Author Topic: Angel's Sword versus Uzzah? (Read 4367 times)

browarod · « **Reply #25 on:** October 13, 2009, 01:38:41 PM »

Quote from: thestrongangel on October 13, 2009, 04:28:04 AM

The main reason his ability is not negateable in this sense is that after his ability completes, he is no longer in the field of battle. Being that he is no longer there, initiative is never determined, and the capability to negate him never comes into being.

Except, in the case of Angel's Sword, there's still the lingering initiative to play the "first" enhancement which, presumably, you could use to play a "negate the SA of a character" card.

3-Liner And Bags Of Chips · « **Reply #26 on:** October 13, 2009, 01:44:55 PM »

Quote from: browarod on October 13, 2009, 01:38:41 PM

Quote from: thestrongangel on October 13, 2009, 04:28:04 AM
The main reason his ability is not negateable in this sense is that after his ability completes, he is no longer in the field of battle. Being that he is no longer there, initiative is never determined, and the capability to negate him never comes into being.
Except, in the case of Angel's Sword, there's still the lingering initiative to play the "first" enhancement which, presumably, you could use to play a "negate the SA of a character" card.

But if nobody is in battle then there wouldn't be a chance to play an enhancement right?

browarod · « **Reply #27 on:** October 13, 2009, 01:47:57 PM »

Quote from: 3-Liner And Bags Of Chips on October 13, 2009, 01:44:55 PM

Quote from: browarod on October 13, 2009, 01:38:41 PM
Quote from: thestrongangel on October 13, 2009, 04:28:04 AM
The main reason his ability is not negateable in this sense is that after his ability completes, he is no longer in the field of battle. Being that he is no longer there, initiative is never determined, and the capability to negate him never comes into being.
Except, in the case of Angel's Sword, there's still the lingering initiative to play the "first" enhancement which, presumably, you could use to play a "negate the SA of a character" card.

But if nobody is in battle then there wouldn't be a chance to play an enhancement right?

The hero is still in battle (unless I'm mistaken about Uzzah's effect). It would be like Ethiopian Treasurer playing an enhancement with no evil character in battle.

ebridge · « **Reply #28 on:** October 13, 2009, 02:54:40 PM »

Thank you all. I definitely know the way to rule on this now. Whether I agree with it is entirely something else

It seems to me that Uzzah completely denies the purpose of Angel's Sword in the first place - to allow the hero (in this case angels who have a hard time getting intiative anyway) to play an enhancement that might negate the special ability of the blocking EC and/or rescue a lost soul. Short of playing FBTN (or John, Centurion at Capernaum, etc) or Garden Tomb, Uzzah just seems overpowered to me (especially if Torment then saves him), but I will have to live with that. After all I like using him too. Thanks again for your help.

Ironica · « **Reply #29 on:** October 13, 2009, 03:52:28 PM »

Quote from: ebridge on October 13, 2009, 02:54:40 PM

Short of playing FBTN (or John, Centurion at Capernaum, etc) or Garden Tomb, Uzzah just seems overpowered to me (especially if Torment then saves him), but I will have to live with that. After all I like using him too. Thanks again for your help.

It's all about the prophets

Joel
Type: Hero Char. • Brigade: Green • Ability: 1 / 1 • Class: None • Special Ability: Prevent all special abilities on brown Evil Characters. If Joel rescues a Lost Soul, he gains 1/1. • Identifiers: OT Male Human, Prophet • Verse: Joel 3:16 • Availability: Faith of Fathers (Set 3)

Even complainers can't do anything with Joel in the battle

thestrongangel · « **Reply #30 on:** October 14, 2009, 04:07:26 AM »

Quote from: browarod on October 13, 2009, 01:38:41 PM

Quote from: thestrongangel on October 13, 2009, 04:28:04 AM
The main reason his ability is not negateable in this sense is that after his ability completes, he is no longer in the field of battle. Being that he is no longer there, initiative is never determined, and the capability to negate him never comes into being.
Except, in the case of Angel's Sword, there's still the lingering initiative to play the "first" enhancement which, presumably, you could use to play a "negate the SA of a character" card.

There is no lingering initiative. Playing the first enhancement implies that it happens in battle, and with Uzzah's effect taking him out of battle at its completion, you then are in a situation where there is no EC in battle, and therefore no initiative to determine.

sk · « **Reply #31 on:** October 14, 2009, 05:01:24 AM »

Not true. It was previously ruled that "play first enhancement" = "play next enhancement".

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #32 on:** October 14, 2009, 07:36:14 AM »

Also, who's to say that after Uzzah dies, I dont use Unknown Nation, Gates of Hell, or Madness to keep the battle going? All three of those can legally work at that point... so what's stopping AS from playing an enhancement?

Cactus Game Design Message Boards

News:

Author Topic: Angel's Sword versus Uzzah? (Read 4367 times)

browarod

Re: Angel's Sword versus Uzzah?

3-Liner And Bags Of Chips

Re: Angel's Sword versus Uzzah?

browarod

Re: Angel's Sword versus Uzzah?

ebridge

Re: Angel's Sword versus Uzzah?

Ironica

Re: Angel's Sword versus Uzzah?

thestrongangel

Re: Angel's Sword versus Uzzah?

sk

Re: Angel's Sword versus Uzzah?

Lamborghini_diablo

Re: Angel's Sword versus Uzzah?