Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on May 22, 2010, 02:44:24 AM

Yes, this is a necropost. No it isn't invalid. I came into this situation in a recent game and need understanding.

Especially since no one ever answered MJB's last post.

They did in a different thread.  Short and sweet, Priestly Breastplate eats up your artifact pile activation slot every single turn, placed on a Priest or no.

Pol

If you stick your neck out, be prepared to have people take hacks at it.

Hey,

Are you sure "they" wasn't "Nobody?" Unless a real PTB said that we need closure, as Nobody's stance is HOTLY contested and he doesn't have rubber-stamp powers.

Only Rob has rubber stamp powers.  He's given authority to the PTB because he shouldn't have to chime in on every ruling question that raises a little debate.

Tim is a real PTB.  He earned that position and Rob has granted him that authority.  Tim is going to give you an accurate answer just as often as any of the PTB and even more often than some.

Tim has done an excellent job in the past few years helping guide Redemption to a more consistent system of "top down" rules.  Sometimes that means that his ideas are ahead of their time and not official when he originally presents them, but they become official later.  For the most part he does a pretty good job of stating when he's giving an opinion/idea of how things should be versus an official ruling.

Tschow,

Gabe

Tim makes wrong rulings with greater regularity than most, probably because he makes a ruling too soon. He's right more than he's wrong, but he's wrong too often to be highly reliable. And I'm not the only one who feels this way.

I don't think it's as small as you believe it to be. But the facts should speak for themselves.

We should just hang the Priestly Breastplate on the Cross Beams of the Cross and stick them in the corner of the garage.

 

Nor have any other PTB confirmed, a suspicious fact in light of many people disputing that this is the way it's actually played repeatedly. All it would take is Bryon saying, "Nobody is right, Artifacts must be reactivated each round and we have no intention of adding an option to simply leave it active where it is. Here's hoping we don't forget to specify that it stays there when we make a card that lets you activate Asherah Pole in ST." But no PTB has done so, so I continue to find the knee-jerk ruling highly suspect and invalid. If I were hosting a tournament, I'd rule in favor of Priestly Breastplate.

Quote from: Minister Polarius on May 24, 2010, 02:21:35 PM

If I were hosting a tournament, I'd rule in favor of Priestly Breastplate.

Which just goes to show if a player is building a deck around this, he/she should attempt to verify ahead of time which way the tournament judge would rule.

Whoo-hoo.

I think Arizona is way within its bounds to regula...

...wait, uh...nevermind.  Wrong debate.  I think??

 

And how in the world did STAMP of all people... forget A New-tered Beginning?

One could also argue that the Artifact is "placed" and therefore continues to have its effect without taking up an Artifact slot in the future.  But doing so would preclude you from being able to de-activate it at will; you basically would be stuck with it as a "placed" card, and not an "activated on" card.

I favor letting Breastplate stay without clogging the pile but I don't yet know which solution has the better support from the rules.  I would think, not being certain of an answer, that staying out of the discussion would be the wiser course of action when people want something definitive.

Quote from: BrianGabe on January 12, 2010, 02:30:39 AM
Destructive Sin has been placed on my Hero.  Does DS continue to negate my Forts and Covs if my Hero gets set-aside?  What about if my Hero is captured?

Yes to both questions.

back to the original question

Tim might be right that DS remains and that it still negates if your hero is set-aside but I think that he has to be wrong about it negating if captured.  The way DS is worded it says to place on a hero and negate THAT HERO's ability and IT'S owners good fortresses and covenants.  Now by definition isn't a "captured hero" not the same as a hero?  The ability to negate depends on referencing the hero it is on and it isn't on a hero anymore.  So there is no "THAT HERO" or "IT'S".