Author Topic: Egyptian Charioteers question (Read 5038 times)

Ken4Christ4ever · « **on:** August 27, 2011, 10:31:32 PM »

I ruled on this at an unofficial tournament a week ago and would like some clarification on if I ruled correctly, or if my ruling should have been different since I hadn't considered the situation before...

A hero and an evil character were in battle. The hero played a negate-able enhancement to get rid of the evil character. The evil character played an interrupt and band enhancement to bring in Egyptian Charioteers.
-Does Egyptian Charioteers prevent the special ability on the enhancement that was interrupted?
-Does it prevent the special ability on the next good enhancement that would be played after that?
-If it's the latter (or something else), is this still a legal play, and could the evil character then play another enhancement to interrupt/negate the good enhancement?

I ruled that Egyptian Charioteers prevented the special ability on the good enhancement that had already been played since it had been interrupted, but I am not confident in my ruling and am glad it was during an unofficial tournament!

Thoughts?

Egyptian Charioteers (H)

Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Gold • Ability: 6 / 8 • Class: Warrior • Special Ability: Prevent the special ability of the next enhancement opponent plays this battle. • Identifiers: Generic OT Male Human, Egypt, Fought Earthly Battle • Verse: Exodus 14:7 • Availability: H Deck

-----------------------------------------------------------

Second question: Related to the first replies.

If a player defends with Egyptian Warden, discards an evil gold negate enhancement and targets the only hero in battle, and the hero plays something that negates his ability, can Egyptian Warden use the negate enhancement he was going to discard? I bring this up because I feel like it relates to what has been played/used/discarded/etc with interrupt/negate abilities, and I'm confused!

Egyptian Warden (FF)

Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Gold • Ability: 4 / 5 • Class: None • Special Ability: You may discard an evil gold Enhancement from hand to capture a human Hero in battle. • Identifiers: OT Male Human, Egypt • Verse: Genesis 39:22 • Availability: Faith of our Fathers booster packs (None)

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #1 on:** August 27, 2011, 10:42:11 PM »

Reserved for witty remark.

Also, I think he would prevent the next enhancement, since the previous one has already hit the table.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #2 on:** August 27, 2011, 10:42:58 PM »

When you interrupt, you don't interrupt the playing of the last enhancement, just its ability. Since it has already been played, I do not believe Charioteers would prevent it, but I do believe you could still interrupt and band him in if you want.

Ken4Christ4ever · « **Reply #3 on:** August 27, 2011, 10:58:34 PM »

Thanks for those replies. If that's the case, take a look at my second question I added. Obviously the easiest solution is to stop allowing Egyptians!

SomeKittens · « **Reply #4 on:** August 27, 2011, 11:04:06 PM »

If Warden's negated, the discarding of the enhancement is also negated, so it returns to hand.

browarod · « **Reply #5 on:** August 27, 2011, 11:33:44 PM »

Kittens is correct. However, if you then use that negate to negate their ability-negator his ability would fizzle anyway as the card you discarded is not in the discard pile when his ability resolves again and, thus, you didn't pay the cost.

Ken4Christ4ever · « **Reply #6 on:** August 28, 2011, 08:31:26 PM »

Then to me those two rulings seem to be contradictory... In the first scenario I'm hearing that the enhancement is still in play and therefore isn't targeted as the "next enhancement" even though it will be the next ability to activate. In the second scenario the enhancement is back in my hand. Can someone help me understand this? Thank you!

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #7 on:** August 28, 2011, 09:08:09 PM »

Egyptian Warden isn't playing the enhancement, he is just discarding it.

In the first case the enhancement is still in play so it can't be the next enhancement.

In the second case Warden's ability is being negated so the enhancement is back in your hand so you can play it

Ken4Christ4ever · « **Reply #8 on:** August 28, 2011, 09:12:55 PM »

Okay, I think I can see the difference. What about if the hero Egyptian Warden was capturing played an interrupt, play next enhancement, and then an enhancement that discarded a card at random from opponent's hand? Would the evil enhancement Egyptian Warden was discarding be in the discard pile already, or could it be targeted by the enhancement as being in hand? Perhaps this is a better scenario because the ability is being interrupted, like the other, but not negated.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #9 on:** August 28, 2011, 09:17:02 PM »

I don't know if interrupt the battle interrupts the discard part of Egyptian Warden, since its not ongoing, an ability causing removal or the last enhancement played.

Ryupeco11 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 28, 2011, 10:09:31 PM »

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on August 28, 2011, 09:17:02 PM

I don't know if interrupt the battle interrupts the discard part of Egyptian Warden, since its not ongoing, an ability causing removal or the last enhancement played.

actually the discard part of Egyptian warden IS causing him to lose by removal via capture.( he is discardsing the enhancement TO capture so its a cost and effect ability) so if that ability is intterupted then the enhancement would go to hand if then the enhancement was discarded somehow i believe wardens abilty would fizzle for the reason browarod said
^_^

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #11 on:** September 01, 2011, 12:03:12 PM »

Quote from: Ken4Christ4ever on August 28, 2011, 09:12:55 PM

Okay, I think I can see the difference. What about if the hero Egyptian Warden was capturing played an interrupt, play next enhancement, and then an enhancement that discarded a card at random from opponent's hand? Would the evil enhancement Egyptian Warden was discarding be in the discard pile already, or could it be targeted by the enhancement as being in hand? Perhaps this is a better scenario because the ability is being interrupted, like the other, but not negated.

It would be in hand, you'd have a chance of killing it. Though this is very convoluted to me.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #12 on:** September 01, 2011, 05:05:26 PM »

I agree with ChristianSoldier that Interrupt the Battle would interrupt the capture, not the discard.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #13 on:** September 01, 2011, 05:10:01 PM »

So there are two separate abilities?

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #14 on:** September 01, 2011, 05:24:54 PM »

Quote from: SomeKittens on September 01, 2011, 05:10:01 PM

So there are two separate abilities?

It is a cost/benefit. You can pay the cost and not get the benefit.

For instance, you could play a card that says "Make a nearly impossible hockey shot to get $50,000." Hypothetically you could make the shot, but not get the $50,000.

SonofLar · « **Reply #15 on:** September 01, 2011, 06:51:20 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on September 01, 2011, 05:24:54 PM

For instance, you could play a card that says "Make a nearly impossible hockey shot to get $50,000." Hypothetically you could make the shot, but not get the $50,000.

10 Points for a tie-in to current events!

However, here are my thoughts:
Say you interrupt the battle and prevent the special ability on an evil card in play (same thing as negating). Since negate applies to both cost and benefit, I would think that the interrupt/prevent also applies to both cost and the benefit. In that case, an interrupt/prevent ability would have to interrupt both the cost and the benefit in order to prevent them.

Thus justifying interrupting the cost.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #16 on:** September 01, 2011, 08:48:34 PM »

The only thing is that Interrupt the Battle is not the same as a negate. ItB has very specific targets.

browarod · « **Reply #17 on:** September 01, 2011, 10:36:43 PM »

The REG uses King Zimri as the example for a special ability that can be interrupted with ItB and it says nothing about the cost not being interrupted (and everyone I know that's used abilities like that have always undone the cost if the card is interrupted), it just says "opponent's special abilites."

Elder confirmation either way would be nice since YMT is ruling it differently than I had thought (and been ruling it).

Gabe · « **Reply #18 on:** September 02, 2011, 12:24:30 AM »

I was taught that ITB against cards like King Zimri and Egyptian Warden would put the discarded card back into the players hand. That's how I've always played it and seen it played.

I also see YMT's point of view on this and understand his logic.

Right now I don't have time to look into this in more detail but I'll try to get back to it soon.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #19 on:** September 02, 2011, 01:11:10 AM »

Quote from: Gabe on September 02, 2011, 12:24:30 AM

I was taught that ITB against cards like King Zimri and Egyptian Warden would put the discarded card back into the players hand. That's how I've always played it and seen it played.

This has also been my experience, so that's probably the safest way to rule this issue at present. However, I don't feel strongly yet whether it should stay that way or change to YMT's way of thinking. I'm open to further discussion

Bryon · « **Reply #20 on:** September 02, 2011, 10:18:48 AM »

I agree with Gabe and Prof Underwood. That has been the ruling.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #21 on:** September 02, 2011, 04:39:37 PM »

So a couple of Elders agree with my logic, but we're ruling the way it always has been ruled anyway?

I don't mind being wrong, but I would at least like to know why I am wrong. I realize that negate and negate all would return the discarded card, but why would ItB return the discarded card?

Gabe · « **Reply #22 on:** September 02, 2011, 06:40:08 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on September 02, 2011, 04:39:37 PM

So a couple of Elders agree with my logic, but we're ruling the way it always has been ruled anyway?

Understanding your point of view isn't the same as agreeing with you.

Busy weekend ahead but I'll try to take the time to explain this soon.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #23 on:** September 03, 2011, 10:47:27 AM »

No offense, butif there are arguments for both sides, I'd rather see it continue to be ruled the same way. Simpler for me.

Bryon · « **Reply #24 on:** September 06, 2011, 11:44:48 AM »

Yeah, it pretty much boils down to having 2 options, both of which are workable systems. So we go with status quo.

News:

Author Topic: Egyptian Charioteers question (Read 5038 times)

browarod

browarod