Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on March 11, 2009, 03:25:12 PM

Title: ITB the site?
Post by: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on March 11, 2009, 03:25:12 PM
Senario

R.a. Mike with NJ, blocked by nerg. If nerg played dream then mask of vanity would mike still have the ability of acsess from the site?

New Jerusalem: Hero has site acsess

Dream: Interrupt the battle, Draw three, play next enhancement.

Mask of vanity: Discard one site

Sites are placed in battle for acsess.
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: The Schaef on March 11, 2009, 03:28:17 PM
The lack of the Site causes the Hero to lose the access-from-having-a-Site-in-battle.  But the special ability gives the Hero access for the remainder of the battle.
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: soul seeker on March 11, 2009, 03:41:35 PM
Even if it is interrupted?

How is demonic blockade different than this scenario?  Is it because it mentions the site by name?
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: The Schaef on March 11, 2009, 03:47:27 PM
How is it interrupted?

And yes, Demonic Blockade negates Sites because it says that it negates Sites.
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: soul seeker on March 11, 2009, 03:56:29 PM
How is it interrupted?

And yes, Demonic Blockade negates Sites because it says that it negates Sites.
It says interrupt the battle...I assumed that NJ site was a part of said battle.
  The Demonic Blockade answer helps clarify things a bit.
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: YourMathTeacher on March 11, 2009, 03:59:08 PM
ITB interrupts characters and enhancements only.
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: Gabe on March 11, 2009, 04:05:49 PM
I agree with YMT and Schaef.  Somewhere in the REG is actually says that ITB doesn't interrupt sites.
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: YourMathTeacher on March 11, 2009, 04:12:15 PM
Just for reference:

Instant Abilities -> Interrupt or Negate Last -> How to Use

‘Interrupt the battle’ interrupts all active ongoing abilities on characters and enhancements (e.g. Red Dragon), abilities that are causing you to lose the battle by removal (e.g. King Zimri), as well as the last enhancement played in the current battle if it was played by your opponent.  Interrupting the battle interrupts the battle flow at the point where you played the interrupt.  It does not send you back to the beginning of the battle and does not include special abilities completed prior to the interrupt being played that are no longer pending.

Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on March 11, 2009, 05:51:58 PM
I guess that makes sense. I forgot ITB doesn't include all cards in battle.
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: galadgawyn on March 14, 2009, 10:41:08 AM
That is the correct ruling for how things are.

 I've heard a few people discuss whether that is how the rule SHOULD be.  I think it would be an appropriate rule change to say Interrupt the Battle interrupts all ongoing abilities in battle.  I think that is a more intuitive rule and how I've seen many people assume it works.  If a card is placed in battle then it faces the risk of whatever affects that battle; if you discard or remove all cards in battle then the site or artifact is discarded/removed.  So make ITB consistent with those rulings.
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: Lamborghini_diablo on March 14, 2009, 12:07:31 PM
That is the correct ruling for how things are.

 I've heard a few people discuss whether that is how the rule SHOULD be.  I think it would be an appropriate rule change to say Interrupt the Battle interrupts all ongoing abilities in battle.  I think that is a more intuitive rule and how I've seen many people assume it works.  If a card is placed in battle then it faces the risk of whatever affects that battle; if you discard or remove all cards in battle then the site or artifact is discarded/removed.  So make ITB consistent with those rulings.

I agree with the above wholeheartedly. Interrupt the Battle means Interrupt the Battle, not Interrupt Half the Battle.
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on March 14, 2009, 01:19:04 PM
Agreed. Artifacts can be in battle now, why would they not be interrupted? They are ongoing. +1
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: Cameron the Conqueror on March 14, 2009, 01:20:37 PM
+1 too.  What arts can be in battle besides Priestly Breastplate?
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on March 14, 2009, 01:23:22 PM
Crossbeams.
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: MichaelHue on March 14, 2009, 03:27:27 PM
I like the idea of interrupting site abilities. +1
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: Cameron the Conqueror on March 14, 2009, 03:33:58 PM
Say the rule was changed.  If say Promised Land was interrupted, would that then count toward one of its uses?  If it would, then this change should not be made because it would be so OPd.  If it didn't, then I think it might be able to be changed.  +1
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: BubbleBoy on March 14, 2009, 03:43:44 PM
I didn't even know that you couldn't interrupt sites. :-\ As long as we're voting, I'll throw my hand up for I-T-B-able sites.
Title: Re: ITB the site?
Post by: YourMathTeacher on March 14, 2009, 04:10:14 PM
Say the rule was changed.  If say Promised Land was interrupted, would that then count toward one of its uses? 

Just interrupting the site would not stop the RA. The initial scenario had the interrupt followed by discarding the site. If the site is not discarded, then it would reactivate after the interrupt or still allow access strictly by color. This would have no changed effect on its number of uses. If it was discarded, then the number of uses would be irrelevent.
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal