Cactus Game Design Message Boards

I think because it says "from Territory" as in singular.  I agree that seems like a pretty lame reason.  I would rather it be any hero in play, or at least any heros from any (eligble) territory.

That is a stupid errata, and I believe I know someone who has been cheating if this is true.

You really did wake up on the wrong side of the bed.... 

I'm curious as to the reason for this clarification and wondering how that is derived from the actual special ability.

I'm certain that the REG was clarified because the rulings were inconsistent and needed uniformity. For me, when I read the original SA, I would rule that they had to be from the same territory. Since others would disagree, an update had to be made. I don't know who made the final ruling, but I would guess their decision is final.

You really did wake up on the wrong side of the bed....  

I actually woke up on the floor...covered in urine...okay, okay, not covered in urine.

Seriously though, did that come off as irritable? I meant to put the emphasis of the first clause on the word "is," if that helps at all. And I was just being observant with my second clause.

Have you ever seen that picture that is a vase, but when you look at it differently, it is two people facing each other? That's what happened here. Some of us saw it as one territory; some of us saw it as any territory.

Nice analogy, but Rehoboam still says, "in territory," not "in one territory." As far as I know, as derived from other examples which I am too lazy to cite, "in territory" really means "in any territory in play." I can see how you might get confused, but I think this vase is a little too oddly shaped to be a face.

Hey,

This is a very old ruling.  It's had the play as it currently has since 2004.  The reason for the ruling is that the phrase "in territory" uses the singular 'territory' and not the plural 'territories.'  If you could choose characters from different territories then it would need to be "in territories."   I'm pretty sure the refers-to-one-territory idea for the phrase "in territory" is consistent with how it is used on other cards.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

To me, just the fact that they slipped a little "(s)" into "draw plie" whispers to me that this ability was meant to be from multiple territories.

Quote from: BubbleBoy on June 08, 2009, 06:29:16 AM

To me, just the fact that they slipped a little "(s)" into "draw plie" whispers to me that this ability was meant to be from multiple territories.

My sentiments exactly.  I cant believe I never caught that before.  IF they truly ruled that it should come from only one territory because it is "singular", then how can those heros go to MULTIPLE draw piles?!?!  I think this needs to be changed to make Rehoboam able to set up side battles between any eligible hero in play.  This would make Rehoboam much more effective and useful AND it woudl be true to the wording on the card.

Using a card like Redemption can give a player control of another player's Hero, making cards owned by two players coexist in the same territory, yet would go to different decks upon defeat.

I think the best proof that they come from the same territory is that it's exactly what the REG says happens.

Oh well, I guess it isn't that big a deal...but if I ever judge a tourney and someone asks me that question, I will say "Yes, of course you can choose someone from your territory to fight someone from your opponent's territory!"