Author Topic: Can I play a negate? (Read 1441 times)

everytribe · « **on:** January 14, 2013, 09:47:34 PM »

This came up at our last tournament, we couldn't come to an agreement.

Player 1-Seraph with a live Coal 6/6, Banded to Isaiah 7/8

Player 2-Blocks With Archelaus 6/9, Archelaus discards Isaiah

Can player 1 play a green negate?

Josh · « **Reply #1 on:** January 14, 2013, 10:22:27 PM »

No. Special initiative now requires all of your characters in battle being removed by special ability. Even choose the blocker no longer allows for special initiative, since you still have a character in battle after the ability resolves.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #2 on:** January 14, 2013, 11:23:09 PM »

I would say this is not known to most of the redemption community, myself included. Stuck in our old ways we are waiting to catch on to updated rules. I wonder what else I don't know about this game?

joel_f · « **Reply #3 on:** January 14, 2013, 11:54:12 PM »

Can someone inform me on what "Special Initiative" actually is normally?

Gabe · « **Reply #4 on:** January 14, 2013, 11:54:58 PM »

According to what is currently published in the 10th anniversary rule book and the REG, yes, you are allowed to play a negate.

Last fall we (the elders) discussed special initiative and came to some conclusions. One thing we realized is that special initiative is not even defined in the REG. We've announced and added the following definition that will be published in the next release of the REG.

Quote from: Next release of the REG

When you are losing the battle by removal, you are granted special initiative to play an Enhancement that will interrupt or negate the card that is causing your character's removal. You are considered to be losing by removal when an opponent's special ability, or a game rule that has been triggered by an opponent's special ability, would leave you with no character in battle when the special ability has completed.

There was an announcement on the boards about the change to special initiative, but I don't expect everyone to scour the posts on the boards to look for updates. If you ruled that it was legal to play a negate then you ruled according to the status quo. It's probably in everyones best interest to practice the new rules going forward, but until it's officially published in the REG judges should only be held accountable to the resources they've been provided.

STAMP · « **Reply #5 on:** January 15, 2013, 11:50:26 AM »

Quote from: everytribe on January 14, 2013, 09:47:34 PM

This came up at our last tournament, we couldn't come to an agreement.

Player 1-Seraph with a live Coal 6/6, Banded to Isaiah 7/8

Player 2-Blocks With Archelaus 6/9, Archelaus discards Isaiah

Can player 1 play a green negate?

So, Bill, we have learned that you are losing by removal, but not "losing by removal".

"All of these words whispered in my ear,
Tell a story that I cannot bear to hear,
Just 'cause I said it, it don't mean that I meant it,
People say crazy things,
Just 'cause I said it, don't mean that I meant it,
Just 'cause you heard it," - Adele

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #6 on:** January 15, 2013, 01:36:38 PM »

Quote from: STAMP on January 15, 2013, 11:50:26 AM

So, Bill, we have learned that you are losing by removal, but not "losing by removal".

You can still play a negate when you are losing by removal, you just can't play a green negate (in this scenario).

I'm OK with this idea in general. In this situation, Isaiah gets removed, but the battle continues. There is a required initiative check. In the "Special Initiative" scenario, the battle would be over, and there would be no initiative check, unless the player was allowed to play a negate.

I think if there is an initiative check, then anything that happens after that would have to be done by who is left in battle.

joel_f · « **Reply #7 on:** January 15, 2013, 03:34:13 PM »

but I thought you're losing by removal if no character would remain. Wouldn't the Seraph remain?

Chris · « **Reply #8 on:** January 15, 2013, 04:00:46 PM »

Quote from: joel_f on January 15, 2013, 03:34:13 PM

but I thought you're losing by removal if no character would remain. Wouldn't the Seraph remain?

Yes, which is exactly why a green enhancement can't be played.

everytribe · « **Reply #9 on:** January 15, 2013, 05:17:50 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on January 14, 2013, 11:54:58 PM

According to what is currently published in the 10th anniversary rule book and the REG, yes, you are allowed to play a negate.

Last fall we (the elders) discussed special initiative and came to some conclusions. One thing we realized is that special initiative is not even defined in the REG. We've announced and added the following definition that will be published in the next release of the REG.

Quote from: Next release of the REG
When you are losing the battle by removal, you are granted special initiative to play an Enhancement that will interrupt or negate the card that is causing your character's removal. You are considered to be losing by removal when an opponent's special ability, or a game rule that has been triggered by an opponent's special ability, would leave you with no character in battle when the special ability has completed.

There was an announcement on the boards about the change to special initiative, but I don't expect everyone to scour the posts on the boards to look for updates. If you ruled that it was legal to play a negate then you ruled according to the status quo. It's probably in everyones best interest to practice the new rules going forward, but until it's officially published in the REG judges should only be held accountable to the resources they've been provided.

Thanks for the conformation Gabe. That's what I was looking for. I ruled at the tournament that player-1 could play a green negate. I never liked it that way but that's what the rules said. I like the change and will rule it that way going forward. Player 2 was gracious and felt that that it probably did not cost him the game. Although his loss did cost him First place.

Best post on this thread.

Quote from: STAMP on January 15, 2013, 11:50:26 AM

So, Bill, we have learned that you are losing by removal, but not "losing by removal".

Redoubter · « **Reply #10 on:** January 16, 2013, 09:45:45 PM »

Quote from: everytribe on January 15, 2013, 05:17:50 PM

Thanks for the conformation Gabe. That's what I was looking for. I ruled at the tournament that player-1 could play a green negate. I never liked it that way but that's what the rules said. I like the change and will rule it that way going forward. Player 2 was gracious and felt that that it probably did not cost him the game. Although his loss did cost him First place.

I would have ruled the same way, before the clarification. It seems that there were different ideas in different places of the country.

Honestly, I'm glad there is A RULING on this that is definitive and shouldn't have a problem with interpretation. I'm also glad that it is relatively intuitive and we don't have the "Well, you have SI if you would have a losing condition after the SA went off""Okay...then what's a losing condition?" discussion anymore, which got weird with some combos

STAMP · « **Reply #11 on:** January 16, 2013, 10:17:11 PM »

Quote

...relatively...

As in 4th cousin, three times removed.

Cactus Game Design Message Boards

News:

Author Topic: Can I play a negate? (Read 1441 times)

everytribe

Can I play a negate?

Josh

Re: Can I play a negate?

RTSmaniac

Re: Can I play a negate?

joel_f

Re: Can I play a negate?

Gabe

Re: Can I play a negate?

STAMP

Re: Can I play a negate?

YourMathTeacher

Re: Can I play a negate?

joel_f

Re: Can I play a negate?

Chris

Re: Can I play a negate?

everytribe

Re: Can I play a negate?

Redoubter

Re: Can I play a negate?

STAMP

Re: Can I play a negate?