Cactus Game Design Message Boards

the drawing stays I'm pretty sure

I don't think the drawing stays, based on this thread:

http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=18250.15

and this quote from that thread:

Quote from: SirNobody on October 13, 2009, 09:28:37 PM

We're not going to make draw abilities cannot be interrupted.  They are powerful enough as it is.

The drawing stays. The ability to play an enhancement cannot be interrupted by game rule. TFG negates the band, but he isn't negating the drawing, and he can't indirectly negate the drawing because he would have to indirectly negate the play abilities (which can't happen).

You cannot interrupt the fact that Reach was played, but the draw ability can be interrupted. Reach cannot reactivate on Claudia, so the draw would not activate and Reach would be discarded.

I'm pretty sure Prof is right. Once an enhancement with an instant ability is played and completes, it cannot be indirectly negated.

You must be able to indirectly Negate instants. You're telling me that if I start a side-battle with Sword of the Lord, play Wrath of Satan, and then you play Devourer (Wa), Wrath sticks?

Well, I re-read the original question again... and I'm honestly confused as well right now.

My point above is still true, but I wasnt paying attention to the entire situation. Heres one possible way to go about this...

When you block with 12FG,  ET is kicked out of battle, everyone agrees on this. There is a rule that cards cannot be "unplayed" by a negate. However... I do think that their effects should be negated as much as possible. So, the cards would still be played, you would negate as much as possible (in this case, the drawing would be negated), and then the cards are discarded as they have no legal place to go.


Maybe...?

but the draw ability can be interrupted

So what is interrupting the draw ability? TFG negates the band, nothing else. Reach never has to reactivate, because it was played via a play ability, which cannot be interrupted.

I'm pretty sure Prof is right. Once an enhancement with an instant ability is played and completes, it cannot be indirectly negated.

That's not quite true either. Say you attack with Claudia and Elders of Jerusalem (8/8 total). I block with The Rabshakeh, so you are losing. You decide to play Moses and Elders to get back you're favorite good card, and I play Rage to band to Spirit of Doubt and negate Claudia. Now, Elders was never in battle for all intents and purposes, meaning that Moses and Elders was never played, so the card goes back. So basically, the playing of an enhancement can be undone, indirectly negating the enhancement, the difference in the other situation is that it was an ability that allowed the enhancement to be played, not normal initiative. Enhancements can only be unplayed if the enhancement is able to be indirectly negated however. So if Elders had instead played Love at First Sight, it would stick.

It may seem silly, but it's kind of one of those things that was done as a band-aid for a play that just seemed too wrong. Say I attack with Ethiopian Treasurer and play Authority of Christ. You then decide to block with King of Tyrus from hand. Now we know that AoC could not be indirectly negated, but since the ability to play it was negated, then it was at first ruled that you would get it back in hand. Other situations like this were also possible, so it was decided that the ability to play an enhancement could not be negated.

So you're saying that not only can the ability to play an enhancement not be interrupted, but also an enhancement played with a play ability cannot be indirectly negated...if not then I am utterly confused.

Indirect negation means negating a card by negating the ability (not special ability, ability in a more general sense) to play that card. The special ability to play an enhancement cannot be negated, so no, an enhancement played via a play ability cannot be indirectly negated.

I thought it would indirectly negated, but it would still have been played.  That was my understanding of what the "Playing an enhancement cannot be interrupted"

Even if that's the ruling, that isn't the logic behind the ruling. Instant abilities most certainly can be interrupted.

Where does it say that instant abilities can be interrupted? To my knowledge interrupt works on the following:

1. Ongoing abilites (Protection etc)
2. Last enhancement if it was played by your opponent.
3. Any ability removing you from battle (warden, zimri etc.)

However, if it was Bringing Fear played then ET's ability would be negated I think as BF negates all special abilities.

However, if it was Bringing Fear played then ET's ability would be negated I think as BF negates all special abilities.

But ET's play ability cannot be interrupted, even by Bringing Fear.

From the REG:

The ability to play an enhancement cannot be interrupted.

So let me break it down for the confused:

There are two ways that things can be negated--directly, and indirectly.

Direct negation is the obvious one. I play an enhancement, you play something that negates it. Direct negation. Bam.

Indirect negation is where an enhancement is negated by negating the circumstance (special ability or condition of battle) that allowed you to play it. So if you play Coat of Many Colors, then several other enhancements, and then I negate Coat, then all of the off-color enhancements are negated. Why? Because by negating Coat, the condition of the battle now becomes one where the hero was never able to play those enhancements. You can't "unplay" cards, so they don't return to hand, but they also can't take effect, because of the fact that no hero was ever able to use them (according to the idea of negate). Of course, if one of the off-color cards was CBN/CBI, then it still takes effect, since CBN/CBI includes indirect interruption/negation.

In order for indirect negation to take place, however, one must interrupt whatever allowed you to play the enhancement. A "play" ability is, by game rule, CBI. So you can't indirectly negate anything played by a "play" ability. Since ET used his ability to play Book (with Claudia's help) then Book's ability allowed you to play the other Book, then that book's ability allowed you to play Reach, all cards were played as the result of uninterruptable abilities, and thusly cannot be interrupted indirectly.

Phew. It would be so much simpler to just block with KoT.

Yes I agree that 12FG was the most complicated card he could have blocked with, but I did have Holy of Holies up so KOT's SA was negated. However, if I wouldn't have had HoH would KOT have negated everything?

Yep. He would negate all special abilities on cards in play activated during the battle phase, as he usually does. He wouldn't negate the play abilities though, so it would be Claudia and two books vs. KoT, with ET returned to territory and Reach discarded for lack of purple heroes. All drawing would be negated, since KoT would directly negate it.