Cactus Game Design Message Boards

The "Only a rescue attempt of 2 or more Heroes can be successful." part, although it can be interpreted as another ability, is really just a clarification of his immune ability.  When people were confused, the Play As removed it.

Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on July 13, 2009, 02:11:53 PM

The "Only a rescue attempt of 2 or more Heroes can be successful." part, although it can be interpreted as another ability, is really just a clarification of his immune ability.  When people were confused, the Play As removed it.

It is a terrible clarification of the immunity which is why they changed it. However in changing it they killed the second part of the ability that could, and should be used in another way. They changed the play of the card (whether or not any body played it that way is irrelevent) which constitutes and errata, not a play as.

You have to look at the ability in light of how it was intended. Emperor Nero was intended simply to be immune to lone heroes. The part of his Special Ability which reads "only a rescue attempt of two or more Heroes can be successful" was just a clarification of his immunity. When they realized that too many people became confused by it, the play as was added to give Emperor Nero the ability he was originally inteded to have. It's no different that Prince of This World (I believe that's the right evil character).

Quote from: TheHobbit13 on July 13, 2009, 02:18:30 PM

Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on July 13, 2009, 02:11:53 PM

The "Only a rescue attempt of 2 or more Heroes can be successful." part, although it can be interpreted as another ability, is really just a clarification of his immune ability.  When people were confused, the Play As removed it.

It is a terrible clarification of the immunity which is why they changed it. However in changing it they killed the second part of the ability that could, and should be used in another way. They changed the play of the card (whether or not any body played it that way is irrelevent) which constitutes and errata, not a play as.

You have to look at the ability in light of how it was intended. Emperor Nero was intended simply to be immune to lone heroes. The part of his Special Ability which reads "only a rescue attempt of two or more Heroes can be successful" was just a clarification of his immunity. When they realized that too many people became confused by it, the play as was added to give Emperor Nero the ability he was originally inteded to have. It's no different that Prince of This World (I believe that's the right evil character).

Changing the use of a card to  it's original intent is an errata and that is what the play as did. 

Many cards have clarifiers that are not actually extra abilities. For example, the Warriors' Red Dragon's ability could be interpreted as basically saying "cannot be negated unless Blood of the Lamb is played" but that's not what it does.

Nathan,

It has been ruled in the past that Prince of this World (Wa) and Nero's "other abilities" are only clarifications, and I don't believe it has ever been played that a lone hero can't rescue even after playing AotL on one of the two. Thus, the Play As removes clarifications that are unnecessary or confusing, as "Play As" abilities often do.

Although I did find out that the Warriors PotW has no such Play As. I'm guessing this is an oversight.

Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Pale Green • Ability: 10 / 12 • Class: None • Special Ability: Character is immune to lone Heroes. Only a rescue attempt of 2 or more Heroes can be successful. • Identifiers: NT Male Demon • Verse: John 14:30 • Availability: Warriors booster packs (Rare)

A new REG will come out sometime after nationals. I'll include the "play as" in PotW.

Regarding other "unnamed threads" having other REG-related discussions, I'll likely have to go find them. That might be like finding a needle in a haystack.

Mike

Hey,

There was a time when Angel of the Lord against Emperor Nero did not result in a redeemed soul unless there were two heroes in battle.  I believe that was the original ruling when the card came out and was changed shortly thereafter to treat the second sentence of Emperor Nero as a clarification rather than a separate ability.

Nathan, I see your point.  Clarifying text shows up on a good number of cards, particularly old cards.  In theory, removing clarifying text does not change the ability of the card at all, but in Nero's case the clarifying text is so poorly worded that it can easily be misunderstood to be a separate ability.  The purpose of play as is to make it clearer how a card is used.  The purpose of Errata is to change how a card is used.  In the case of Nero we gave him a play as to try to clarify how he is to be used, and in the process changed how he is used.  So we probably should relabel Nero's rewording and call it an errata.  But the requirements for giving a card play as are different than the requirements for giving a card errata.  And Nero doesn't really meet the requirements for receiving errata...so maybe we should consider going back to how it was originally ruled and treat it as a second ability rather than as clarifying text.

Long and short of it, until you hear otherwise from TPTB treat Nero as if his ability was worded the same as the Priest's Prince of this World is worded.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Hey,

There was a time when Angel of the Lord against Emperor Nero did not result in a redeemed soul unless there were two heroes in battle.  I believe that was the original ruling when the card came out and was changed shortly thereafter to treat the second sentence of Emperor Nero as a clarification rather than a separate ability.

Nathan, I see your point.  Clarifying text shows up on a good number of cards, particularly old cards.  In theory, removing clarifying text does not change the ability of the card at all, but in Nero's case the clarifying text is so poorly worded that it can easily be misunderstood to be a separate ability.  The purpose of play as is to make it clearer how a card is used.  The purpose of Errata is to change how a card is used.  In the case of Nero we gave him a play as to try to clarify how he is to be used, and in the process changed how he is used.  So we probably should relabel Nero's rewording and call it an errata.  But the requirements for giving a card play as are different than the requirements for giving a card errata.  And Nero doesn't really meet the requirements for receiving errata...so maybe we should consider going back to how it was originally ruled and treat it as a second ability rather than as clarifying text.

Long and short of it, until you hear otherwise from TPTB treat Nero as if his ability was worded the same as the Priest's Prince of this World is worded.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Sounds good, I wouldn't mind Nero being able to work like that though...