Author Topic: Darius Decree (Read 30664 times)

Bryon · « **Reply #25 on:** February 11, 2010, 07:48:43 PM »

Wait, do we want consistency or not?

Putting a hero, evil character, artifact, site, fortress, good dominant, evil dominant, lost soul, covenant, or curse on the table counts as playing it. But puting an enhancement on the table does not? Wha?

If a card goes from your hand onto the playing field (table, floor, bottom of the pool, whatever), then it was played.

The special abilities of characters and weapons only activate as they enter battle. Enhancements played onto another card as part of a place ability do not activate, but they were still played.

Master KChief · « **Reply #26 on:** February 11, 2010, 08:01:40 PM »

there are always exceptions. does putting a character face down count as 'playing' it? does putting an artifact face down count as 'playing' it?

Bryon · « **Reply #27 on:** February 11, 2010, 09:01:38 PM »

Did it come from your hand? Did it go in play? That's it, really.

Face down cards are not considered in play, right?

Master KChief · « **Reply #28 on:** February 11, 2010, 09:06:46 PM »

Quote from: Bryon on February 11, 2010, 09:01:38 PM

Did it come from your hand? Did it go in play? That's it, really.

yes. yes.

Face down cards are not considered in play, right?

right. so why would a face-down card be considered 'played' if its not even in play?

The Schaef · « **Reply #29 on:** February 11, 2010, 09:09:17 PM »

Cards can go on the table from places other than one's hand, and there was no mention in previous posts of the requirement to be in the Field of Play. There are areas out of play to which cards are "played", so I don't think that's an accurate defining characteristic, anyway.

Bryon · « **Reply #30 on:** February 11, 2010, 09:37:41 PM »

Good point, Schaef. You CAN play a card to a set aside area.

So, the hero was played, and the artifact was played, as long as they came from your hand.

The Schaef · « **Reply #31 on:** February 11, 2010, 09:47:32 PM »

So if I play a card that says take an Artifact from my discard pile and put it face-down in my Artifact pile, that does not count as playing the Artifact, but if I do the same thing from my hand, that does count?

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #32 on:** February 11, 2010, 10:49:02 PM »

Can I just say I love these types of discussion?

Fifteen years in and we have top tier judges debating the meaning of the verb "play." There is something so awesome about that.

CountFount · « **Reply #33 on:** February 11, 2010, 10:54:42 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on February 11, 2010, 10:49:02 PM

Can I just say I love these types of discussion?

Fifteen years in and we have top tier judges debating the meaning of the verb "play." There is something so awesome about that.

What kind of judges are we, Matt? And can you define what the word 'is' means?

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #34 on:** February 11, 2010, 11:06:04 PM »

Quote from: CountFount on February 11, 2010, 10:54:42 PM

What kind of judges are we, Matt? And can you define what the word 'is' means?

I am a jolly old judge who does his best to muddle through the complexity of a game designed for the flexible minds of whippersnappers. Whenever I blow a call, I point to these discussions, shrug my shoulders, and say, "If the best minds in the game are just now deciding what 'play' means how can you expect me to rule correctly on your shiny new super-fantasti-insta-ca-bibbity-bobbity combo?"

Super-fantasti-insta-ca-bibbity-bobbity combo noun a type of exceedingly convoluted card combination that Sir Nobody plays at least one time in every tournament I am judging where he is present.

STAMP · « **Reply #35 on:** February 11, 2010, 11:52:02 PM »

You know what the best thing about retirement is? I don't have to be 59 1/2 to collect as many chuckles as I can from these types of threads.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #36 on:** February 12, 2010, 02:48:22 AM »

This thread made me cry a little. Here I was, thinking sanity had won yet another battle in Redemption with "play" and "place" meaning two different things (since they obviously function very differently in the game). Then all of the sudden, the ruling is reversed and somehow playing cards loses the less simple but more logical definition (playing a card by a game rule) and becomes more simple and less logical (any time a card leaves your hand and isn't Discarded, basically).

When I heard "play an Enhancement on..." and then "Place an Enhancement on..." I used to think they meant two different things. Now they don't? What, really, is the definition of play, if you play an Enhancement when it is placed by a Special Ability? And if it's defined as broadly as the reversal requires it to be defined, then either playing an enhancement and activating an enhancement are always separate (making cards like ET impotent), or cards like Agur get a lot more powerful because placing an Enhancement is now playing an Enhancement.

Master KChief · « **Reply #37 on:** February 12, 2010, 02:56:06 AM »

i call SHENANIGANS!

CountFount · « **Reply #38 on:** February 12, 2010, 09:01:48 AM »

Quote from: Master KChief on February 12, 2010, 02:56:06 AM

i call SHENANIGANS!

Clear your cards we have a winner! Now what does 'dominant' really mean?

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #39 on:** February 12, 2010, 10:21:08 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on February 12, 2010, 02:48:22 AM

When I heard "play an Enhancement on..." and then "Place an Enhancement on..." I used to think they meant two different things. Now they don't?

If I understand Bryon correctly then they still mean 2 different things. "Place" is a subset of "Play", just as a "Babylonian" is a subset of "human". He seems to be saying that "Play" is just a word for putting a card down on the table (except in the discard pile). He seems to be saying that this "Playing" can be broken down into several subsets. One of those subsets is "Place" which puts the card in a specific location to be activated later.

Assumedly other subsets would include "Activating" (which would include putting down an artifact face-up, or playing a TC-class enhancement, or putting a LS in the LoB or a site, or putting down a fortress, all of which cause something to happen) and "Filling" (which would include filling Storehouse with enhs, or the territory with characters, or the art pile with face down arts, none of which cause anything to happen).

Are there current rulings that would not fit into the scheme above?

The Schaef · « **Reply #40 on:** February 12, 2010, 10:41:49 AM »

No, because discarding is the act of placing something in your discard pile.

So the only set/subset according to him is that putting any card anywhere any time is "placing", and "playing" is when you place something, only from your hand, and not in the discard pile. Things like activation and filling don't even factor into that.

There is a very strong suggestion of use in the general notion of playing a card, or the use of term anywhere in games or sports. It's an active verb. The answer that makes more sense to me is to say that playing a card is a combination of placing the card and using its special ability.

If Decree or some other card is somehow broken by this distinction, then we can expand it to include cards that are put in play by game rule without using their special ability (basically, characters and weapons in territory). But this other definition keeps expanding every time another scenario comes up, to the point where there's almost no distinguishable difference at all between place and play.

Bryon · « **Reply #41 on:** February 12, 2010, 10:43:41 AM »

Prof Underwood, thank you for your response, and your honest attempt to understand what Tim and I are saying.

According to the rulebook, you place heroes in your territory to have their abilities activate later, and that is still called playing. It is the same with weapons. It is the same with puting an enhancement in Storehouse. If it goes from hand to table (other than discard pile which has its own definition: discard), it is called PLAY.

As for whether you can "play" a card from the discard pile, I guess you could, but I'm not certain. Or, is that technically search + play?

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #42 on:** February 12, 2010, 10:44:40 AM »

My only issue is when a card says the word "Place" and DD stops it cuz its "playing" a card. And I understand it is putting a card into play, but then why was the word place chosen? "Play on a hero. When hero enters battle..." works just as well.

Bryon · « **Reply #43 on:** February 12, 2010, 10:49:04 AM »

"Subset" was not entirely accurate.

Capture is not really a subset of "removal from battle," since you could also capture a character in a territory. What I meant to say about that (and you all understand it, really), is that capture and "removal from battle" mean DIFFERENT things, right? But they can both accurately describe what is happening to a card.

It is the same with Place and Play. They mean different things, but they can both accurately describe what is happening to a card.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #44 on:** February 12, 2010, 11:08:03 AM »

So, I'm still not seeing a whole lot of difference between play and place under this idea.

You play and place characters into your territory.
You play and place weapons on those characters.
You play and place enhancements in storehouse.
You play and place artifacts into your art pile.
You play and place enhancements using Elishana & Co.
You play and place some dominants such as GoYS and Doubt.
You play and place Artifacts that activate on characters.
You play and place Sites and fortresses in your territory.

So, does this mean I play and place enhancements on my characters in battle too? Why don't we just merge play and place to be the same thing? In this case, can I use High Places to play enhancements that say Play as well, since they pretty much mean the same thing now?

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #45 on:** February 12, 2010, 11:16:02 AM »

Quote from: Bryon on February 12, 2010, 10:49:04 AM

"Subset" was not entirely accurate.

Capture is not really a subset of "removal from battle," since you could also capture a character in a territory. What I meant to say about that (and you all understand it, really), is that capture and "removal from battle" mean DIFFERENT things, right? But they can both accurately describe what is happening to a card.

It is the same with Place and Play. They mean different things, but they can both accurately describe what is happening to a card.

So when my little brother asks why he can't play a card with his place hero because my card stops cards from being played. How do I explain this without confusing him? (Note he is 11) I mean I can wrap my head around what you're saying, but I know he wouldn't be able to.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #46 on:** February 12, 2010, 11:19:45 AM »

Quote from: Lamborghini_diablo on February 12, 2010, 11:08:03 AM

So, does this mean I play and place enhancements on my characters in battle too?

No. I would see it like this: Place = play + remain. When you place something, you initially place it, and it stays there until it is removed by a special ability. When you play an enhancement on a character in battle, the default is that it is discarded after battle, with the few exceptions of WC and placed enhancements.

Quote

In this case, can I use High Places to play enhancements that say Play as well, since they pretty much mean the same thing now?

Also no. "Place X" and "X is placed" mean essentially the same thing already, yet one ability can be used by HiP, and one can't. That distinction has already been made.

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on February 12, 2010, 11:16:02 AM

So when my little brother asks why he can't play a card with his place hero because my card stops cards from being played. How do I explain this without confusing him? (Note he is 11) I mean I can wrap my head around what you're saying, but I know he wouldn't be able to.

Same reason why he can't play a territory class enhancement. I initially thought this could cause confusion too, but after reading Bryon's arguments, I think it makes sense, and I don't think it would be that difficult of a concept to grasp.

The Schaef · « **Reply #47 on:** February 12, 2010, 11:21:38 AM »

It doesn't make sense to me that putting a card in Storehouse is "playing" a card rather than using the "place instead" ability that is printed on the Fortress itself.

Nor does it make sense that various other actions, for example inactive Artifacts, are considered "played" even though you're not putting them "in play" or even doing anything with them other than putting them in an out-of-play stack.

You say place and play mean different things, but the only difference you've cited is that discarding doesn't count as playing, which seems arbitrary because you count every other act of putting down a card as playing, even when it can be defined differently. The requirement to come from your hand now even seems to be in question.

Compare to defining play as either activating or putting "in play" by game rule. The rules clearly define when the various card types are activated, and they clearly define when you can just put a card "in play" without activating it. This also draws clear lines between place (putting a card somewhere) and play (using a card). Using special abilities, you can retrieve a card from discard pile and "place" it in hand or "place" it in territory, or "play" it in battle where it is activated. You can "place" a card in Storehouse by special ability, or "place" it in discard pile by game rule, or "play" it into your territory by game rule (assuming a character or weapon).

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #48 on:** February 12, 2010, 11:29:45 AM »

Quote from: The Schaef on February 12, 2010, 11:21:38 AM

It doesn't make sense to me that putting a card in Storehouse is "playing" a card rather than using the "place instead" ability that is printed on the Fortress itself.

Nor does it make sense that various other actions, for example inactive Artifacts, are considered "played" even though you're not putting them "in play" or even doing anything with them other than putting them in an out-of-play stack.

You say place and play mean different things, but the only difference you've cited is that discarding doesn't count as playing, which seems arbitrary because you count every other act of putting down a card as playing, even when it can be defined differently. The requirement to come from your hand now even seems to be in question.

Compare to defining play as either activating or putting "in play" by game rule. The rules clearly define when the various card types are activated, and they clearly define when you can just put a card "in play" without activating it. This also draws clear lines between place (putting a card somewhere) and play (using a card). Using special abilities, you can retrieve a card from discard pile and "place" it in hand or "place" it in territory, or "play" it in battle where it is activated. You can "place" a card in Storehouse by special ability, or "place" it in discard pile by game rule, or "play" it into your territory by game rule (assuming a character or weapon).

, I mean honestly, what is wrong with the reasoning I stated earlier? Is there any real reason why splitting the two into two very different actions is a BAD thing?

Quote from: Lamborghini_diablo on February 11, 2010, 02:26:08 PM

I feel that the difference is... When you play a card, it is almost ALWAYS done without the help of a special ability. You play characters into your territory from hand without abilities, play cards in battle due to initative rules, even play healing enhancements due to the rules. The only ability that lets you "play" a card is one that SAYS "play", such as ET.

Storehouse is an ability that lets you place the cards on it. I don't see how the two are the same. Play = putting a card into play from hand by game rule or a "play" ability. Place = done entirely by special ability. You cannot place a card WITHOUT a special ability.

So, I see Play as more of a game rule, with a few abilities that allow you to use that rule out of normal bounds, while Place is done entirely by special ability, and only involves the placement of a card into an area it normally is not allowed (such as into a territory or into a fortress)

I have no REG quotes to back me up, but I stand by this idea.

If you all are trying to define play simply based on terms of OTHER games rather than the RULES of this game... then Why does Queen of Sheeba defeat King Zedekiah? According to every other card game, Kings are better than Queens... why is Redemption different?

The Schaef · « **Reply #49 on:** February 12, 2010, 11:40:19 AM »

The idea has merit but I kind of balk at a). the exceptional cases that exist and b). the fact that your definition still allows for weird cases where cards are "played" without being either activated or put "in play", face-down Arts remaining the best example.

Also, discarding your cards at the end of turn is "placing" them in the discard pile, not playing them by game rule into discard. Or if it is, that's seriously messed up.

I also take exception to your claim that I'm doing anything here "rather than" the rules of Redemption. My appeal to broader definitions speaks only to conventions that players expect to remain consistent. I will not argue that discarding is "playing" and activating is "discarding" just because we can make rules that would call it that. Convention is a key component in making a game accessible.

That said, I am still defining place and play firmly within the context of these rules and these rules only. I simply think that it's easy enough for everyone to understand and distinguish if "placing" is putting a card somewhere and "playing" is actively using the card in some way, either by activation or by putting it "in play" where it can be the target of most effects.

News:

Author Topic: Darius Decree (Read 30664 times)

The Schaef

The Schaef

The Schaef

Lamborghini_diablo

The Schaef

Lamborghini_diablo

The Schaef