Author Topic: Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions  (Read 1346 times)

Offline YourMathTeacher

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+80)
  • *****
  • Posts: 11089
    • -
    • Southeast Region
Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions
« on: December 28, 2013, 10:23:55 AM »
0
1.) If Gold Shield is used to convert a hero to a different color, can the hero use their old color to negate it? How about ItB? I was guessing "no" since the hero only has normal initiative.

2.) I know at one point it was ruled that you could not search for a "search" card. Is this still true?

-------------- Edited additional question----------------

3.) If Foreign Wives is in battle and opponent has drawn 5 cards, then opponent plays Ambush the City, what happens to Foreign Wives?
« Last Edit: December 28, 2013, 11:25:35 AM by YourMathTeacher »
My wife is a hottie.

Offline AJ

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 487
  • #JarretSTUDham
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2013, 10:50:55 AM »
0
for number 2 u can seaarch for a search card
Its Stiddy Time

Offline Drrek

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
  • The Bee of the Sea
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2013, 11:22:12 AM »
0
1) no

2) you can search for a search
The user formerly known as Easty.

Offline YourMathTeacher

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+80)
  • *****
  • Posts: 11089
    • -
    • Southeast Region
Re: Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions
« Reply #3 on: December 28, 2013, 11:25:02 AM »
0
Thanks guys. A new question:

3.) If Foreign Wives is in battle and opponent has drawn 5 cards, then opponent plays Ambush the City, what happens to Foreign Wives?
My wife is a hottie.

Offline Alex_Olijar

  • 16plus
  • Trade Count: (+15)
  • *
  • Posts: 8124
  • This guy is my mascot
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions
« Reply #4 on: December 28, 2013, 11:34:49 AM »
0
Stays in battle. She's immune. If BtC is a cost benefit, there is no second battle, and nothing happens in practice. I don't think that's true though, so I think she'd stay around i nthe field of battle for the second one, and then be there for the side battle as well?

Offline YourMathTeacher

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+80)
  • *****
  • Posts: 11089
    • -
    • Southeast Region
Re: Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions
« Reply #5 on: December 28, 2013, 12:14:44 PM »
0
I ruled that she stays in the new RA, but would resolve with that battle. Since she was not set aside, she would not be in the BC. AtC is not a Cost-Benefit that I can tell.
My wife is a hottie.

Offline Redoubter

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4910
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2013, 02:17:38 PM »
0
YMT, the rule I think you are referring to for #2 is that you cannot exchange for a card that exchanges for the same card in such a way that you can cause an infinite loop.  I cannot remember the exact wording of the rule (or even where to find it anymore), but I know it was put in place due to infinite loop stalling potential.

For #3, I brought this scenario up awhile back, and the consensus was people agreeing with this statement:

My contention would be that AtC could be played, with all heroes being set-aside while FW stays in play, remaining in the battle that will become a battle challenge.  A new battle, separate from the one FW is in, begins and is a rescue attempt.  Once that finishes, the heroes return and join FW in the original battle as a battle challenge.

Offline Red Dragon Thorn

  • Covenant Games
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • *****
  • Posts: 5373
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • Covenant Games
Re: Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions
« Reply #7 on: December 31, 2013, 08:28:35 PM »
0
Stays in battle. She's immune. If BtC is a cost benefit, there is no second battle, and nothing happens in practice. I don't think that's true though, so I think she'd stay around i nthe field of battle for the second one, and then be there for the side battle as well?

Actually, She's protected which is an important distinctions since Ambush the City contains regardless of immunity language.
www.covenantgames.com

Offline YourMathTeacher

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+80)
  • *****
  • Posts: 11089
    • -
    • Southeast Region
Re: Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions
« Reply #8 on: December 31, 2013, 08:34:06 PM »
0
I'm still not sure I understand this ruling. Foreign Wives cannot be set aside, so she remains in the Field of Battle. The new RA takes place in that Field of Battle, because AtC does not create a new Battle Phase (like ANB, for instance). I don't understand why FW would not be part of the new RA.
My wife is a hottie.

Offline Redoubter

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4910
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions
« Reply #9 on: January 01, 2014, 09:08:02 PM »
+1
I'm still not sure I understand this ruling. Foreign Wives cannot be set aside, so she remains in the Field of Battle. The new RA takes place in that Field of Battle, because AtC does not create a new Battle Phase (like ANB, for instance). I don't understand why FW would not be part of the new RA.

I understand the question, and I'm not sure there is a cut-and-dry rule that can be pointed to that definitively answers it.  However, from what we have on this (and other) rulings, being in the field of battle does not necessarily mean being in the same battle, as those are different spaces (see Field of Battle / Battle wording on cards/default targeting).  Therefore, a card sitting in the field of battle does not join any new battle caused by a SA, because that is a different battle with its own location.

So, she is in the field of battle, but that doesn't allow her to just join in any battle in the field of battle, if that makes sense.

Offline Praeceps

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • *****
  • Posts: 888
    • LFG
    • East Central Region
Re: Couple of "In Tournament" Ruling Questions
« Reply #10 on: January 02, 2014, 02:16:40 AM »
0
The best way I can think to explain it is that of a golf course. FW and Co. started a game. Her mates left her to go to the men's room, a place that she can't follow them to, and the next group in line came up to the tee. Just because she's on the same hole as them, doesn't mean she joins their game until it's done at which point she'll rejoin those she started with to finish that game.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2014, 02:21:00 AM by Praeceps »
Just one more thing...

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal