Author Topic: Duplicates (Read 4000 times)

Minister Polarius · « **on:** May 05, 2010, 02:23:01 AM »

If my opponent is using a 100+ card deck and has an annoying unique Egyptian sitting in his territory, can I WatW the other one out, effectively killing one with fire? I would say yes. The opposition says that you can't force people to control duplicates, but if that's the case, why is there a rule for what happens when you are forced to have duplicates?

A related question: If I have Moses, can I capture Moses?

Gabe · « **Reply #1 on:** May 05, 2010, 02:41:37 AM »

Yes, your plan with WatW works. Yes, you can capture Moses.

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #2 on:** May 05, 2010, 03:03:09 AM »

I disagree -

With the second part.

You can't willingly create a situation where you control two copies of the same unique character. If you were to have a captured moses, then mass target say the discard pile with Midwives to return moses, then you could temporarily have both. (Until you choose one to discard)

REG says this under how to use - capture:

Captured characters retain their identity, therefore must conform to the restrictions of duplicates in play.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #3 on:** May 05, 2010, 04:44:08 AM »

Yes, the restrictions on duplicates in play. Restrictions being that if you have them, you have to Discard one.

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #4 on:** May 05, 2010, 04:52:33 AM »

No, the restriction is that you cannot willingly create a situation where you control two. If a mass effect (Brass Serpenting after Gates of Hell with two copies in d/c) causes you to have two then you choose one to discard.
I cannot play Aaron if I have one in play already. Otherwise I could drop one if I had one in territory poisioned, this has never been the case.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #5 on:** May 05, 2010, 05:48:30 AM »

So if I have TAS sitting in my LoB, I can't use UN to get my own TAS out to block with?

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #6 on:** May 05, 2010, 05:59:44 AM »

Under my understanding of the rules, that would be an illegal play.

Red · « **Reply #7 on:** May 05, 2010, 07:50:35 AM »

Why do captured chacters count again?

Gabe · « **Reply #8 on:** May 05, 2010, 08:46:05 AM »

You can capture a character, even if you already have a copy of that character. Then you have to immediately discard one copy because of the duplicate rule. The duplicate is caused by a special ability (capture or WotW or Midwives) so it's allowed. This happens all the time in T2.

Gabe · « **Reply #9 on:** May 05, 2010, 08:48:01 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on May 05, 2010, 05:48:30 AM

So if I have TAS sitting in my LoB, I can't use UN to get my own TAS out to block with?

Yes, you can. It's the special ability of UN which is putting TaS in play. As soon as he enter's play you must choose one to discard, usually the LS. However, it would not be legal for you to play your own TaS from your hand to create a duplicate.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #10 on:** May 05, 2010, 10:11:24 AM »

Then why are you not allowed to band to your opponent's Captain with your Jacob if you have Captain in your territory? It is Jacob's SA that is causing you to control two of the same unique card.

I have always assumed it is the way RDT said. You can't do something optional to have two unique characters in your control, and the rule only applies when either something not-optional happens (like SWJ revealing a hero that you have in your territory). But I could certainly be wrong.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #11 on:** May 05, 2010, 11:33:12 AM »

I don't know how it is supposed to work, but this is how I think it SHOULD work:

You are not allowed to create a situation where you control 2 of the same unique cards when you have a choice. This would prohibit banding to an opponent's card when you have the same card in your territory. It would also prohibit using UN to get another copy of a unique EC that you have in play already.

However, you are allowed to force a situation where your opponent has control of 2 of the same unique cards when you have a choice. At that point they would have to discard 1 copy. So you could send your TAS over to their LoB while they have TAS in their territory, but then they would get to discard 1 (probably yours acting like a LS, making this play unwise). You could also create a side battle where they would have to defend with your EC who is the same as their EC in their territory (forcing them to choose between losing the battle by killing the defender, or killing their EC in territory and trying to win the battle).

In addition, situations that do not allow a choice could cause a situation where duplicates are in play. This would be another time when 1 would have to be discarded.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #12 on:** May 05, 2010, 11:41:50 AM »

. That's how I've always though it should work.

Gabe · « **Reply #13 on:** May 05, 2010, 12:09:10 PM »

Quote from: REG > Example – Same Character

You may have more than one Moses in your deck or hand, but you are allowed only one Moses in your territory, set-aside area or the Field of Battle. Something could happen in the game that would cause you to have two cards named Moses in your territory or Field of Battle. If it does, you must select and discard one of these cards. Also, you cannot band in a character with the name of the same person as a character already in the Field of Battle.

Unfortunately the REG doesn't define what "something" is so we're left to guess what type of actions this can be. We know that banding doesn't work because it's noted as an exception. Since "search, reveal, exchange" and "capture" are not noted as exceptions I don't see why they would not work.

Quote from: REG > Instant Abilities > Capture > How to Use

Captured characters retain their identity, therefore must conform to the restrictions of duplicates in play. Should a character by the same name be already in a player’s territory or set aside area, the holder of the duplicates determines which duplicate to discard.

This backs up the idea that I can capture your Moses if I already control my own Moses.

STAMP · « **Reply #14 on:** May 05, 2010, 12:10:34 PM »

To add to Prof Underwood's clarification, you cannot cause duplicates in your territory by targeting a unique card when you are able to target a different card.

For example, if you have Moses in your territory you cannot capture your opponents' Moses if you are able to target a different character at the time. If Your opponents' Moses is the only target available then you can capture him and then discard one. Another example: Idolaters only has one target, Aaron, so it doesn't matter how many other targets there are. You capture Aaron and then discard one of the duplicates.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #15 on:** May 05, 2010, 12:41:05 PM »

I'm with Gabe. Maybe its cuz I play capture heavy in T2, but if midwives can pull out three hurs only to discard two. My capture should hit moses, even though I already have one AND I should be able to band to an opp's hero to d/c it.

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #16 on:** May 05, 2010, 12:47:15 PM »

The two situations that you are describing are fundamentally different,

One does not include a choice of target (Midwives)
One does (capture)

This is where the disagreement lies. While it is possible to create a situation where you control multiple copies (Mass effect) My belief is that you cannot willingly create a situation where you control multiple.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #17 on:** May 05, 2010, 01:37:18 PM »

Quote from: BrianGabe on May 05, 2010, 12:09:10 PM

Quote from: REG > Example – Same Character
You may have more than one Moses in your deck or hand, but you are allowed only one Moses in your territory, set-aside area or the Field of Battle. Something could happen in the game that would cause you to have two cards named Moses in your territory or Field of Battle. If it does, you must select and discard one of these cards. Also, you cannot band in a character with the name of the same person as a character already in the Field of Battle.

Unfortunately the REG doesn't define what "something" is so we're left to guess what type of actions this can be. We know that banding doesn't work because it's noted as an exception. Since "search, reveal, exchange" and "capture" are not noted as exceptions I don't see why they would not work.

Quote from: REG > Instant Abilities > Capture > How to Use
Captured characters retain their identity, therefore must conform to the restrictions of duplicates in play. Should a character by the same name be already in a player’s territory or set aside area, the holder of the duplicates determines which duplicate to discard.

This backs up the idea that I can capture your Moses if I already control my own Moses.

The banding exception specifies that you can't bring a duplicate character into a battle where another copy of that character is, it doesn't say you can't band to a character you have in your territory (like Jacob banding to your opponent's captain). If you can use Unknown Nation to search for a guy you have in your territory, I'm not sure what the difference would be in bringing a character into battle via banding.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #18 on:** May 05, 2010, 01:50:27 PM »

Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on May 05, 2010, 12:47:15 PM

The two situations that you are describing are fundamentally different,

One does not include a choice of target (Midwives)
One does (capture)

This is where the disagreement lies. While it is possible to create a situation where you control multiple copies (Mass effect) My belief is that you cannot willingly create a situation where you control multiple.

Isn't a S.A. a S.a. no matter how small or limited? Aren't S.a. supposed to override game rules?

Professoralstad · « **Reply #19 on:** May 05, 2010, 01:55:47 PM »

Not always. Some game rules are there that can't be circumvented by SA's. There's a game rule that says that you can't add Characters to your opponent's side of the battle without a CtB/CtR card, which is why Gates of Hell can't be used to give your opponent a demon to give you initiative, and you can't give your opponent an OT Hero when blocking with HP Annas when The Silver Trumpets is active. Most recently, the hand limit rule is specifically there to not be overridden by an SA.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #20 on:** May 05, 2010, 02:58:47 PM »

Why Bryon's saying makes perfect sense and it's how a lot of us have always played it. Banding is clearly listed as an exception, and we all know you can't band to an opponent's card when you have one of your own. Other than that, it makes no sense not to play it as un-rulesy as possible (why Bryon is suggesting).

Gabe · « **Reply #21 on:** May 05, 2010, 03:22:35 PM »

When and where did Bryon say anything on this topic? Maybe I missed something? I'm interested in his thoughts but I don't see what you're referring to.

I'd like to point out that this isn't the first time we've found out that they play things differently in Minnesota.

Although this topic mostly applies to T2 and I mostly learned T2 from the studs in Minnesota so I'm not sure how that fits in...

Professoralstad · « **Reply #22 on:** May 05, 2010, 04:38:02 PM »

Yeah, I'll never forget the first time someone from outside of Minnesota came to a MN tournament with an Orange defense. Someone called over a judge and asked if his cards were legal. The judge said that King of Tyrus was Gold, not whatever color was in the icon box (looked like a cross between crimson and yellow, or so the judge said), so the outsider clearly had an illegal deck.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #23 on:** May 06, 2010, 01:54:11 AM »

*facepalm* got you and Bryon mixed up in my head.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #24 on:** May 06, 2010, 12:38:24 PM »

Why are you keeping Gabe and Bryon in your head?

News:

Author Topic: Duplicates (Read 4000 times)