Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Player 1 plays an enhancement to make the hero ignore or be immune to the blocking evil character.
Can Player 2 play an interrupt (such as Devourer) to negate the ignore or immune effect? (Assuming player 2 has initiative.)

I think the answer is yes because of this excerpt from the rule book: "Since Servant Angel is losing, you have initiative and play Sixth Seal, a silver brigade enhancement with abilities of 2/2 and the special ability, 'Hero ignores pale green brigade.' Servant Angel will pass by Shechem as though Shechem is not there and will make a successful rescue. Your opponent must negate the 'ignore' special ability or the rescue will succeed, and each character will be returned to his owner’s territory."

I assume the following scenario is also legitimate:

1. I make a rescue attempt with a human hero
2. My opponent blocks with Red Dragon ("Character is immune to all Human Heroes...")
3. I play "Sent Two by Two" ("Negate special abilities on demons...") to negate Red Dragon's immunity
4. Battle proceeds with Red Dragon no longer immune

I understand this to be legitimate because paper beast rock.

Sorry for waking this up but according to the article here: http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/Immune no ability of a card opponents card is immune against can harm that card which is immune! So in the example given above Dragon is immune against "Sent Two by Two" according to the wiki article.
The same is stated within the "Exegesis Guide" http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/downloads/REG_PDF_v1.0.2.pdf and the "10th anniversary rulebook", for example at page 20 or 25 http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/downloads/rulebook_10th_anniversary.pdf.

So what is correct now? The mentioned printed parts and the statement within the post above are contradictory!

Not really. Negate isn't a harmful state, it just cancels out what it negates and makes it as if it never occurred. Thus, when STbT negates Dragon's immunity, Dragon is played as if he never was immune to human heroes.

There is no contradiction. The rules for how "negate" works are in all of those documents/pages as well. All special abilities (immune, ignore, discard, set aside, underdeck, shuffle, etc.) can be negated unless they specifically say "Cannot be Negated" or "Cannot be Interrupted (by a card played after it)" or "Cannot be Prevented (by a card played before it)" or are normally not able to be negated (i.e. dominants and gained abilities from previous turns).

This I do not question b u t:

• According to Exegesis Guide: "A card that is immune cannot be targeted by an ability that is on a card to which it is immune or on a card played on that card."
• According to 10th anniversary rulebook: "Your Hero is winning by immunity if the Hero is immune to the blocking Evil Character and the strength of your Hero greater than or equal to the blocking Evil Character’s toughness. Either way, your opponent has initiative and can play any evil enhancement of matching brigade.
  However, the special ability on the enhancement cannot be directed at a Hero that is immune to the Evil Character or is ignoring the Evil Character."
  

So both cases are for my reading and understanding a 100% contradictory to what the above mentioned posts are telling and hence also to the interpretation of negate given above!

I do not say that it cannot be negated but this needs to be done for example by cards not played directly on the card in battle which opponent's card is immune against. Examples would be artifacts, fortresses, abilities from territory enhancements or whatever like the one here: http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/King%E2%80%99s_Sword_%28H%29

Otherwise one of the descriptions (negate or immune) are not quite correct elaborated in the rules.

Sorry, did not leave it out intended - just did not read further. But again I do not question that!
I also provided an example how such immunity or ignore ability can be negated. See http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/King%E2%80%99s_Sword_%28H%29. This fully applies to what you are asking for and the lines I did not post in addition also describe: The ability is negated. But not by a card which is played on the hero/character which is ignored/immunity is given against. Also other possibilities are there as mentioned.

So for me the lines from the guides/rulebooks are still not contradictory (see my example) while the intrepretation in this thread still is.

The bottom line is that the rulebook is not exhaustive, and was never intended to be. It was designed to teach new players how to learn the game. The many complexities that exist with card interactions can really only be hashed out by communicating here on the Message Boards, which is why they were created.

We also use these forums for announcing rule changes. For instance, the rulebook says "When a special ability reduces a character to */0 or less, the character is immediately discarded, EXCEPT during the Battle Phase (p.20)." This, however, is no longer the rule. Characters are now discarded even in battle when their toughness reaches zero.

I realize what you are saying, and why it appears to be a contradiction. However, what I am trying to say is that "negate" is an exception to that quote, even though the rulebook does not mention it in that passage. It was not included since there is already an overarching understanding that negation is always an option when you have intiative, and can target any card regardless of immunity, ignore, or protection.

Thats fine for me. If there is such overarching understanding shouldnt it be mentioned somewhere officially here in the forum as new/additional rule and or within wiki?