with knowledge of the vast collection of cards from the past 16 years of Redemption, creative types, deck-building masters, strategic thinkers, Type 2 champions, Type 1 champions, multi-player fans, teams fans, Booster Draft fans, players who love speed decks, players who don't like speed decks, players who love themes, players who will ignore themes and build the best deck possible, and players who will try to break any card we try to make. Not only that, but some of us are playtesting with our playgroups, or online, where even more people are putting eyes on the cards. There are multiple themes and mini-themes that will make their debut this summer, and you can be assured of a few things:
1) Redemption will have MORE variety in deck building (though the new themes might remain popular for a while based on their sheer newness).
2) There will be new favorite heroes and evil characters
3) You will do certain things with certain cards that you have never done before (a new cost, a new effect, etc.)
4) Thad and CP will have some counters
5) There will be cards that frustrate some players, like Thad and CP did last year. We may or may not know what those cards are yet. ;)
-
As long as the players who don't like speed had more of a say than the ones who do, I'm content.
-
players who will try to break any card we try to make.
I'm one of those people. ;) I haven't broken anything this year, I promise.
1) Redemption will have MORE variety in deck building (though the new themes might remain popular for a while based on their sheer newness).
2) There will be new favorite heroes and evil characters
3) You will do certain things with certain cards that you have never done before (a new cost, a new effect, etc.)
4) Thad and CP will have some counters
5) There will be cards that frustrate some players, like Thad and CP did last year. We may or may not know what those cards are yet. ;)
Don't forget the new card type!
-
... grammar pros, ...
"Not that I speak in regard to need, for I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content:" - Phil 4:11
That being said, please don't make any more mistakes or erratas with green. ::)
-
Otherwise, it might sound to some players that this is a special case, rather than the default rule.
The only problem with this is that it IS a special case, or at least there is precedent (within this same set, even (see: Dust and Ashes)) that it is. Cards which refer to other cards by specific name sometimes can target those cards even when they're not in play. Am I making sense?
-
Cards which refer to other cards by specific name sometimes can target those cards even when they're not in play.
That is NOT true. There is no such rule in Redemption. As I've already said in this thread, the second sentence of Dust and Ashes does not target Job. The targeting is done by whatever other card targeted Job. Dust and Ashes only replaces that effect.
The part of Dust and Ashes that DOES target Job is the first sentence: search discard pile for Job.
-
Cards which refer to other cards by specific name sometimes can target those cards even when they're not in play.
That is NOT true.
So does that mean that Prince of the Air doesn't work?
Prince of the Air (Pi)
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Orange • Ability: 10 / 11 • Class: None • Special Ability: Return an angel in battle (except warrior class) to owner’s territory. If block is successful, place one Chamber of Angels and its contents beneath owner’s draw pile. Cannot be negated. • Play As: Return one non-warrior class angel in battle to owner’s territory. If block is successful, place one Chamber of Angels and its contents beneath owner’s deck. Cannot be negated. • Identifiers: NT Male Demon • Verse: Ephesians 2:2 • Availability: Priests booster packs (Rare)
-
Cards which refer to other cards by specific name sometimes can target those cards even when they're not in play.
That is NOT true.
So does that mean that Prince of the Air doesn't work?
Prince of the Air (Pi)
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Orange • Ability: 10 / 11 • Class: None • Special Ability: Return an angel in battle (except warrior class) to owner’s territory. If block is successful, place one Chamber of Angels and its contents beneath owner’s draw pile. Cannot be negated. • Play As: Return one non-warrior class angel in battle to owner’s territory. If block is successful, place one Chamber of Angels and its contents beneath owner’s deck. Cannot be negated. • Identifiers: NT Male Demon • Verse: Ephesians 2:2 • Availability: Priests booster packs (Rare)
Found the errata here: http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=24.0
Special abilities only target cards in play, unless another location is specified.
-
Cards which refer to other cards by specific name sometimes can target those cards even when they're not in play.
That is NOT true. There is no such rule in Redemption. As I've already said in this thread, the second sentence of Dust and Ashes does not target Job. The targeting is done by whatever other card targeted Job. Dust and Ashes only replaces that effect.
The part of Dust and Ashes that DOES target Job is the first sentence: search discard pile for Job.
...If I discard a card from your hand, or the top card of the deck, and it is an angel, the angel goes to Chamber. It always has. Nothing is changing about that. But Chamber does not say "If your angel is discarded FROM PLAY..." It just says "If your angel is discarded,..."
It is exactly the same with Dust and Ashes. "If your Job is harmed or defeated by an opponent,..." works just the same as "If your angel is discarded..."
The answer I gave on the playtester side of the board was not really intended to be a final wording for a ruling. I was just answering a question how I thought it should work and none of the playtesters disagreed. If anyone has a suggestion for a better way to word it, please help. Helping is better than mocking and insulting.
The traditional ruling that cards default to play unless otherwise specified is still true. This new rule is just stating what one of those "specified" situations is. The idea is that if a card refers to a specific card (ie. D&A targeting Job, or Prince of the Air targeting Chamber of Angels), then it targets that card even if it is NOT in play (ie. set aside).
I am trying to understand why SoG is not protected from Mayhem, Ill read the post again and come back...
-
Protect only targets cards in play, unless specified otherwise. For an example of a list of otherwises, see Thad.
Birth Foretold (Di)
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Silver • Ability: 1 / 4 • Class: Territory • Special Ability: Search deck for Isaac, Samson, John the Baptist, or Son of God. Protect cards with those titles from opponents' cards this turn. • Identifiers: NT, Based on Prophecy • Verse: Luke 1:31 • Availability: Disciples booster packs ()
-
The quote from Prof Underwood from January 15 is not correct, as far as I know.
Specifying a card title does not change the rule that in order to target a card not in play, you must specify the location of the card.
Prince of the Air only targets Chamber because Prince of the Air got errata which specifies "Chamber in set aside area."
Instead abilities that send cards to new destinations, such as on Dust and Ashes and Chamber of Angels, don't target anything. They only replace special abilities. The targeting is still done by the original card. So, for example, Christian Martyr targets TSA. Chamber simply changes that discard outcome into a "place in Chamber" outcome.
-
Why does PotA get errata but not Split Altar?
-
The second special ability on Prince of the Air would do nothing ever without errata.
But all of Split Altar's parts still work:
- shuffle all opponents' artifacts in play into deck
- play the next enhancement
- CBN
If Split Altar were a common, people would think it is a decent card, especially with Hidden Treasures.
But promos are not all amazing. Even Nationals promos. I know that players think that a nationals promo somehow "deserves" to be a tier 1 card, but I really don't see why it absolutely must be that way.
-
Still, both cards were worded in a way that they did not work as intended.
Only one got an errata. :-\
-
But promos are not all amazing. Even Nationals promos. I know that players think that a nationals promo somehow "deserves" to be a tier 1 card, but I really don't see why it absolutely must be that way.
Because then it'd be worth more and I want to make money going to nats by winning every category/getting expensive promos.
-
Still, both cards were worded in a way that they did not work as intended.
Only one got an errata. :-\
It has little to do with intent. PotA has a special ability doesn't work AT ALL without errata. Split Altar has a special ability that still works, though it only targets 0 to 9 artifacts (or more), instead of 0 to unlimited.
Kindness (Unlimited) got errata because there it doesn't make sense otherwise. Gabriel (Disciples) didn't get errata, because he still does something. Both of these cards did not get printed as intended. We only gave errata to one of them. The intent was not the point. If a card works, and isn't too strong, it doesn't get errata.
Word to the wise: stop complaining about something that isn't getting changed. It is getting very, very, very old.
-
You heard it here, guys. Split Altar can shuffle unlimited, meaning a deck can have unlimited, meaning there is no deck limit. Waiting on one more elder.
;D
-
You can play Redemption with an unlimited number of opponents, right?
I guess there is a limit based on the total number of cards printed...
-
There's only like 6.7B people in the world. Unless people play two decks in the same game, but then the number of cards come into play. Unless you're using Redemption live. So point retracted.
-
6.7B is only the current number. Projecting exponential population growth, expansion of the species to other planets and galaxies, expanding the interuniversenet (and RedemptionLive with it, of course) to the entire universe, which is expanding at a rate at least capable of holding the projected Trillions+ that the species should reach in a twinkle of God's eye, and ... yeah, it's pretty close to unlimited.
So, yes, Split Altar could conceivably shuffle every artifact in existence into decks, assuming every artifact in existence is in play. ;)
By the way, how many artifacts can one player have active at a time now. I thought we were getting up to a pretty high number even before Magic Charms. There's another artifact coming next set that can be activated offpile. How many will that make?
If you are playing a 5 player game, and each of your 4 opponents has all of those active, how many artifacts would your Split Altar shuffle?
-
Ones I can think of from memory: Charms, Cross Beams, Priestly Breastplate (assuming it works as intended rather than as printed), Temple holding an artifact, Altar of Dagon in Temple of Dagon, and Writ or 30 Pieces in High Priests' Palace. By my count, that's 6. If the artifact in the Temple is Book of the Covenant with 2 Covenants on it, the number becomes 8. 4 players x 8 artifacts = 32 artifacts Split Altar would shuffle (yay for basic math).
-
Captured Ark. Same SA 2 uses. 8)
-
That being said, please don't make any more mistakes or erratas with green. ::)
Because that, too, is getting old. ;D
-
Captured Ark. Same SA 2 uses. 8)
Captured Ark lets you play another enhancement? Captured Ark is CBN?
-
I really need to read the card...
-
I really need to read the card...
I was the same way. :) Since it is so rarely used, no one even remembers what it does.
Also, Split Altar shuffles ALL their artifacts in play. Captured Ark only makes them pick ONE of their artifacts in play. They get to keep their other ones active.
-
The traditional ruling that cards default to play unless otherwise specified is still true. This new rule is just stating what one of those "specified" situations is. The idea is that if a card refers to a specific card (ie. D&A targeting Job, or Prince of the Air targeting Chamber of Angels), then it targets that card even if it is NOT in play (ie. set aside).
I am trying to understand why SoG is not protected from Mayhem, Ill read the post again and come back...
The quote from Prof Underwood from January 15 is not correct, as far as I know.
That quote was in the middle of a thread where several elders were trying to explain how "instead" works. I was quoting from a statement from Bryon, which no one disagreed with at the time and I therefore thought was going to be our explanation. However, if you read to the end of the thread, it seems that the consensus ended up that a better way to state the ruling that we were trying to communicate was:
"The conditions for an 'instead' ability may be applied to any card regardless of location."
I think that works. Thanks!
Therefore, apparently this rule about referencing cards ONLY applies when dealing with "instead" cards. This also would mean that protecting SoG in hand would not be covered by that rule.
-
Ah, yes. Now I remember that. Thanks for the clarification, Mark! :)
-
Are you required to show/reveal the card you search for with Birth Foretold?
-
Yes. Anytime you search for a card that has limited scope (i.e. Consider the Lillies: NT White) you must reveal it.
-
How is anyone going to remember that it can only be applied to instead abilities?
The traditional ruling that cards default to play unless otherwise specified is still true. This new rule is just stating what one of those "specified" situations is. The idea is that if a card refers to a specific card (ie. D&A targeting Job, or Prince of the Air targeting Chamber of Angels), then it targets that card even if it is NOT in play (ie. set aside).
So how is Prince of the Air considered an instead ability?
Prince of the Air (Pi)
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Orange • Ability: 10 / 11 • Class: None • Special Ability: Return an angel in battle (except warrior class) to owner’s territory. If block is successful, place one Chamber of Angels and its contents beneath owner’s draw pile. Cannot be negated. • Play As: Return one non-warrior class angel in battle to owner’s territory. If block is successful, place one Chamber of Angels and its contents beneath owner’s deck. Cannot be negated. • Identifiers: NT Male Demon • Verse: Ephesians 2:2 • Availability: Priests booster packs (Rare)
-
So how is Prince of the Air considered an instead ability?
It's not. PotA was errata'ed specifically to target set aside Chamber of Angels. Interestingly, since its errata PotA would do nothing to a Chambe in play (as opposed to set aside). Now if I could just figure out how to get one of those...
-
Someday, there may be a way to place your Son of God card on a Manger artifact for some really nice effect. When that is possible, it might be very nice to play Brith Foretold first. ;)
My nativity set! YAY! Can I be a playtester for this set? please!!!
Also, if you play birthforetold, you can immediately follow it with playing the card since you are responding to your own action. if you decide to not immediately play the SoG, then you risk it being targeted while in your hand.
and I am serious about wanting to be a playtester for that nativity set. I have wanted one for a long time. please keep me in mind.