Author Topic: In game question (Read 4189 times)

megamanlan · « **Reply #25 on:** April 24, 2012, 09:53:15 PM »

That is the problem, ITB should be at least better then interrupting a Card, which it's not.

Chris · « **Reply #26 on:** April 24, 2012, 10:03:43 PM »

Quote from: megamanlan on April 24, 2012, 09:53:15 PM

That is the problem, ITB should be at least better then interrupting a Card, which it's not.

It interrupts all ongoing abilities and the last enhancement played. That actually seems to be a reasonable amount for one ability to cover. It doesn't need to encompass every ability that's been played during the battle, since, in the opinion of myself and many others here, it wouldn't make sense for it to interrupt abilities that happened two or three cards ago; it's merely interrupting the battle, not erasing it. At any rate, regardless of your opinion on the matter, other people disagree, including those who run the operation, so it's not going to change.

Redoubter · « **Reply #27 on:** April 25, 2012, 12:21:40 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on April 24, 2012, 04:34:26 PM

This is a pointless debate. We have explained the definition fo ITB to megamanlan. It's not that he doesn't understand the definition, he just doesn't like it. There's nothing more we can do.

This.

ITB has specific targets, just like CBP, CBI, and CBN don't just stop the last letter of their acronym but specify when cards played against them will work.

It is very clearly defined in the rules, and feeling that it should be different isn't going to change that. This is how the game is played.

megamanlan · « **Reply #28 on:** April 25, 2012, 04:04:55 PM »

Actually, it was defined enough in the rulebooks because in there it gives a different impression (it doesn't actually define ITB) but I guess it doesn't matter much on my thoughts.

Redoubter · « **Reply #29 on:** April 25, 2012, 04:10:34 PM »

Quote from: megamanlan on April 25, 2012, 04:04:55 PM

Actually, it was defined enough in the rulebooks because in there it gives a different impression (it doesn't actually define ITB) but I guess it doesn't matter much on my thoughts.

See, but it DOES define it, you just aren't reading it.

Look in the REG, under Interrupt, under Special Conditions:

Quote

Special Conditions

The phrase “interrupt the battle includes interrupting the following:

all active ongoing abilities

abilities that are defeating one of the characters you control in battle

the last enhancement played in current battle if it was played by your opponent.

Interrupt the battle only includes such abilities if they are on cards that are in battle.

It is understandable if you can't find it, but this was quoted to you, from the REG, multiple times in this thread. Once it is pointed out where it is and what the definition is, why do you always continue to fight? I don't understand it at all. We're trying to help point you to what you need from the rules, but we just get hostility back.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #30 on:** April 25, 2012, 04:22:49 PM »

Seeing as how this question has been answered, I'm going to lock the thread.

Cactus Game Design Message Boards

News:

Author Topic: In game question (Read 4189 times)

megamanlan

Re: In game question

Chris

Re: In game question

Redoubter

Re: In game question

megamanlan

Re: In game question

Redoubter

Re: In game question

Professoralstad

Re: In game question