Cactus Game Design Message Boards

"activated on" is also undefined as specifically referring to artifacts where activate refers to many cards. R&D does not specify artifact.

The phrase “interrupt the battle” includes interrupting the following abilities if they were activated on cards in the current battle:
1 all active abilities
2 abilities with effects that are defeating one of the characters you control in battle 3 abilities on the last card played in current battle if it was played by your opponent

Is specifically used under interrupt etc

REG on artifacts:
If an Artifact is activated on another card and the underlying card is relocated, the activated Artifact is generally
relocated (regardless of protect effects)

REG on Interrupt
An interrupt effect temporarily undoes and suspends active or completed abilities, or completing effects of
abilities, while activating other abilities or effects before the suspended abilities reactivate.

Im not seeing in the REG where a SA is "Activated on," but I do see where it is "Activated" im guessing the confussion is where you apply the jargon of "activating" from Redemption and the real sense of the word? I do not see in the REG where an enhancement used during battle is "Activated on" but rather "Activated by"

Quote from: SEB on June 18, 2018, 12:43:49 PM

To sum up:
"Used" means an instant use (typically in battle), with a discarding of the enhancement when resolution happens
"Equip" means to place a weapon-class enhancement on a legal warrior-class character
"Place/put" means place an enhancement on a legal target/in a legal area
"Activate" means to place an artifact in a legal area/on a legal target

Therefore, the target for R&D is legal only if the target has cards "placed" in it through the target's own mechanics, another card forcing it upon the target, if the target has a weapon-class enhancement, if the target has "ongoing" enhancements placed upon it, or if the target has an artifact on it.

correct?

This is exactly correct except for a clarification on use. An enhancement is considered used simply when it's ability completes, the enhancement being discarded or not isn't relevant.

could you give an example of an enhancement being "used" and not being discarded when it's ability completes?

In conclusion abilities are activated, on a card, with a card actually on it in battle is not a valid target when meeting

A card with a card activated on it

Where artifact is not specified below 5 lines and "activated on" is undefined but appears multiple times elsewhere

Thank you

Are you saying, "Cards with special abilities activate, and have nothing to do if a player places that card on a another card, because the game doesnt check for the physical location, but the "game-legal" sense of "on"?

Quote from: SEB on June 18, 2018, 12:58:30 PM

Quote from: kariusvega on June 18, 2018, 12:51:57 PM

In conclusion abilities are activated, on a card, with a card actually on it in battle is not a valid target when meeting

A card with a card activated on it

Where artifact is not specified below 5 lines and "activated on" is undefined but appears multiple times elsewhere

Thank you

Are you saying, "Cards with special abilities activate, have nothing to do if a player places that card on a another card, because the game doesnt check for the physical location, but the "game-legal" sense of "on."?

"Activated on" is actually undefined and intuitively to game rule all enhancements abilities are activated on characters according to the reg and enhancements are even discarded by game rule when that character is removed from battle. It's not a semantics war when these things are actual. This is why I said by current rules I find

(Activate, which is sufficient)

A card with a card activated on it to be true where artifact is not specified and "activated on" is undefined in the case of enhancements actually on cards and activated in battle

I guess the part that is confusing me in your explanations are that the REG uses the phrase "activate on" when talking about artifacts being placed on a legal target, and when an enhancement is used by a character the special ability then becomes active, but I think we arrive to the same end: an enhancement being used by a character is not "placed on" a character unless the enhancement specifically says that it is "placed."

I dont think the game intuitively demands enhancements to be "activated on" because I have always understood enhancements to be used by a character, whereas enhancements that "Stick-around" to be used by and on characters.

I might have missed the MP, but i think the intention is to make clear R&D targets. A character in battle that used a "normal" enhancement(s) is not a legal target.

Quote from: kariusvega on June 18, 2018, 01:14:56 PM

Quote from: SEB on June 18, 2018, 12:58:30 PM

Quote from: kariusvega on June 18, 2018, 12:51:57 PM

In conclusion abilities are activated, on a card, with a card actually on it in battle is not a valid target when meeting

A card with a card activated on it

Where artifact is not specified below 5 lines and "activated on" is undefined but appears multiple times elsewhere

Thank you

Are you saying, "Cards with special abilities activate, have nothing to do if a player places that card on a another card, because the game doesnt check for the physical location, but the "game-legal" sense of "on."?

"Activated on" is actually undefined and intuitively to game rule all enhancements abilities are activated on characters according to the reg and enhancements are even discarded by game rule when that character is removed from battle. It's not a semantics war when these things are actual. This is why I said by current rules I find

(Activate, which is sufficient)

A card with a card activated on it to be true where artifact is not specified and "activated on" is undefined in the case of enhancements actually on cards and activated in battle

I guess the part that is confusing me in your explanations are that the REG uses the phrase "activate on" when talking about artifacts being placed on a legal target, and when an enhancement is used by a character the special ability then becomes active, but I think we arrive to the same end: an enhancement being used by a character is not "placed on" a character unless the enhancement specifically says that it is "placed."

I dont think the game intuitively demands enhancements to be "activated on" because I have always understood enhancements to be used by a character, whereas enhancements that "Stick-around" to be used by and on characters.

I might have missed the MP, but i think the intention is to make clear R&D targets. A character in battle that used a "normal" enhancement(s) is not a legal target.

That's not what the REG currently says and R&D doesn't specify artifact. Activated is clearly defined to include characters and enhancements played on by around and near them ultimately abilities activated on them clearly defined in the REG.