Author Topic: Egyptian Charioteers question (Read 5042 times)

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #25 on:** September 06, 2011, 04:09:00 PM »

Quote from: Bryon 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.

So, I will not understand the ruling, but I will rule it that way anyway. Is that the conclusion of the Elders? I will do as I am told, but I want to be sure that there was not an explanation forthcoming. I can wait for a valid explanation.

This will affect how I rule other future combos. So in a cost/effect ability, the cost is not completed until the benefit is gained?

Gabe · « **Reply #26 on:** September 06, 2011, 05:02:30 PM »

It might work better for you if you think of it this way. Cost/benefit abilities are usually one special ability with two parts, a cost and a benefit. If you interrupt/negate the ability you interrupt the whole thing, not just the benefit.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #27 on:** September 06, 2011, 05:21:27 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on September 06, 2011, 05:02:30 PM

It might work better for you if you think of it this way. Cost/benefit abilities are usually one special ability with two parts, a cost and a benefit. If you interrupt/negate the ability you interrupt the whole thing, not just the benefit.

I would agree in the case of a negate or negate all, but ItB does not interrupt completed instant abilities. So the only way ItB could interrupt Egyptian Warden's cost is if the cost was not completed.

Again, I am not trying to be a pain (well, not this time). I just want to understand for when similar situations occur. If the verdict is "stick with the status quo," then I will do so willingly.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #28 on:** September 06, 2011, 08:29:03 PM »

ITB does interrupt complete instant abilities if they are causing you to be removed from battle.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #29 on:** September 06, 2011, 09:35:32 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on September 06, 2011, 08:29:03 PM

ITB does interrupt complete instant abilities if they are causing you to be removed from battle.

So you are saying that the answer to this question:

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on September 06, 2011, 04:09:00 PM

So in a cost/effect ability, the cost is not completed until the benefit is gained?

..... is "yes." You do not actually ever complete the cost (discard) until the benefit is completed (capture)? If this is true, then that is how we must rule every cost/benefit card. Correct?

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #30 on:** September 06, 2011, 10:07:53 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on September 06, 2011, 09:35:32 PM

You do not actually ever complete the cost (discard) until the benefit is completed (capture)? If this is true, then that is how we must rule every cost/benefit card. Correct?

I don't have a definitive answer to the original question yet, but I know that this last statement is NOT correct. You can pay the cost of a card without gaining the benefit of that cost. For example if a card lets you discard a hero to draw a card, but there is a card out that prevents all drawing, then you can still discard the hero (but not draw the card).

SomeKittens · « **Reply #31 on:** September 06, 2011, 10:18:40 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on September 06, 2011, 09:35:32 PM

Quote from: Minister Polarius on September 06, 2011, 08:29:03 PM
ITB does interrupt complete instant abilities if they are causing you to be removed from battle.

So you are saying that the answer to this question:

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on September 06, 2011, 04:09:00 PM
So in a cost/effect ability, the cost is not completed until the benefit is gained?

..... is "yes." You do not actually ever complete the cost (discard) until the benefit is completed (capture)? If this is true, then that is how we must rule every cost/benefit card. Correct?

This sounds like YMT's coming up with a combo.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #32 on:** September 06, 2011, 10:35:18 PM »

I was not responding to that question, I was responding to the assertion that ITB does not interrupt completed abilities. I'm not even really sure what this thread is about, currently, I was just addressing that one point.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #33 on:** September 07, 2011, 05:35:02 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on September 06, 2011, 10:07:53 PM

For example if a card lets you discard a hero to draw a card, but there is a card out that prevents all drawing, then you can still discard the hero (but not draw the card).

I don't see how this is different than an ItB on Egyptian Warden, then. Paying the cost is a completed instant ability. Only the benefit (capture) is being interrupted, just like only the drawing is being prevented in your example.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #34 on:** September 08, 2011, 10:28:35 AM »

If the phrasing was "Do this. If you do that, do this other thing," I'd agree with you. In this case, it's one sentence, and in my mind, one ability.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #35 on:** September 08, 2011, 10:47:15 AM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on September 07, 2011, 05:35:02 PM

I don't see how this is different than an ItB on Egyptian Warden, then. Paying the cost is a completed instant ability. Only the benefit (capture) is being interrupted, just like only the drawing is being prevented in your example.

I understand your point, and if the majority of the elders want to change the ruling on this, I'm fine with it. I just see it both ways, and therefore don't have enough interest in changing a standing ruling to lead a discussion on the other side about it.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #36 on:** September 08, 2011, 04:01:21 PM »

Quote from: SomeKittens on September 08, 2011, 10:28:35 AM

If the phrasing was "Do this. If you do that, do this other thing," I'd agree with you. In this case, it's one sentence, and in my mind, one ability.

Reach of Desperation is one sentence but it is considered 3 separate abilities, why shouldn't Cost/Benefit be two separate abilities that one of them requires the other one to be completed.

browarod · « **Reply #37 on:** September 08, 2011, 05:45:09 PM »

In the end it comes down to the fact that cost/gain-type abilities are connected to each other. The question is whether their connection is treated like any other set of multiple special abilities (they activate and are carried out separately and can be prevented, interrupted, negated, or whatever separately, except that the second ability cannot work if the first does not) or one single special ability (it activates as one ability and is interrupted, prevented, negated as one ability except that the first part can be carried out even if the second is not).

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #38 on:** September 08, 2011, 07:18:06 PM »

If I have a card that says "Prevent capture abilities" would that prevent me from discarding a card for Egyptian Warden even though the capture is prevented?

Gabe · « **Reply #39 on:** September 08, 2011, 10:14:21 PM »

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on September 08, 2011, 07:18:06 PM

If I have a card that says "Prevent capture abilities" would that prevent me from discarding a card for Egyptian Warden even though the capture is prevented?

No, you can still pay the cost without gaining the benefit. If you had something that said "prevent discard abilities" you would not be able to capture.

Three elders have confirmed the ruling. What's it going to take for this discussion to end?

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #40 on:** September 08, 2011, 10:20:08 PM »

I think I forgot that it was decided, I have nothing against the ruling, I would just prefer it to be the other way, but not seriously enough to make a big deal about it.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #41 on:** September 08, 2011, 10:31:08 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on September 08, 2011, 10:14:21 PM

Three elders have confirmed the ruling.

A ruling that contradicts how those Elders have agreed cost/benefit abilities work:

Quote from: Gabe on September 08, 2011, 10:14:21 PM

No, you can still pay the cost without gaining the benefit.

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

Quote from: Gabe on September 08, 2011, 10:14:21 PM

What's it going to take for this discussion to end?

Apparently all that is needed is for me to shut up and go away, since that is what your logic is telling me to do.

OK, you win, for no other reason than you are the Elders and there's nothing I can do about it.

Gabe · « **Reply #42 on:** September 08, 2011, 10:47:30 PM »

I'm sorry it doesn't make sense to you. It's been explained several times over. If I understood why you're not making the connection you know I'd be glad to help you.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #43 on:** September 08, 2011, 11:17:10 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on September 08, 2011, 10:47:30 PM

If I understood why you're not making the connection you know I'd be glad to help you.

I thought I had explained my dilemma in detail. To sum up:

Quote from: Gabe on September 08, 2011, 10:14:21 PM

No, you can still pay the cost without gaining the benefit.

Cost: Discard (Instant completed ability)
Benefit: Capture (Instant ability causing removal)

ItB interrupts the latter, not the former.

Earlier you said this:

Quote from: Gabe on September 06, 2011, 05:02:30 PM

It might work better for you if you think of it this way. Cost/benefit abilities are usually one special ability with two parts, a cost and a benefit. If you interrupt/negate the ability you interrupt the whole thing, not just the benefit.

And yet, in subsequent discussion it was decided that you can prevent one part without preventing the other. This would seem to indicate that they are separate. Why is prevent ruled differently than interrupt (in regard to cost/benefit)?

Gabe · « **Reply #44 on:** September 09, 2011, 12:16:10 AM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on September 08, 2011, 11:17:10 PM

And yet, in subsequent discussion it was decided that you can prevent one part without preventing the other. This would seem to indicate that they are separate. Why is prevent ruled differently than interrupt (in regard to cost/benefit)?

The examples that are being cited are not a broad prevent ability, they are a very specific prevent ability. "Prevent capture abilities" is not the same as "prevent the special ability on an evil character". The broad prevent will stop both the discard and capture on Egyptian Warden. The specific prevent will not stop the discard even though it's tied to the capture as a cost.

A broad interrupt is going to interrupt the entire ability on a card. A specific interrupt may only negate part of an ability. "Interrupt capture abilities" is specific and only stop the capture of Egyptian Warden. "Interrupt the battle" is broad and interrupts the whole ability, both parts, the cost and the benefit.

As far as I can tell the thing that causing confusion is that a sentence is considered a special ability on a character. "Do [this] to gain [that]." is one ability that consists of two parts.

News:

Author Topic: Egyptian Charioteers question (Read 5042 times)

browarod