Author Topic: Can You Ignore/Be Immune to Gideon after Angel Under the Oak? (Read 7434 times)

SignoftheStar · « **Reply #25 on:** May 15, 2012, 10:21:55 PM »

Thank you, Redoubter. I thought I got rid of that last part.

But again, thank you. It's pretty tricky, but now I get it perfectly. You've been very patient, and I appreciate the help.

megamanlan · « **Reply #26 on:** May 15, 2012, 10:26:03 PM »

Redoubter is correct, for example, if I play Egyptian Snakes while Iron Pan is up, Snakes still works because it cannot be stopped before it was played, vs. if I'd play The First Seal ( which if they would reprint it w/ the same effect it would be Cannot be interrupted) would be negated by Iron Pan but can't be stopped once it hits play. But Balaam's Disobedience can't be negated at any time by Iron Pan, no matter when it was played.

I hope this helps. =)

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #27 on:** May 16, 2012, 03:36:32 PM »

Negate functions exactly like interrupt+prevent, but it is not defined that way so there's no mess with abilities that prevent or negate only interrupt or prevent abilities. The reason you can negate a CBP is because CBP is not inherently CBN, so you interrupt the inability to be prevented, prevent it, and then if/when it reactivates the negate happened prior to the CBP effect.

SignoftheStar · « **Reply #28 on:** May 16, 2012, 05:45:21 PM »

Wait a minute.

Minister Polarius, are you saying that you CAN negate CBP before it is played?

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #29 on:** May 16, 2012, 05:55:10 PM »

Quote from: Luxumbra on May 16, 2012, 05:45:21 PM

Wait a minute.

Minister Polarius, are you saying that you CAN negate CBP before it is played?

Not quite.

Quote from: Minister Polarius on May 16, 2012, 03:36:32 PM

so you interrupt the inability to be prevented, prevent it, and then if/when it reactivates the negate happened prior to the CBP effect.

Redoubter · « **Reply #30 on:** May 16, 2012, 05:56:51 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on May 16, 2012, 03:36:32 PM

Negate functions exactly like interrupt+prevent

It just undoes. It does not mean "interrupt and prevent", and when you try to say negate = interrupt and prevent, we get:

Quote from: Luxumbra on May 16, 2012, 05:45:21 PM

Wait a minute.

Minister Polarius, are you saying that you CAN negate CBP before it is played?

The definition now is that Negate undoes. And if it is continuous, it becomes a prevent going forward, but it does not prevent going back. It just undoes.

Remember, CBP isn't affected by cards played BEFORE it. A negate after the fact can stop it.

SignoftheStar · « **Reply #31 on:** May 16, 2012, 05:59:46 PM »

Quote from: Redoubter on May 16, 2012, 05:56:51 PM

Remember, CBP isn't affected by cards played BEFORE it. A negate after the fact can stop it.

Which includes a continues negate, like Iron Pan, correct?

browarod · « **Reply #32 on:** May 16, 2012, 06:21:44 PM »

Quote from: Luxumbra on May 16, 2012, 05:59:46 PM

Quote from: Redoubter on May 16, 2012, 05:56:51 PM

Remember, CBP isn't affected by cards played BEFORE it. A negate after the fact can stop it.

Which includes a continues negate, like Iron Pan, correct?

If Iron Pan was active prior to a CBP being played then it cannot stop the CBP due to CBP being unaffected by cards played before it. If Iron Pan comes to be active after a CBP is played then it would indeed be able to negate the CBP.

christiangamer25 · « **Reply #33 on:** May 16, 2012, 06:25:17 PM »

too bad oak is cbn not cbp so mute point

SignoftheStar · « **Reply #34 on:** May 16, 2012, 06:31:04 PM »

Right, that's what I thought. It's just the way that Minister Polarius put it...

Quote from: Minister Polarius on May 16, 2012, 03:36:32 PM

The reason you can negate a CBP is because CBP is not inherently CBN, so you interrupt the inability to be prevented, prevent it, and then if/when it reactivates the negate happened prior to the CBP effect.

...sounds like you CAN interrupt the CBP, then prevent it.
Which is what I thought we determined to NOT be the case.

christiangamer25 · « **Reply #35 on:** May 16, 2012, 06:33:16 PM »

all pol is doing is decribing how negates work

cbp nothing before it can stop it
cbi nothing after it can stop it
cbn nothing can stop it

PERIOD END OF DISCUSSION

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #36 on:** May 16, 2012, 06:48:30 PM »

Quote from: Luxumbra on May 16, 2012, 06:31:04 PM

Right, that's what I thought. It's just the way that Minister Polarius put it...
Quote from: Minister Polarius on May 16, 2012, 03:36:32 PM
The reason you can negate a CBP is because CBP is not inherently CBN, so you interrupt the inability to be prevented, prevent it, and then if/when it reactivates the negate happened prior to the CBP effect.
...sounds like you CAN interrupt the CBP, then prevent it.
Which is what I thought we determined to NOT be the case.

Which is why Pol says that Negate is actually different than Interrupt and Prevent, though it functions that way. Pol is correct in saying a Negate will stop a CBP if played after the fact.

Ongoing negates do not have an ongoing interrupt though, which is probably where you're getting mixed up.

STAMP · « **Reply #37 on:** May 16, 2012, 07:11:15 PM »

Quote

...sounds like you CAN interrupt the CBP, then prevent it.

megamanlan · « **Reply #38 on:** May 16, 2012, 07:57:32 PM »

Pol just accidentally undid what we just got finished explaining... *facepalm*
Pol was trying to explain CBP, but didn't do the best job of it... Sorry Pol...

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #39 on:** May 18, 2012, 01:47:14 PM »

Actually, I am exactly correct. Negate functions exactly like interrupt+prevent, but is not defined that way.

megamanlan · « **Reply #40 on:** May 18, 2012, 04:02:46 PM »

That's what I said, interrupt/prevent are the same as Negate, but for CBP, it doesn't mean that.

I was just saying that unfortunately, u helped w/ the confusion not explaining it.

Redoubter · « **Reply #41 on:** May 18, 2012, 06:38:58 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on May 18, 2012, 01:47:14 PM

Actually, I am exactly correct. Negate functions exactly like interrupt+prevent, but is not defined that way.

If it's not defined that way, then don't say that it is that. This leads to the type of confusion we get in this thread.

Negate is defined all by its lonesome as a completely different ability, and that makes it simpler to explain as well. If you try to mix them together, you get two pages of confusion.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #42 on:** May 19, 2012, 01:50:07 PM »

It functions exactly the same as interrupt+prevent. It is defined differently. That is all.

Praeceps · « **Reply #43 on:** May 19, 2012, 07:04:04 PM »

Quote from: Redoubter on May 18, 2012, 06:38:58 PM

Quote from: Minister Polarius on May 18, 2012, 01:47:14 PM
Actually, I am exactly correct. Negate functions exactly like interrupt+prevent, but is not defined that way.

If it's not defined that way, then don't say that it is that. This leads to the type of confusion we get in this thread.

Negate is defined all by its lonesome as a completely different ability, and that makes it simpler to explain as well. If you try to mix them together, you get two pages of confusion.

Actually it was a lot simpler until we were told that they were defined differently. Having something work as a combination of two predefined abilities is simpler than creating a third definition who's difference is arguable, negligible, and confusing.

megamanlan · « **Reply #44 on:** May 20, 2012, 10:05:52 AM »

Not really, it's really confusing when you say Interrupt and Prevent is negate, so then the new players can quickly get confused if a card cannot be prevented but your Negating it and Negate is really interrupt and prevent, then we need to explain to a new player who's totally confused now then before.

In short it's easier to give Negate a different definition, at least for the new players.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #45 on:** May 21, 2012, 01:55:51 PM »

The biggest problem with saying "negate" is "undo" is that it leaves out the prevent aspect.

Redoubter · « **Reply #46 on:** May 21, 2012, 06:33:57 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on May 21, 2012, 01:55:51 PM

The biggest problem with saying "negate" is "undo" is that it leaves out the prevent aspect.

No, it undoes what is out and (depending on the wording) becomes a prevent. That also resolves the "Well, if it's CBP, does that mean it can be stopped by an ongoing Negate?"

Prevent stops abilities from activating. Interrupt temporarily undoes and suspends abilities. Negate undoes abilities. Ongoing negates are prevents.

That's the current definition. And it is the current definition that negate =/= interrupt and prevent.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #47 on:** May 22, 2012, 06:16:25 PM »

Sure, if you say "negate means undo and prevent." But I mostly see people saying "negate means undo" and leaving it at that.

megamanlan · « **Reply #48 on:** May 22, 2012, 09:06:46 PM »

If the Negate is ongoing, it's a Prevent for any cards played after it. I've always mentioned that to new players who I am teaching to play the game that too.

News:

Author Topic: Can You Ignore/Be Immune to Gideon after Angel Under the Oak? (Read 7434 times)

Warrior_Monk

browarod

Warrior_Monk