Author Topic: Block clarification  (Read 1759 times)

Offline thejambi

  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 170
  • Programmer & Sound Guy
    • -
    • Midwest Region
    • BurnSoftware
Block clarification
« on: February 25, 2019, 06:28:53 AM »
0
Just to clarify what counts as a Block...

I found a post - http://www.cactusforums.com/ruling-questions/block-40148/ - that I think has cleared up the question I had, but when verifying in the REG under Block, I was confused because it ended up saying this as a condition: "No Evil Characters were in battle prior to the first Evil Character entering battle" which sounds... kinda always true.. since it's the first one. So, just wanting to make sure I have this right.

It's trying to say that if an EC enters battle and after you've run the abilities on it, banded other ECs in and run their abilities, etc, if there were no ECs in battle before that, then the ECs that show up are Blocking, right?

So, if you block with an EC that can band in Leviathan, then Leviathan is considered Blocking, so his abilities trigger, right?

But if, during the battle, you play an enhancement to band in Behemoth, that Behemoth is not considered Blocking, correct?
-Zach
Titus 1:9

Offline ArmedKevin117

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 195
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Block clarification
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2019, 09:26:54 AM »
0
That doesn't seem right.  I'd think that any character in battle opposing the Hero is "blocking".  The quote you're looking at is probably relevant to things that respond to "the action of being blocked."

Example: Angel's Sword says that if you're blocked by a human E.C. you may play an enhancement.  Thus, if the initial block (character enters battle, character's ability goes off, character's weapon goes off) includes a human, Angel's Sword goes off.  If, however, a human E.C. bands in after enhancements start getting played, Angel's Sword doesn't re-trigger.

Offline thejambi

  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 170
  • Programmer & Sound Guy
    • -
    • Midwest Region
    • BurnSoftware
Re: Block clarification
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2019, 09:32:53 AM »
0
Yeah, there seems to be "Block" as a verb and "Blocking" as a, what, adjective?

So with Angel's Sword, if a Human EC is the initial blocker or there is one in battle at the time it is played, its ability triggers, I'm guessing? (Edit: Wait, no, I was thinking it could be read as "a Human EC is blocking" but perhaps that is not the case at all.)

But, if Leviathan is around, and during the battle Behemoth is banded in or added to battle while there are EC's already there, does that cause Leviathan's ability to trigger?
« Last Edit: February 25, 2019, 09:35:36 AM by thejambi »
-Zach
Titus 1:9

Offline RedemptionAggie

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+38)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • -
    • South Central Region
Re: Block clarification
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2019, 03:32:29 PM »
+1
Yeah, there seems to be "Block" as a verb and "Blocking" as a, what, adjective?

This looks correct to me.

There is a separate entry in the glossary for "blocking". A character is "blocking" while it is defending in a battle begun by a Hero. Even if there are no Heroes currently in battle. (Mostly so things that check "while blocking" don't turn off when a Hero is removed and have to turn on if a new one is added.)

A character "blocks" if it enters battle as part of a group where there were no blocking ECs when the group started entering battle.

There's also "opposed" (as an adjective), which checks for the presence of a character on the opposite side of battle.

That does mean a character is "blocking" before it has "blocked".

It's trying to say that if an EC enters battle and after you've run the abilities on it, banded other ECs in and run their abilities, etc, if there were no ECs in battle before that, then the ECs that show up are Blocking, right?
It's saying that the ECs that showed up have blocked. (They're also blocking, but that's not covered by the definition of "block".)

So, if you block with an EC that can band in Leviathan, then Leviathan is considered Blocking, so his abilities trigger, right?
Leviathan is considered to have blocked, and his abilities can trigger.

But if, during the battle, you play an enhancement to band in Behemoth, that Behemoth is not considered Blocking, correct?
Behemoth is not considered to have blocked, but is blocking.

So with Angel's Sword, if a Human EC is the initial blocker or there is one in battle at the time it is played, its ability triggers, I'm guessing? (Edit: Wait, no, I was thinking it could be read as "a Human EC is blocking" but perhaps that is not the case at all.)
"If blocked by" is looking for something in the future, so Angel's Sword only works if a human blocks after it's been played.

But, if Leviathan is around, and during the battle Behemoth is banded in or added to battle while there are EC's already there, does that cause Leviathan's ability to trigger?
No, because a character does not block if banded into battle outside of the act of the block.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2019, 03:35:33 PM by RedemptionAggie »

Offline thejambi

  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 170
  • Programmer & Sound Guy
    • -
    • Midwest Region
    • BurnSoftware
Re: Block clarification
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2019, 04:36:58 PM »
+1
You're the best, thank you! I am glad I had things right except for when I used Blocking instead of Block or vice versa when writing things. Everything makes sense now. I shall continue my quest for things to confound me to see if I can find any more :)
-Zach
Titus 1:9

Offline Josh

  • Trade Count: (+46)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3187
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: Block clarification
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2019, 04:44:23 PM »
0
But if, during the battle, you play an enhancement to band in Behemoth, that Behemoth is not considered Blocking, correct?
Behemoth is not considered to have blocked, but is blocking.

This hurts my head.  Hopefully we can find a better way to word the rules where something like this isn't true - where the rule and the actual English are in conflict.
If creation sings Your praises so will I
If You gave Your life to love them so will I

Offline goalieking87

  • Trade Count: (+52)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 496
    • East Central Region
Re: Block clarification
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2019, 05:19:05 PM »
+1
But if, during the battle, you play an enhancement to band in Behemoth, that Behemoth is not considered Blocking, correct?
Behemoth is not considered to have blocked, but is blocking.

This hurts my head.  Hopefully we can find a better way to word the rules where something like this isn't true - where the rule and the actual English are in conflict.

It might help to understand the reason why the abilities are close, but not the same thing.

My understanding of why the current structure is valid is two-fold:

1. There are abilities that trigger when a character is blocked that need to be kept in check so they don’t get out of control. The Throne of David is an easy one to pick on. If block essentially meant any time an EC enters battle, then all banding would trigger Throne for each EC and would result in multiple draw + plays. Because of this, the “block” is defined as explained above, but “blocking” is essentially any EC while it opposes a rescue attempt or battle challenge (i.e. excludes side battles)

2. “Blocking” Or “If blocking” is a term that is usually used to help keep EC abilities in balance. This helps prevent side battle shenanigans, as well as the possibility of some abilities on ECs working if converted to a Hero (that otherwise would work).



Offline Josh

  • Trade Count: (+46)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3187
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: Block clarification
« Reply #7 on: February 27, 2019, 09:07:06 AM »
0
1. There are abilities that trigger when a character is blocked that need to be kept in check so they don’t get out of control.

2. “Blocking” Or “If blocking” is a term that is usually used to help keep EC abilities in balance.

Believe it or not, this did nothing to ease my headache, and in fact made it worse   ;)

Simple and logically sound rules should never be sacrificed on the altar of any individual card.  The integrity of the game itself is way too important to be defiled by individual rules designed to accommodate specific cards.

If a certain card can't play by the rules, then it needs to go.  The Throne of David (or any other individual card) cannot possibly be more important than Redemption itself.

Twisting the rules to the special interests of individual cards leads to...  Well, something similar to the Internal Revenue Code and its endless pages of exceptions and accommodations to special interest groups.

If a card needs a literal change of rules "to be kept in check", then it needs banned.  Which is easier to maintain/remember:  An ever-increasing complex set of rules where you find literal English contradictions such as an EC didn't block but is blocking?  Or a banlist?
If creation sings Your praises so will I
If You gave Your life to love them so will I

Offline thejambi

  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 170
  • Programmer & Sound Guy
    • -
    • Midwest Region
    • BurnSoftware
Re: Block clarification
« Reply #8 on: February 27, 2019, 09:32:15 AM »
0
As an inexperienced player, I'm fine with the distinction and it makes sense for it to be there. The terms being overloaded is a bit of an issue but if it stays consistent, I will know what to expect. "Block" is a shorthand for something, so there could be an update to what terms are used to clear it up but that's all. I don't think anything is broken.
-Zach
Titus 1:9

Offline goalieking87

  • Trade Count: (+52)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 496
    • East Central Region
Re: Block clarification
« Reply #9 on: February 27, 2019, 09:40:27 AM »
+1
I understand your confusion, and really don’t want to turn this into a  ban/no ban thread. I believe there are quite a few of those out there already.

I believe that the block/blocking rules actually make sense with the English language too.  Here is how I see it:

Block constitutes an event that meets the criterion outlined in the REG. Once the block has occurred, any ECs that are added to the battle will join the block and still be blocking, but it is the same block. It does not constitute a new block. 

Offline Master Q

  • Trade Count: (+65)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Onward...
    • -
    • Midwest Region
Re: Block clarification
« Reply #10 on: February 27, 2019, 02:21:11 PM »
+1
I think having different distinctions would be more beneficial. For example, instead of this non-intuitive garble:


Behemoth is not considered to have blocked, but is blocking.


You could say:

Behemoth is not considered to have blocked, but is defending.

Just a simple word change might help alleviate this simple confusion. But I do agree with Josh (unsurprisingly); in general, things get muddled when you try to play around individual cards rather than just errata/ban them.
If you were to go on a trip... where would you like to go?

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: Block clarification
« Reply #11 on: March 09, 2019, 02:03:58 AM »
0
I agree with both sides. To have the function of the initial block be separate from anyone who happens to battle at any point makes sense, but using the terminology "blocking" and "blocked" and "block" to all refer to different versions of the gamestate is stupid.
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal