Cactus Game Design Message Boards

What happens when my opponent's EC has first strike and has higher offense than my Hero's defense but my Hero has Protection of Angels played on him? Is it a stalemate or does the EC die?

Protection of Angels
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Silver • Ability: 2 / 3 • Class: None • Special Ability: Interrupt the battle and protect all Heroes in play and set aside areas from evil cards until end of turn. • Identifiers: OT, Involves Music • Verse: Psalms 91:11 • Availability: Priests booster packs (Common)

Hmm. Why does the enhancement say "protect...from evil cards"? Why the all-inclusiveness?

Yeah, PoA is pretty much a card that says you can't die this battle...you may not win, but at least you can't die.

Hey,

Hmm. Why does the enhancement say "protect...from evil cards"? Why the all-inclusiveness?

Because when the card was printed the working definition for protect wasn't nearly as well defined as it is now.  Priests was the first big set that used "protect" as a keyword.  If the card was printed today it would say "Protect....from special abilities on evil cards."

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly, WildCard Secretary of Defense
www.freewebs.com/redemptionne

Because when the card was printed the working definition for protect wasn't nearly as well defined as it is now.  Priests was the first big set that used "protect" as a keyword.  If the card was printed today it would say "Protect....from special abilities on evil cards."

That's not the point, I don't think. Until PoA gets a Play-As or an Errata, the card says "protect...from evil cards" and should be played as such.

Hey,

Odd.  If you were immune, then both abilities and special abilities do not affect you.  Curious why protect is different.  Furthermore, the first strike is a special ability so PoA should protect against it.

Protect is different from Immune, which is different from Ignore.  They are all similar abilities, but they are all slightly different.

First Strike targets the character that gains first strike.  Thus it does not target the hero that PoA is played on (or any other hero) and thus is not affected by Protection of Angels.

That's not the point, I don't think. Until PoA gets a Play-As or an Errata, the card says "protect...from evil cards" and should be played as such.

"Immune to Black Brigade" protects you from strength and special abilities on Black Brigade cards even thought it doesn't explicitly say strength and special abilities in the special ability.  You know that is what it does because of the definition of Immune in the rulebook.  Protect is the same.  It only keeps you from being affected by special abilities and game rules because that's what the rulebook says.  We could give play as to Protection of Angels to make it more clear what it does, but I don't expect that to happen soon because the people who could make that happen are busy with other things, and by the very definition of what Play As is, it isn't necessary.  Play As does not change how the card is played.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly, WildCard Secretary of Defense
www.freewebs.com/redemptionne 

If what you are proposing is true, then there should be a Play As, because obviously a lot of people have been playing this card "wrong" for years.

I concur, but the reason it has been played this way for years probably goes back to the original version of PoA which said to protect from "harm or effect." Since "harm" has now been stuffed into the "negative effect" definition, the interpretation of PoA has been muddled. I always took "harm" to include being harmed by the numbers, whether I was supposed to or not.

Nowadays, I think most people see "Protect from evil cards" as an all-inclusive statement. If it is not, due to game rules, then I'm sure we will support the rules. But having a "Play As" for PoA will save future misinterpretations as Redemption continues to grow in popularity. 

Is there anything in the Rulebook or REG that supports the way that "everyone" has been playing PoA?     

Is there anything in the rulebook that debunks it? I looked (skimmed) and I didn't see anything. I feel like evil cards means evil cards, and protection means protection, no matter what, and if there is a different meaning meant, then it should be stated on the card in no uncertain terms. Protection from evil cards =/= Protection from special abilities on evil cards.

Is there anything in the Rulebook or REG that supports the way that "everyone" has been playing PoA?

This seems to sum up my understanding and why I've played it the way I have since the card was released.

The phrases “immune to”, “ignores”, “cannot be”, “may not be”, “may only be _____ by”, “must be _____ by”, “no _____ may be, “prevented from being”, “protected from”, and “protect” have the same function.

I take that to mean that if a card says that it's "immune to evil cards" or that it's "protected from evil cards" it means the same thing (serves the same function).

Hey,

This seems to sum up my understanding and why I've played it the way I have since the card was released.

Quote from: REG

The phrases “immune to”, “ignores”, “cannot be”, “may not be”, “may only be _____ by”, “must be _____ by”, “no _____ may be, “prevented from being”, “protected from”, and “protect” have the same function.

I take that to mean that if a card says that it's "immune to evil cards" or that it's "protected from evil cards" it means the same thing (serves the same function).

I have regretted the presence of that quote in the REG since I first saw it.  If you take it at face value it says that "immune to" and "ignores" have the same function, but I don't know any Redemption player that plays immune and ignore the same way.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly, WildCard Secretary of Defense
www.freewebs.com/redemptionne

I think it's better in that case to rewrite that whole section (separate the three, which will also separate out the different "mays" and "bes"), and give all the old "ignore Great Image" cards Play As text.