Author Topic: Hero+Set aside in one motion? (Read 5798 times)

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **on:** August 14, 2010, 05:14:24 PM »

If I play Hur into territory, can I slap down a set aside before my opponent has the opportunity to play Christian Martyr?

I believe no because there is supposed to be a window for dominant play, just as if I used holy grail to convert Saul to Paul and pushed him into battle my opp has time to play don.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #1 on:** August 14, 2010, 05:17:50 PM »

I would also say no.

Eric the Wolfe · « **Reply #2 on:** August 14, 2010, 05:42:13 PM »

The question is not about one motion. I put a hero in territory, as a second motion, I placed the set aside on him. Is there somewhere in the rules that requires you to ask your opponent if they want to play a dominant before you play a set aside?

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #3 on:** August 14, 2010, 05:49:13 PM »

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 14, 2010, 05:42:13 PM

Is there somewhere in the rules that requires you to ask your opponent if they want to play a dominant before you play a set aside?

I believe the rule is you don't have to ask, but you cannot deny your opponent a chance to play a card by being physically faster than him.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #4 on:** August 14, 2010, 05:59:29 PM »

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on August 14, 2010, 05:49:13 PM

I believe the rule is you don't have to ask, but you cannot deny your opponent a chance to play a card by being physically faster than him.

In general I wait a second or two just to be sure. If it is something that commonly gets a dominant response, I do sometimes ask as well. For example if I activate Gifts of the Magi with Hur sitting in my territory, I usually ask if my opponent wants to play Destruction of Nehustan. I don't have to, I could just wait 1-2 seconds and go, but I think asking is nice.

Master_Chi · « **Reply #5 on:** August 14, 2010, 09:19:42 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on August 14, 2010, 05:59:29 PM

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on August 14, 2010, 05:49:13 PM
I believe the rule is you don't have to ask, but you cannot deny your opponent a chance to play a card by being physically faster than him.
In general I wait a second or two just to be sure. If it is something that commonly gets a dominant response, I do sometimes ask as well. For example if I activate Gifts of the Magi with Hur sitting in my territory, I usually ask if my opponent wants to play Destruction of Nehustan. I don't have to, I could just wait 1-2 seconds and go, but I think asking is nice.

I second this motion since it would then become a game based on who had the quickest reflexes, not just good strategy.

Eric the Wolfe · « **Reply #6 on:** August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM »

Quote from: Master_Chi on August 14, 2010, 09:19:42 PM

Quote from: Prof Underwood on August 14, 2010, 05:59:29 PM
Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on August 14, 2010, 05:49:13 PM
I believe the rule is you don't have to ask, but you cannot deny your opponent a chance to play a card by being physically faster than him.
In general I wait a second or two just to be sure. If it is something that commonly gets a dominant response, I do sometimes ask as well. For example if I activate Gifts of the Magi with Hur sitting in my territory, I usually ask if my opponent wants to play Destruction of Nehustan. I don't have to, I could just wait 1-2 seconds and go, but I think asking is nice.

I second this motion since it would then become a game based on who had the quickest reflexes, not just good strategy.

If it's true that you can't deny your opponent a chance to play a dominant because you're faster than him. Then he could just wait for you to put down your card, then say "oh, you went faster than me, I get to play a dominant." Please show me somewhere in the rule book, where it says that there is no playing cards to fast. That it's illegal for you to play a card in your territory to fast for your opponent.
From what I know, there is no "initiative" in territory. I don't have to ask you if its my initiative to put down a hero from my hand. I don't have to ask for initiative from my opponent before activating an artifact. So what you're saying is, your opponent could just sit there, you wait 30 seconds, then play your set aside, he decides he doesn't like what thats going to do. He can just say "you cant deny me a chance to play my dominant!" "You moved to fast!" Can we get a ruling from Bryon or another official judge please?

Master KChief · « **Reply #7 on:** August 15, 2010, 12:06:33 AM »

it is true what the others have said, you cannot deny your opponent the chance to play a dom. if you try to play too fast, your opponent can call you on it and get it ruled in his favor.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #8 on:** August 15, 2010, 12:10:54 AM »

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM

If it's true that you can't deny your opponent a chance to play a dominant because you're faster than him. Then he could just wait for you to put down your card, then say "oh, you went faster than me, I get to play a dominant."

No. That is a scenario where your action will affect your opponent's action. That is totally different: he was given a chance and did not use it. Once that chance is up, too bad. He played it wrong.

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM

Please show me somewhere in the rule book, where it says that there is no playing cards to fast. That it's illegal for you to play a card in your territory to fast for your opponent.

No thank you. Mostly because one doesn't exist.

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM

From what I know, there is no "initiative" in territory. I don't have to ask you if its my initiative to put down a hero from my hand. I don't have to ask for initiative from my opponent before activating an artifact.

There is no initiative, but that isn't totally true. I can't draw 3 cards and throw down a hero the second I see I have one, my opponent must have a chance to play a dom (AKA Mayhem).

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM

So what you're saying is, your opponent could just sit there, you wait 30 seconds, then play your set aside, he decides he doesn't like what thats going to do. He can just say "you cant deny me a chance to play my dominant!" "You moved to fast!"

No. Like I said above, that is totally different. In that scenario your opponent was given a chance to play a dominant but chose not to. Once you play your set aside, its too late. He was given his chance. This 'too fast' idea is simply to stop slap jack.

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM

Can we get a ruling from Bryon or another official judge please?

This was discussed a while back, I know SirNobody gave a fairly definite answer. Go look for the thread.

goldencomet · « **Reply #9 on:** August 15, 2010, 12:11:51 AM »

Today I was making a rescue, they block and said "my initiative" and instantly threw down Joseph in prison. I wanted to aotl him so I put it down and he said I still couldn't get the soul, even though I was gonna use the dom before the enhancement. What should have happened there

Master KChief · « **Reply #10 on:** August 15, 2010, 12:13:27 AM »

you should have had the oppurtunity to play aotl before he played jip. that would be a prime example of slapjack.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #11 on:** August 15, 2010, 12:14:20 AM »

Quote from: goldencomet on August 15, 2010, 12:11:51 AM

Today I was making a rescue, they block and said "my initiative" and instantly threw down Joseph in prison. I wanted to aotl him so I put it down and he said I still couldn't get the soul, even though I was gonna use the dom before the enhancement. What should have happened there

You should have yelled at and verbally (or physically) assaulted him for assuming it is his initiative. After that you should have either made him pick up his enhancement, or burn it yourself, and then play Angel of the Lord.

Eric the Wolfe · « **Reply #12 on:** August 15, 2010, 12:32:59 AM »

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on August 15, 2010, 12:10:54 AM

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM
If it's true that you can't deny your opponent a chance to play a dominant because you're faster than him. Then he could just wait for you to put down your card, then say "oh, you went faster than me, I get to play a dominant."
No. That is a scenario where your action will affect your opponent's action. That is totally different: he was given a chance and did not use it. Once that chance is up, too bad. He played it wrong.

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM
Please show me somewhere in the rule book, where it says that there is no playing cards to fast. That it's illegal for you to play a card in your territory to fast for your opponent.
No thank you. Mostly because one doesn't exist.

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM
From what I know, there is no "initiative" in territory. I don't have to ask you if its my initiative to put down a hero from my hand. I don't have to ask for initiative from my opponent before activating an artifact.
There is no initiative, but that isn't totally true. I can't draw 3 cards and throw down a hero the second I see I have one, my opponent must have a chance to play a dom (AKA Mayhem).

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM
So what you're saying is, your opponent could just sit there, you wait 30 seconds, then play your set aside, he decides he doesn't like what thats going to do. He can just say "you cant deny me a chance to play my dominant!" "You moved to fast!"
No. Like I said above, that is totally different. In that scenario your opponent was given a chance to play a dominant but chose not to. Once you play your set aside, its too late. He was given his chance. This 'too fast' idea is simply to stop slap jack.

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM
Can we get a ruling from Bryon or another official judge please?
This was discussed a while back, I know SirNobody gave a fairly definite answer. Go look for the thread.

I'll do this one by one. (sorry, I don't know how to quote each of your things separately)

1. Actually, that is exactly what happened in our game today, where this first came up. I played my guy, then my set aside, I did it quickly, he then said that I couldn't do that because I moved to fast and didn't give him a chance to play a dominant.

2. Exactly what I thought, there isn't one in the rule book. I've never had it ruled this way and I have never seen anything it the rule book about this.

3. Whoa. When did that happen? Exactly why can't I put down a hero from my hand when I see I have one? That is exactly what I said, I have to ask my opponent if he wants to play a dominant on a card in my hand before he even sees it? So then it brings up the question, what if you wait for your opponent to put down a hero you don't like? Then he can just play mayhem and say you didn't give him a chance? Or, what if someone slapped down mayhem before I could put down a hero, could I then call him out for moving to quickly when I wanted to play a dominant on him?

4. As I said above, that what happened in our game, except it wasn't 30, more like 4-5. I pulled my hero out of kerith Ravine, and then played the set aside. I was in no hurry because I didn't know he had CM. But again, he claimed I moved to fast and that I didn't give him a chance.

5. I would actually like to here a ruling from Bryon, no offense to Sir Nobody. I play at Bryon's tournaments and slapjack situations have come up and there was never a ruling like this.

SirNobody · « **Reply #13 on:** August 15, 2010, 04:02:10 AM »

Hey,

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:00:54 AM

From what I know, there is no "initiative" in territory. I don't have to ask you if its my initiative to put down a hero from my hand. I don't have to ask for initiative from my opponent before activating an artifact. So what you're saying is, your opponent could just sit there, you wait 30 seconds, then play your set aside, he decides he doesn't like what thats going to do. He can just say "you cant deny me a chance to play my dominant!" "You moved to fast!" Can we get a ruling from Bryon or another official judge please?

You don't have to ask for initiative in battle and you don't have to ask for initiative between performing actions during your prep phase. But you do have to give your opponent time to respond to either if they want to (just like Munchkin approximately 2.6 seconds should be allowed for the player to respond

). This is exactly why I don't do the "my initiative" thing in battle, because if you do it in battle then you really should be doing it between every action you take during your prep and discard phase as well.

Ultimately every time someone makes a claim that their opponent played too quickly it's going to turn into a he said/she said situation and the Judge will have to make a judgment call. But when both players are aware of this rule it is very rare to see a dispute about it come up.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #14 on:** August 15, 2010, 12:40:56 PM »

This thread is getting very close to making me leave the game in spite of the awesome new set.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #15 on:** August 15, 2010, 12:54:27 PM »

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:32:59 AM

As I said above, that what happened in our game, except it wasn't 30, more like 4-5. I pulled my hero out of kerith Ravine, and then played the set aside. I was in no hurry because I didn't know he had CM. But again, he claimed I moved to fast and that I didn't give him a chance.

This is inaccurate. Your hero moved out of Kerith Revine (not even all the way to the territory), and then the set aside card appeared, and he went back to Kerith Revine. All that happened in less than 3 seconds. And you were in a hurry, because we were drawing near to the time limit for the end of the game and you were behind.

I'd also like to point out that we extended the time limit on the game to allow the game to finish, and you to come back and win. I clearly was not trying to cheat you out of playing your cards. I just wanted to make sure that you gave opportunity for me to play mine.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #16 on:** August 15, 2010, 12:59:42 PM »

The way I see it is this:

It's ok to play fast, as long as you're not doing it with intention of slapjacking someone. If you make a fast play such as the one described in this thread, and the opponent immediately says "WAIT! I was going to CM that hero!" Then their play should be allowed, as it is a legal play. However, if they say like a minute later, "Oh, I was going to CM that guy," then I would not allow them to do so. They have to be relatively quick to respond in a situation like that.

In other words, don't check for initiative for every action, as that will slow games down like crazy, but don't try to play so fast that opponents can't react.

SirNobody · « **Reply #17 on:** August 15, 2010, 01:55:43 PM »

Hey,

Quote from: Prof Underwood on August 15, 2010, 12:54:27 PM

Quote from: Eric the Wolfe on August 15, 2010, 12:32:59 AM
I would actually like to here a ruling from Bryon, no offense to Sir Nobody. I play at Bryon's tournaments and slapjack situations have come up and there was never a ruling like this.
Sir Nobody is an elder just like Byron. So am I. MKC, Sauce, and RR are all 3 REPs. Everyone in this thread has agreed that your understanding is incorrect. At this point, the answer should be obvious, and you don't need Bryon to post here as well. You're welcome to talk to him about it at the next tournament when you see him, but as far as this thread is concerned, this issue should be closed.

Since Bryon is the one that hosts tournaments that Eric goes to, Eric has every right to want to hear from Bryon on this topic; It just doesn't necessarily have to be on the boards or in this thread.

As one of the two parties involved in this ruling question, Prof, you are in no position to say when the issue should be closed. A REP, Elder, or even Rob becomes just an average player when it comes to ruling questions that come up in games that they are playing.

I'm glad I wasn't the one that had to make this ruling because as I said before it's just a he said/she said sort of situation and there's never a clear answer in those cases. But if this had happened in a face-to-face tournament, and I was the Judge making the decision, I'd probably rule in Eric's favor because Prof has a reputation of being a very deliberate player that often doesn't act as quickly as he can/should. I'm just glad that this ruling didn't affect the outcome of the game.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #18 on:** August 15, 2010, 02:12:35 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on August 15, 2010, 01:55:43 PM

But if this had happened in a face-to-face tournament, and I was the Judge making the decision, I'd probably rule in Eric's favor because Prof has a reputation of being a very deliberate player that often doesn't act as quickly as he can/should.

So, if it had not been the Prof (whom you obviously have personal issues with) and it had been a player with no "reputation of being very deliberate", then you would not have ruled in Eric's favor? That type of favoritism/discrimination is not something I would advertise. Just sayin'.

mjwolfe · « **Reply #19 on:** August 15, 2010, 02:25:37 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on August 15, 2010, 04:02:10 AM

Hey,

You don't have to ask for initiative in battle and you don't have to ask for initiative between performing actions during your prep phase. But you do have to give your opponent time to respond to either if they want to (just like Munchkin approximately 2.6 seconds should be allowed for the player to respond ). This is exactly why I don't do the "my initiative" thing in battle, because if you do it in battle then you really should be doing it between every action you take during your prep and discard phase as well.

Ultimately every time someone makes a claim that their opponent played too quickly it's going to turn into a he said/she said situation and the Judge will have to make a judgment call. But when both players are aware of this rule it is very rare to see a dispute about it come up.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

The problem that I see with this idea is that it is unclear. If you don't ask for initiative in battle or you don't ask if the opponent wants to play a dominant before every single card you play outside of battle, how can you determine what giving them a chance to play a dominant was? I have often been playing and been surprised by an opponent's playing of a card before I was mentally able to anticipate that they were going to do that. I'll then realize that I could have stopped that if I had only played one of my dominants. Were they playing too fast or was it just that I was not anticipating their strategy until I saw what they played?

If there had been 30 seconds since they played the previous card, a judge would probably rule that 30 seconds was enough time for me to have had a chance. But what if it was 20 seconds? What if it was 10 seconds or five seconds? If it's really going to be a specific number of seconds instead of an initiative check, then it should be specified as a specific number of seconds so that a player knows they can wait that number of seconds between cards so that the opponent can't claim they weren't given a chance to play a dominant after a strategy is revealed.

This is why I always ask if it is my initiative in battle, because I don't want to reveal my enhancement and then have the opponent say they get to play their dominant first. But now with all of the strong set-asides, territory class, weapons and artifacts combined with the wealth of dominants, the prep phase has just as many possible issues like this.

I've always considered slapjack as playing two cards simultaneously (other than SOG and NJ) by the same person. But if we're going to have a rule about playing two separate cards in two separate motions as being too fast, then we should have an actual definition of what too fast is. Otherwise, players may use the "too fast" idea as a way around an opponent's strategy.

Mike

SirNobody · « **Reply #20 on:** August 15, 2010, 03:13:38 PM »

Hey,

Quote from: mjwolfe on August 15, 2010, 02:25:37 PM

The problem that I see with this idea is that it is unclear. If you don't ask for initiative in battle or you don't ask if the opponent wants to play a dominant before every single card you play outside of battle, how can you determine what giving them a chance to play a dominant was? I have often been playing and been surprised by an opponent's playing of a card before I was mentally able to anticipate that they were going to do that. I'll then realize that I could have stopped that if I had only played one of my dominants. Were they playing too fast or was it just that I was not anticipating their strategy until I saw what they played?

If you opponent instantly knows they want to play their dominant they get to. You must give your opponent time identify the situation, you do not have to give your opponent time to analyze the situation. While the 2.6 seconds comment was kinda a joke, it's actually a pretty good estimate. If you wait 2.6 seconds that should be enough time for your opponent to identify the situation.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Gabe · « **Reply #21 on:** August 15, 2010, 03:22:28 PM »

You don't need to wait for your opponent before you play a set-aside during your prep phase. The rule book lists that as one of many actions you can perform during that phase. There's no such thing as initiative during that part of the turn.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #22 on:** August 15, 2010, 05:34:29 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on August 15, 2010, 03:13:38 PM

While the 2.6 seconds comment was kinda a joke, it's actually a pretty good estimate. If you wait 2.6 seconds that should be enough time for your opponent to identify the situation.

I've also played Munchkin and feel like 2.6 seconds is a good rule of thumb. And in this case, the hero was certainly NOT in the territory for 2.6 seconds before the set aside was played (at least not on my side of the RTS screen).

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #23 on:** August 15, 2010, 06:21:23 PM »

The fact that this is an RTS dispute is the relevant fact here. I don't think this situation would ever happen in real life because the players can communicate better.

Gabe · « **Reply #24 on:** August 15, 2010, 06:24:46 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on August 15, 2010, 05:34:29 PM

And in this case, the hero was certainly NOT in the territory for 2.6 seconds before the set aside was played (at least not on my side of the RTS screen).

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on August 15, 2010, 06:21:23 PM

The fact that this is an RTS dispute is the relevant fact here.

I have a feeling that Mark's extremely slow internet played a factor here. The Hero may very well have been in territory for 30 seconds but due to lag Mark may not have even seen it there during that time. I'm being serious here. I've played Mark enough times and talked to him over Skype and there's usually some pretty bad lag.

News:

Author Topic: Hero+Set aside in one motion? (Read 5798 times)

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

Lamborghini_diablo