Author Topic: Confusion and Covent of Noah (Read 2489 times)

turtlegamer81 · « **on:** September 28, 2016, 10:05:50 AM »

Ok everyone i need a ruling

I was playing a game on Skype last night and my opponent played the Cloud of Witness Confusion and was trying to remove my Son God from my Deck but I has my Convent of Noah on the field ready to used and wanted to used it to stop him from removing my Son of God and said i cant so my question is that true or could I used it to stop him.

Thanks

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #1 on:** September 28, 2016, 10:40:03 AM »

An ability currently in progress has to finish before anything else can happen. Confusion removes itself from the game, so after the ability completes it is out of play and cannot be targeted by CoN.

Master Q · « **Reply #2 on:** September 28, 2016, 02:36:05 PM »

Just use Faith Among Corruption.

Watchman · « **Reply #3 on:** September 28, 2016, 06:35:38 PM »

Quote from: Master Q on September 28, 2016, 02:36:05 PM

Just use Faith Among Corruption.

How can FAC target Confusion if Confusion isn't in the game anymore?

slugfencer · « **Reply #4 on:** September 28, 2016, 07:32:16 PM »

See, this is the stuff that confuses me. $:-\$ Are you guys saying that confusion is effectively cannot be interrupted because of the game rule of removal? Even though it doesn't say that on the card? That's one of the things that puts me in a quandary I would rather have a card just say it straight out that it can't be interrupted. That way there is no confusion about how that works. I think that helps younger players as well and the older ones like me to make things very black and white.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #5 on:** September 28, 2016, 07:43:20 PM »

It can be interrupted as the last card played, but not as a card in play.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #6 on:** September 28, 2016, 09:14:25 PM »

Quote from: slugfencer on September 28, 2016, 07:32:16 PM

See, this is the stuff that confuses me. $:-\$ Are you guys saying that confusion is effectively cannot be interrupted because of the game rule of removal? Even though it doesn't say that on the card? That's one of the things that puts me in a quandary I would rather have a card just say it straight out that it can't be interrupted. That way there is no confusion about how that works. I think that helps younger players as well and the older ones like me to make things very black and white.

Another thing similar to this is End the Battle. It is also CBI even if the card doesn't say it because battle resolution is part of the ability and since the battle has completed, the phase transitioned and instant abilities can't be negated in a different phase.

Watchman · « **Reply #7 on:** September 29, 2016, 10:20:22 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on September 28, 2016, 07:43:20 PM

It can be interrupted as the last card played, but not as a card in play.

So would Faith Among Corruption, Gamaliel's Speech, etc negate Confusion's ability but not allow it to be discarded since the card is out of the game?

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #8 on:** September 29, 2016, 10:23:00 AM »

Quote from: Watchman492 on September 29, 2016, 10:20:22 AM

Quote from: Minister Polarius on September 28, 2016, 07:43:20 PM
It can be interrupted as the last card played, but not as a card in play.

So would Faith Among Corruption, Gamaliel's Speech, etc negate Confusion's ability but not allow it to be discarded since the card is out of the game?

I believe they wouldn't even be able to negate it.

Gabe · « **Reply #9 on:** September 29, 2016, 10:48:00 AM »

FAC, Gam's Speech and Kinsmen's can all target Confusion (CoW) as the "last EE played" even though it's out of play.

Negating Confusion stops all of its ability including the RFG of itself.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #10 on:** September 29, 2016, 11:29:19 AM »

Quote from: Gabe on September 29, 2016, 10:48:00 AM

FAC, Gam's Speech and Kinsmen's can all target Confusion (CoW) as the "last EE played" even though it's out of play.

Negating Confusion stops all of its ability including the RFG of itself.

That seems to contradict the REG since it says removed cards are not targetable by any card. Confusion isn't just outside of play, it's outside of the game entirely. Does the card text on those cards actually trump the game rule in the REG?

Quote from: REG

Once a card has been removed from the game it has no location (with respect to the game) and is not targetable by
any card.

Gabe · « **Reply #11 on:** September 29, 2016, 11:47:42 AM »

Good question. The ability "negate" doesn't target cards, it targets abilities. Therefore a "negate last" can negate the last ability no matter where the card is located (in play, out of play like deck and discard pile or RFG).

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #12 on:** September 29, 2016, 12:13:49 PM »

I understand negate targets abilities but is that not still subject to whether the ability is targetable or not? There seems to be an inconsistency about whether abilities on cards have the same "targetability" (For lack of a better word) as the cards they are on. For example, when a card with an instant ability is discarded/shuffled/set-aside/etc, it is out of play and can't be targeted unless a card specifically targets out of play things. In this situation, the ability on that card also cannot be targeted for the same reason. Therefore, it seems the game rule that makes cards out of play not normally targetable also extends the ability on that card. Why is it then that the game rule that makes removed cards untargetable not make the abilities on the card untargetable in the same way?

Sorry if my question isn't very clear, it's seems to be a very hard question to express in text.

Master Q · « **Reply #13 on:** September 29, 2016, 01:16:03 PM »

Quote from: slugfencer on September 28, 2016, 07:32:16 PM

See, this is the stuff that confuses me. $:-\$ Are you guys saying that confusion is effectively cannot be interrupted because of the game rule of removal? Even though it doesn't say that on the card? That's one of the things that puts me in a quandary I would rather have a card just say it straight out that it can't be interrupted. That way there is no confusion about how that works. I think that helps younger players as well and the older ones like me to make things very black and white.

Heh, Confusion doesn't care about your confusion.

Watchman · « **Reply #14 on:** September 29, 2016, 01:49:33 PM »

I can understand why Confusion doesn't have a modifier on it: it's probably so the ability CAN be targeted by a prevent, negate or interrupt card. The fact that it doesn't have a modifier is an apparent counter-balance to the power of the card's ability.

Kevin, I'm obviously with you on the apparent confusion (no pun intended) regarding the "removal from the game rule" but the REG talks about how a "card" itself that's been removed from the game can't be targeted; however, abilities on the removed card are residual. If there is no response to that ability then the ability fully resolves and is no longer targetable once the phase has changed. It confused me because I played a game with an experienced player who told me it could not be targeted since it's out of game, but I think he misinterpreted what the REG is addressing.

Thanks Gabe and Polarius for the clarification. Turtlegamer, now you know you can stop me from removing your Son of God.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #15 on:** September 29, 2016, 02:02:27 PM »

Quote from: Watchman492 on September 29, 2016, 01:49:33 PM

I can understand why Confusion doesn't have a modifier on it: it's probably so the ability CAN be targeted by a prevent, negate or interrupt card. The fact that it doesn't have a modifier is an apparent counter-balance to the power of the card's ability.

Kevin, I'm obviously with you on the apparent confusion (no pun intended) regarding the "removal from the game rule" but the REG talks about how a "card" itself that's been removed from the game can't be targeted; however, abilities on the removed card are residual. If there is no response to that ability then the ability fully resolves and is no longer targetable once the phase has changed. It confused me because I played a game with an experienced player who told me it could not be targeted since it's out of game, but I think he misinterpreted what the REG is addressing.

Thanks Gabe and Polarius for the clarification. Turtlegamer, now you know you can stop me from removing your Son of God.

The ability fully resolves regardless of anything. The current discussion isn't whether it can be negated before being removed, it's whether it can be negated after leaving the game.

Also after thinking about it more I realized my previous post with the confusing question is less "how does it work this way" and more of a "why were the rules set up this way?". IMO if the current rules allow interaction with a card (or its ability) after it has been successfully removed from the game goes against the idea of a removal from the game ability. If the untargetability of removed cards does not extend to abilities on those cards to me that severely weakens the ability as a concept (Not to mention creating yet another one of the many situations that are counter-intuitive and require going over the REG with a fine toothed comb to understand) and should be changed.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #16 on:** September 29, 2016, 09:42:30 PM »

I think what may help is understanding that the idea of "Removal from Game" is a long-term effect. In the short-term (i.e. Battle Phase), everything has the potential to be negated. However, once the phase that abilities are activated in ends, long-term effects become permanent.

"Removal from Game," as a concept, allows cards to not be recurred. Since many SAs target the discard pile, "discard abilities" are often a temporary solution. "Remove from Game" becomes permanent in the next phase, so it is a powerful ability that distinguishes itself from other abilities.

I think it is important for the game in general to allow Battle Phases to play out with every possibility of things being done, and then undone. Since "Remove from Game" can be so powerful, I think allowing a possible out is necessary for power balance.

Watchman · « **Reply #17 on:** October 02, 2016, 03:52:15 PM »

I want to verify if GEs like Walking on Water, Holy Ground, Glad Tidings, etc. can also target Confusion with a negate and discard ability.

Walking on Water and Glad Tidings: "Negate and discard the last evil enhancement played this battle."
Holy Ground: "Negate and discard the last evil enhancement played in current battle."

I would assume it negates Confusion's ability AND causes the discard, since Confusion was played in battle, even though the card itself is no longer in the battle field; or would Confusion's ability only be negated but the card itself not discarded?

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #18 on:** October 02, 2016, 04:03:19 PM »

Anything that targets the ability itself can hit it, so yes those should work. Also, when Confusion is negated, it comes back into play and can then be discarded.

Watchman · « **Reply #19 on:** October 02, 2016, 09:13:57 PM »

Thought so. Thanks.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #20 on:** October 03, 2016, 08:08:00 AM »

The "clarifying text" for "remove from Game" should either be removed (since the sum of all other default conditions and special abilities will produce the same conclusion anyway) or the negation caveat explicitly spelled out. Yeah, yeah, negate targets abilities but the ability is on the card which is removed from game; we've been having that merry-go-round of a logic argument since the EZ boards and it's time to actually spell it out in the rules rather than periodically have an elder state it.

Watchman · « **Reply #21 on:** October 03, 2016, 06:20:21 PM »

AND one more elementary question that I just want to make sure about. A placed enhancement, such as Gamaliel's Speech, Kinsmen's Agreement, Faith among Corruption (even though it's not an enhancement, but also Covenant of Noah), can be used without needing initiative first, correct?

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #22 on:** October 03, 2016, 06:25:29 PM »

Watchman · « **Reply #23 on:** October 03, 2016, 08:18:36 PM »

Thank ya

LukeMarshall@FYM · « **Reply #24 on:** November 01, 2016, 09:37:48 PM »

Is Eternal Inheritance given the same treatment as Confusion, in regards to being removed from the game?

News:

Author Topic: Confusion and Covent of Noah (Read 2489 times)

slugfencer