Cactus Game Design Message Boards

The ONLY... ISSUE... under discussion has been the fact that Heroes are "defeated" at the end of battle and not in the middle.  You did not "defeat" anybody if you lost the battle.  All other considerations e.g. Dominant play still apply exactly the same as they always have and I see no reason to believe that would be changed by an unrelated discussion about when you determine defeat.

I am sorry if I read a tone in your posts that was not there, but I think that given the rampant use of sarcasm on the intartubes and having a thread about the timing of calculating defeat suddenly turn into "Hooray!  Now all these combos that have nothing do to with the timing of defeat suddenly work because of the way you phrased this certain response two pages ago!", you might be able to appreciate how I was able to make a mistake like that.

I also don't understand how you can claim I am "just telling you now" that this is the ruling.  Here are four different threads - just since The Purge - that talk about this, specifically using Potiphar's Wife:
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=13486.0
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=19102.0
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=13857.0
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=14050.0

The third link should be of particular interest to you, since you posted in that thread and quoted an explanation I gave in the first linked thread, in November of 2008.

I'm not sure why you were given the Lies ruling on Pot's Wife, considering it contradicts the Play As which says "by win or stalemate" and Lies + FO is neither a win nor a stalemate, but obviously there's an issue there that needs to be looked at.  But you passed right over Lies and went straight to Christian Martyr.  You also claimed that I said ONLY the resolution matters, and that how you got to resolution is irrelevant.  I NEVER said those things.  I can understand where my one errant response confused Lambo but I didn't say the things you claimed AT ALL.  The only thing I've been talking about is how you don't get a "defeat" just by virtue of getting someone out of the Field of Battle, you have to actually win the battle to defeat anybody.  That would NOT mean that Pot's Wife would trigger on Christian Martyr.  It WOULD mean that Pot's Wife would trigger if you played Lies and Moses Kills Egyptian on Potiphar if the Wife was banded into battle at the time.

K I'mma talk on the 3rd one. When I read win or stalemate then I had the definition of winning against a hero being removing it from the battle not from winning as in winning the battle.

Okay so after reading the threads I see why it didn't click with my brain, because you and Maly were taking different sides so there appeared to be no official outcome.

My lies comment was the "incorrect ruling" and I was moving on from that point.

My next point was if Win means surviving the battle, how is Pot's wife not winning the battle (and defeating by the Play as)?

How is she not defeating those heroes? If the enhancement was played on her, why is she not defeating them?

I thought you were talking about Lies.

It's my understanding that he's moving on from Lies, to the question of Dominants (which are absolutely no different than they have always been).

If she won the battle with Lies or Lies + battle-winner, then yes, that's pretty obviously a defeat of the Heroes.  If she plays Lies and FO, she is losing the battle, not winning the battle, so that's not really related to the question you're asking.

Either way, there's no issue here with playing a winning Enhancement on a character.

I still have an issue with defeating ANYTHING if you LOST.  Losing is the opposite of defeating.

Discarding/Remove from the game would be like Killing said character... which I consider to be a rather large defeat over said character. Converting is an obvious defeat of said character... if I switch to the other team, then they won me over. If I capture you, thats a rather obvious defeat. return to territory, hand, and deck are a little harder to think of real life examples, but they still defeat that character during the battle.

My view is this: Defeat looks at characters, Successful block looks at the entire team of characters.

To put it in another game perspective...

Say I'm playing a Capture the Flag game in a First Person Shooter game. Me and a teammate run into two other guys from the other team and we start fighting them. One of them snipes my teammate, but I still manage to beat the two opponents. They still defeated my teammate in that battle, even though I won the overall fight, so if they were guarding the flag, they did not successfully block, even though they defeated my friend.

Say I'm playing a Capture the Flag game in a First Person Shooter game. Me and a teammate run into two other guys from the other team and we start fighting them. One of them snipes my teammate, but I still manage to beat the two opponents. They still defeated my teammate in that battle, even though I won the overall fight, so if they were guarding the flag, they did not successfully block, even though they defeated my friend.

everything...makes so much more sense now.

But the families of the people who died there would know that they died.

You said died.  You did not say defeated.

The Scottish families of the slain would say that their dad was killed, but that the Scots still won the war BATTLE.

Am I the only person left on the boards that has a battle during the Battle Phase?

There would also probably be some British soldiers who would say something like, "Well we lost that battle, but at least I took out 4 Scots and lived to fight another day."

Again, you talk about him taking out people and not dying, but he still says he was defeated in battle.

The point here is that there does seem to be a difference in many people's (read: not Schaef's) minds between winning the overall battle, and defeating individual characters.

Because they've been conditioned that way from rules that go back to the Third Edition.  In their minds, anything that "stops a Hero from achieving his goal" should count.

This is not an opinion survey, this is the way the rules have been since the introduction of Battle Resolution four years ago.  The explanation "such as stalemate" was written to CLARIFY that you defeat someone by winning the battle.  THERE WAS A REASON FOR THAT.  A Play As was added to Pot's Wife to say defeat is a win or stalemate.  THERE WAS A REASON FOR THAT.

Am I the only person left on the boards that has a battle during the Battle Phase?

Yes,

the rest of us just use pre-block ignore and never worry about it.

i seriously was just about to hiss. you're a mindreader prof.

Yet it wasn't added to Sword of the Fighter and David's Tent, when both are worded the same way.

Potiphar's Wife was the one brought up most often, and I will remind you that in anticipation of the forthcoming REG update, further changes have been tabled.  Now can you explain to me how the absence of that clarifying text demonstrates that the other additions were made for no reason or for a reason different than the one I have given?