Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: SirNobody on November 15, 2009, 04:45:16 PM
-
Hey,
I have Hidden Treasures active, Midwives and Micah in my territory, Search and Christian Martyr in my hand, and several redeemed souls with no Guardian in a multiplayer game. One of my opponent's has Unholy Writ active.
I attack with Micah and use Hidden Treasures to play Search to get Guardian of Your Souls. Can I then play Christian Martyr on Micah to discard him before my opponent can use Unholy Writ to capture him?
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
I say yes - you are responding to your own action of playing search.
-
I say yes - you are responding to your own action of playing search.
+1 If there's one thing I've seen a lot on this forum, it's that you always get to respond to your own actions before an opponent can.
-
I say it no.
If your opponent declares his intent to use UW at earliest convenience on Micah, then that ability is "waiting in line" from the time Micah enters battle. Hidden Treasures would also activate at earliest convenience based on the lone hero entering battle. Since both of those triggers respond to the same action, the player with Micah would get to do his thing first (play Search). However, once Search finishes then UW would be next in line. After all abilities triggered by Micah entering battle have completed, then dominants could be played, followed by enhancements based on initiative.
-
I say it no.
If your opponent declares his intent to use UW at earliest convenience on Micah, then that ability is "waiting in line" from the time Micah enters battle. Hidden Treasures would also activate at earliest convenience based on the lone hero entering battle. Since both of those triggers respond to the same action, the player with Micah would get to do his thing first (play Search). However, once Search finishes then UW would be next in line. After all abilities triggered by Micah entering battle have completed, then dominants could be played, followed by enhancements based on initiative.
There is nothing that says declaring what you plan on doing gives you the right to carry it out.
-
but the uw player must still be given the oppurtunity to exercise the use if they want to. i agree with prof.
-
I say yes - you are responding to your own action of playing search.
Responding to your own action only applies in a situation where two players could play an ability, usually Dominants, and they both play them at the same time. "Responding to your own action" is a way to provide a resolution in the event of a tie.
To answer Tim's question, placing a human Hero in battle triggers Unholy Writ giving it's controller the option to use it's ability. Unholy Writ has to wait for the Hero's abilities and Hidden Treasures to carry out as well as any other abilities that result from those abilities. Once that chain of events is complete, Unholy Writ has precedence. Since it's an optional ability you either use it right away or lose your chance if your opponent plays a Dominant to stop it.
Unholy Writ
Type: Artifact • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: A human Hero in battle may be taken prisoner. Discard Artifact after use. • Play As: When holder chooses, capture a human Hero during battle. Discard Artifact after one use.
Even if I'm wrong, there's no such thing as initiative to play a Dominant. It would be a slapjack between the two players to see who could use their card first.
-
I agree that this is slap jack as well. UW can be triggered first, but it is dependant upon the human action, just as Cm is dependant upon human action. There is no rules governing who gets to play it first, it is basically first come first served.
-
Even if I'm wrong, there's no such thing as initiative to play a Dominant. It would be a slapjack between the two players to see who could use their card first.
Right - and this is exactly why we created the 'Respond to own actions' rule - For situations where both players have "initiative" to play.
-
I am a proponent of the "responding to own action" rule completely replacing the "whichever hit the table/whoever declared intent first" rule. There is no place for physical swiftness in a strategy card game.
-
I am a proponent of the "responding to own action" rule completely replacing the "whichever hit the table/whoever declared intent first" rule. There is no place for physical swiftness in a strategy card game.
Fine, I agree to a point. I dont like the idea of physical swiftness being a part of the game either, but the responding to own action, really give the offense one more advantage in a long list of advantages that they already own. I tend to preffer the idea of setting SA's in order that they are activated or triggered. Which would actually give UW a chance to respond in some of these cases
-
Hey,
I agree with RDT's opinion on this topic.
I am a proponent of the "responding to own action" rule completely replacing the "whichever hit the table/whoever declared intent first" rule. There is no place for physical swiftness in a strategy card game.
By my understanding of the rules, in two player, that has already happened.
...but the responding to own action, really give the offense one more advantage in a long list of advantages that they already own. I tend to preffer the idea of setting SA's in order that they are activated or triggered. Which would actually give UW a chance to respond in some of these cases
While Unholy Writ may get the short end of the stick in many of these scenarios, almost all of these scenarios are very rare, and in the average case Unholy Writ is still winning out. It is in most top decks, and you'd have a hard time convincing me it's not one of the five best defensive cards in the game.
I'm not sure what all is on the "long list of advantages" that offenses have, but it seems to me they need every advantage they can get, considering in the very game that prompted this thread my defense was about two cards (that were in my deck I just didn't draw them) away from locking out a speed deck (less than five brigaded evil cards).
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
speed deck (less than five brigaded evil cards
That's your defenition of 'Speed Deck' now? Cool! My deck is no longer a speed deck! Gomer+Uzzah+TAS+Foul Spirit+Plot. Thats 5 brown brigade cards.
-
Hey,
speed deck (less than five brigaded evil cards
That's your defenition of 'Speed Deck' now? Cool! My deck is no longer a speed deck! Gomer+Uzzah+TAS+Foul Spirit+Plot. Thats 5 brown brigade cards.
No, it was just clarifying that not only do I consider it a speed deck, but having less than five brigaded evil cards 95% of other people would call it a speed deck too. Your deck is still a speed deck in my mind :P
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
+1 with Gabe, for the reason Gabe offered.
Allowing Tim to play his CM prior to his opponent using UW is no different than his opponent arguing he gets to play Destruction of Nehustan in between the time Micah enters battle and Search is played.
Tim didn't even search for Christian Martyr, so how can playing Christian Martyr be considered a response to his own action?
-
Allowing Tim to play his CM prior to his opponent using UW is no different than his opponent arguing he gets to play Destruction of Nehustan in between the time Micah enters battle and Search is played.
Emphasis mine.
It is very different - Hidden Treasures is a instantaneous triggered ability which triggers when the Hero enters battle - UW is an ongoing manually triggered ability.
And thats the key - UW is a human action, Hidden Treasures is a game action.
As to the second part - How can me playing my SoG after I draw a soul be considered a response? I didn't draw it. How can me playing DoN after I block Lydia with KoT be a response? I didn't block with DoN.
Playing Christian Martyr is a response to his action because Tim gets the first chance to play something, it doesn't matter what it it. I think its very clear what Tim was doing - It was planned out all the way, it wasn't like he was sitting there in battle and then realized that his opponent had UW.
-
I think its very clear what Tim was doing - It was planned out all the way, it wasn't like he was sitting there in battle and then realized that his opponent had UW.
Being part of the discussion with you Tim and Prof U the night this took place I have to disagree. Tim admitted to having DoN before entering battle. He forgot to play it or didn't realize Prof U had Writ until Prof mentioned he wanted to use his Writ when Tim was in battle. It wasn't well planned out. It was a mistake on Tim's part that was going to turn out bad for him. Now he's trying to justify his mistake by posting a hypathetic scenerio to show the rules allow him to get around it. :P
-
Right -And after we had our discussion I did some more thinking on it and I think I agree with you, that since Tim had no intention of DoNing Writ until Prof pointed it out he can't do it - but in this hypothetical one I agree with Tim.
-
Right -And after we had our discussion I did some more thinking on it and I think I agree with you, that since Tim had no intention of DoNing Writ until Prof pointed it out he can't do it - but in this hypothetical one I agree with Tim.
I thought you don't care about intentions? ;D I don't really care or want to start anything (not that I think you're taking it this way, just clarifying) but I thought this was kinda funny. :D
EDIT: Woops... I meant to quote... oh well.
-
I don't think I said anything like that.
-
Hey,
Right -And after we had our discussion I did some more thinking on it and I think I agree with you, that since Tim had no intention of DoNing Writ until Prof pointed it out he can't do it - but in this hypothetical one I agree with Tim.
The intention is what made the in game situation very fuzzy. But we can't ask or expect judges to determine the intention of players. The ruling we make must be independent of intention. In fact I think we need to assume that any action a player takes is intentional.
Gabe, the reason I presented this scenario rather than the exact one that occurred in the game was because I wanted the discussion to be independent of intention as I believe the ruling needs to be. Disregarding intention, I believe this scenario is functionally the same as the scenario that happened in my game. The cards are different, but the ruling should be the same.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Disregarding intention, I believe this scenario is functionally the same as the scenario that happened in my game. The cards are different, but the ruling should be the same.
+1
-
Hey,
Tim didn't even search for Christian Martyr, so how can playing Christian Martyr be considered a response to his own action?
When I give a player half of the lost souls card I then respond to my action by playing Burial. I get to do that before my opponent can respond to my action by playing Son of God on the second half of Lost Souls. How is this scenario any different?
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
[A bunch of stuff about responding to your own action deleted--mjb]
I deleted the arguments about responding to your own action because I realized as I was driving home that as far as my argument goes the entire discussion is completely irrelevant to this hypothetical at hand. The "respond to your own action" rule only occurs when two players have equal claim to initiative. The hypothetical example provided at the start isn't such a case at all.
Here is the normal precedence of initiative in this case.
1) Micah enters battle.
2) Hidden Treasures and Unholy Writ trigger simultaneously.
3) HT goes first because get to respond to your own actions in a tie situation.
4) Unholy Writ goes off.
If the blocker is not allowed to play a dominant between steps 2 & 3, why would the rescuer be able to play a dominant between steps 2 & 4? This is not a case of both players having equal rights to initiative. The blocker already has his initiative slot queued up.
We can see this very simply by removing HT from the equation. If I push a hero into battle against an opponent who has Unholy Writ active, my opponent gets to decide whether or not to use UW before I can play DoN to take it out. If I wanted to play DoN to take out UW I needed to do it before I entered battle. Why would adding HT and an extraneous search change this?
When I give a player half of the lost souls card I then respond to my action by playing Burial. I get to do that before my opponent can respond to my action by playing Son of God on the second half of Lost Souls. How is this scenario any different?
In this scenario both you and your opponent have equal claims to having initiative.after the half of the Lost Souls card is granted. That is distinct from the case where you have SAs already triggered. SAs that have already triggered and are merely waiting to activate take precedence over dominants--at least that's how I understand it from in the case of pushing a hero into battle and then trying to DoN an active UW.
-
Hey,
I give you half of lost souls. You then have the opportunity to play Son of God to rescue the rest of it. I play Burial to deprive you of that opportunity.
I play search off of Hidden Treasures. You then have the opportunity to use Unholy Writ to capture my hero. I play Christian Martyr to deprive you of that opportunity.
Because you are playing Burial in direct response to giving half of a Lost Souls in the sense that the first action logically leads to the second. If you searched for CM then the two scenarios would be analogous, but how does searching for Guardian in anyway imply that you are going to play CM on yourself?
In this situation it strikes me that playing CM was merely something extra you wanted to do outside the normal rules of initiative.
That sounds to me like you can't see the strategy in the play so you don't think it should be allowed. Maybe there isn't a strategy to it, maybe there is and you just don't see it or agree with it. But just like intention the strategy of a play shouldn't affect it's legality.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Tim, you post-instaposted me. Read the modified version of what I wrote above.
(This just here so Tim realizes there's a response.)
-
Hey,
Your number 2 is incorrect.
Writ is not a triggered ability. It is an "at any time" ability (much like a dominant), with a restriction on who it can target (a hero in battle).
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Your number 2 is incorrect.
Writ is not a triggered ability. It is an "at any time" ability (much like a dominant), with a restriction on who it can target (a hero in battle).
The result of which is that I can push a hero into battle and then immediately play DoN to take out UW? OK, I've never had anyone actually rule it that way before, but I'll take your word for it.
-
Here is the normal precedence of initiative in this case.
1) Micah enters battle.
2) Hidden Treasures and Unholy Writ trigger simultaneously.
3) HT goes first because get to respond to your own actions in a tie situation.
4) Unholy Writ goes off.
As I think of the current rules, I don't believe that the order above is correct. I believe that it is this:
1) Micah enters battle.
2) Hidden Treasures and Unholy Writ trigger simultaneously, Unholy Writ goes first because it was activated first (not really relevant) it grants player A the option to choose at any time during the battle to capture a Human hero if in battle, then Hidden Treasures immediately grants Player B the option to play an enhancement. These triggers and granting of options all happened so fast that neither player could take an action in between so they are essentially all simultaneous.
3) At this point, all special abilities are complete and both players have a few things they MAY do before an initiative check. (You might not initially think of Unholy Writ and Hidden Tresaures special abilities as having completed, but they were both activated in a previous phase or turn and if their special abilities hadn't already completed Micah wouldn't have been able to enter battle because he couldn't be played until their abilities had completed.)
So now, either player MAY choose to play any dominant or player A can declare a capture of a human hero in battle or player B can play an enhancement or discard an evil enhancement from opponent's deck. Whoever clearly takes one of these actions first would get to use that ability first. Either one of them could be thinking about what strategy they want to employ at this point and if the other player decides first and exercises one of their available options, then that option would begin first. However, if they both take action at the same time (or dispute who was first), then a judge would select player B as having been first because (theoretically) he knew he was putting Micah into battle and would have been able to respond quicker to his own action because he knew sooner that it was coming. This tie scenario is the only one where "responding to your own action" is relevant (it's just a convention for dealing with the unknowable answer of who really was first when the players can't agree). It has nothing to do with whether the second action is logically related to the first. Just that someone thinking of doing two actions and then doing them in succession would probably be faster than someone else watching the person take the first action and then having to think what to do in response and then taking their action.
4) Once all of the options from Step 3 that either player wants to use are completed, in the order chosen (by either playing a card or declaring intent to use an option), then the defending player would have initiative to present a blocker if a Hero still remained in battle.
5) Battle proceeds as normal.
The differences in a lot of the opinions in this thread come from the slapjack nature of step 3. We don't currently have any rules that say that we specifically have to ask the players in a given order to make a yes/no decision on their use of the (possibly many) options that they have available to them within step 3. If we did, it would give a distinct advantage to one or other of the players in that scenario. Many think that it should be a fair playing field and the swiftest of mind (and hand) should get the advantage. All we have in the rules is that the players have to be given the opportunity to perform the actions of step 3 before step 4 can be performed.
Mike
-
in other games i have played whenever the trigger event occurs, the ability is put on the stack the next time a player would receive priority and stays there until it’s countered, it resolves, or it otherwise leaves the stack
basically whosever turn it is gets to activate any triggers they choose to activate, then the next player gets to activate triggers.
i also think dominants should be able to be faster than any other ability
-
oh yes, make dominants more powerful than they already are. ::)
-
1) Micah enters battle
2) Auto-triggered abilities activate: Hidden Treasures activates
3) Manually-Triggered abilities may be introduced: Unholy Writ and Christian Martyr
Unholy Writ is NOT in a tie with Hidden Treasures. It is in a tie with CM. In that case, the player who is responding to his own action goes first. In this case, Tim can play CM before the opponent can play UW. However, if Tim had the UW and wanted to use it to capture his own hero before his opponent plays CM on it (for some reason), then Tim STILL goes first. His UW would happen before the opponent's CM.
So, this is not about giving dominants more power. It is simply a way to sort out who goes first in dominant/manually-triggered ties.
-
Bryon, I assume this ruling extends to the case where HT is not in the equation--am I correct? If I push a hero into battle when my opponent has UW active, do I get the right to play DoN on my opponent's UW after initiating battle but prior to my opponent utilizing UW?
-
why would hidden treasures be an auto-triggered ability and uw not? they both use the word 'may'.
-
2) Auto-triggered abilities activate: Hidden Treasures activates
I would also like to know why HT is considered "auto-triggered" since it says "may".
It is in a tie with CM.
Did you consider that UW was already down on the table before CM when deciding that they were in a tie?
-
Quote from: Bryon on Today at 02:55:20 AM
2) Auto-triggered abilities activate: Hidden Treasures activates
I would also like to know why HT is considered "auto-triggered" since it says "may".
It's Auto-Triggered, because you either use it then, or don't use it - UW is 'Manually Triggered' because you can use it at anytime during battle.
As far as your second point - becuase both UW and CM are 'Manually Triggered' abilities the act of using them is what defines the slap-jack situation, in this case it would be playing CM, and discarding UW - It doesn't matter that UW was already on the table, becuase being on the table isn't criteria for UW being used, discarding it is. (IMO)
-
RDT is correct. Here are a couple more details:
Unholy Writ is a manually-triggered ability because:
a) you don't use it the moment it activates (how could you? There are no heroes in battle during your prep phase.), and
b) you may use it at any time during the entire battle phase. As long as a hero is in battle, you may use it. It does NOT automatically trigger at ANY point during the battle.
Hidden Treasures is auto triggered because:
a) you don't use it the moment it activates (no hero begins a battle as you are activating an artifact).
b) There is a specified moment when HT can activate (when a lone green prophet begins a battle). It cannot be activated whenever you want in that phase. Only at one specific time. That time happened the moment the lone green prophet entered battle.
When an action is completed (such as presenting a hero into battle and completing its abilities), we:
1) complete all abilities that are automatically triggered by that action (optional or not)
THEN
2) use dominants and manually-triggered abilities that are available
-
Bryon, I assume this ruling extends to the case where HT is not in the equation--am I correct? If I push a hero into battle when my opponent has UW active, do I get the right to play DoN on my opponent's UW after initiating battle but prior to my opponent utilizing UW?
Is MJB correct as well then?
-
Yes. You are responding to your own action before your opponent does. Remember that the special ability on the hero(es) must complete first. Second, auto-triggered abilities. Third, dominants and manually-triggered abilities. Destruction and Unholy Writ are in that third step.
I think that the biggest hang-up most people have with this whole thing is that they treat Unholy Writ as an auto-triggered ability. They treat it as if it said "If a human hero enters battle, you may capture it." But it does not say that. It is a manually-triggered ability, which puts it on equal footing with dominants and other manually-triggered abilities.
-
Just so that I'm clear, does the "responding to your own action" rule that allows CM to be played before UW only apply in the event of a "tie" (both players use CM and UW at approximately the same time) or does it mean that we now have a type of "initiative" to use abilities like CM, UW, etc?
-
Only in the case of a tie is what I would say - We do have special initiative for things like Doms VS enhancements (Aotl V Zed+Dungeon for instance) But I don't think that extends to things with the same level of priority (since I think we're all agreed that UW has the same level of priority as a Dom)
-
Just so that I'm clear, does the "responding to your own action" rule that allows CM to be played before UW only apply in the event of a "tie" (both players use CM and UW at approximately the same time) or does it mean that we now have a type of "initiative" to use abilities like CM, UW, etc?
In a practical sense it means there is a new type of initiative.
You know as well as I do that once a hero is pushed into battle certain (maybe all) players with DoN in the hand are going to wait until their opponent goes towards UW before flashing the dominant. (This makes sense because most defenders won't immediately reach for UW if they think they can successfully block.) Any disputes then go to the judge, who is--for reasons discussed elsewhere--going to side with the DoNner if he/she said he/she wasn't allowed time to play his/her dominant. The only way around it is for the defender to specifically ask if the attacker wants to do something before playing UW. (This is precisely the reason I (and a number of others) verbally announce they are activating HT and then wait for a little bit of time before sending a green brigade prophet into battle.)
In the end given his preference against verbal cuing, I think Sir Nobody is going to end up ruing this decision.
-
Get rid of all cues in favor of queues. Give a couple of seconds when it's your instant initiative, then give your opponents a couple of seconds for doms or UW or whatnot. Then determine battle initiative and repeat. If slow players cry about it, they can just learn to play faster, tournament rounds won't take as long, speed will have less of an edge, and the whole game is improved.
-
Queues > cues
In other words + 1.
I also think 'Manually Triggered' abilities should be given a hiearchy, perhaps something similar to this:
1 (highest). Dominants
2. Artifacts
3. Fortress.
4. Sites.
5. Characters
6. Enhancements (Placed or Otherwise)
7. Did I miss anything? Oh, right - There is a Lost Soul that comes to mind - But I think thats an auto-triggered ability.
-
I'd rather avoid a hierarchy.
It is much simpler to let a player respond to his own last action.
-
I'd rather avoid a hierarchy.
It is much simpler to let a player respond to his own last action.
With so many threads and arguments about the order of abilities, I can't see how it would be more complex than what we have now. Plus, letting a player respond to his own last action would still exist (dom vs dom).
idk if a hierarchy would be good or not, but I think it simplifies for sure.
-
Hey,
Just so that I'm clear, does the "responding to your own action" rule that allows CM to be played before UW only apply in the event of a "tie" (both players use CM and UW at approximately the same time) or does it mean that we now have a type of "initiative" to use abilities like CM, UW, etc?
I prefer the idea of an "initiative". If this only applies in the event of a "tie" then it's still slapjack, because I still have to get my card down fast enough to qualify as a "tie." If we consider it a new type of initiative then I don't have to rush to play my cards, I still have to act promptly, but the speed at which I manipulate my cards has no bearing on the game. For what it's worth, I've been treating it as a sort of "initiative" for several years now.
You know as well as I do that once a hero is pushed into battle certain (maybe all) players with DoN in the hand are going to wait until their opponent goes towards UW before flashing the dominant.
This gets back to the Angel of the Lord issue. If you start to play Angel of the Lord immediately upon seeing the Evil Character I've chosen to block with then you get to use it before I can play an enhancement. But if you stall on playing Angel of the Lord wondering if my block is a decoy or not sure if you want to use it, and then try to slap your Angel of the Lord down after you see me moving to play an enhancement, then it's too late you missed your chance and my enhancement happens before you can use Angel of the Lord.
This is the same type of thing, if you play DoN as an immediate response to entering battle, then you get to use it. But if you are waiting to see how I will respond to your attack before using DoN, then you're no longer responding to your own action, and you no longer get the "tie goes to me because I'm responding to my own action" benefit of the doubt. You have the right to respond to your own action. You do not have a right to abuse your right to respond to your own action.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
...if you stall on playing Angel of the Lord wondering if my block is a decoy or not sure if you want to use it, and then try to slap your Angel of the Lord down after you see me moving to play an enhancement, then it's too late...
I like this idea. If my opponent verbally grants my character initiative, then they are passing their ability to play AotL or CM to kill me before I play an enhancement.
-
...which is why its common courtesy to ask for initiative, even if you currently have it.
-
...if you stall on playing Angel of the Lord wondering if my block is a decoy or not sure if you want to use it, and then try to slap your Angel of the Lord down after you see me moving to play an enhancement, then it's too late...
I like this idea. If my opponent verbally grants my character initiative, then they are passing their ability to play AotL or CM to kill me before I play an enhancement.
I agree with Prof Underwood's proposal, but note that the word verbally makes it distinct from what SirNobody is claiming. While there is no real cause for argument in the verbal grant case, here's how SirNobody's "wait for bit" situation plays out in a real world example...
If a judge is called over and the player who played AotL claims that the defender didn't provide enough time to play his dominant, then the rescuing player will (in general) get the benefit of the doubt and AotL wins. We all agree and have learned from experience that this is going to be the most likely result.
Now we have gone a step further and added DoN slap-jacking of defensive artifacts into the mix. The end result of this ruling is that players who prefer not use verbal initiative checks are likelygoing to end up having their UW DoN-flashed sometimes as soon as they go to play them. The result of this ruling is to extend--in a practical sense--the new level of initiative that we have in slapjack situations.