Author Topic: Lampstand protect LoR? (Read 6311 times)

LordZardeck · « **on:** February 15, 2012, 09:34:25 PM »

Like the subject says, does lampstand protect your LoR like Guardian? And does it protect itself??

Red Wing · « **Reply #1 on:** February 15, 2012, 09:39:48 PM »

1. Yes
2. From Evil Doms, Yes.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #2 on:** February 15, 2012, 09:45:07 PM »

Yes. It cannot be discarded by DoN, either.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #3 on:** February 15, 2012, 10:54:09 PM »

Quote from: LordZardeck on February 15, 2012, 09:34:25 PM

Like the subject says, does lampstand protect your LoR like Guardian?

I don't think it should, but I'm not the one making the rules.

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #4 on:** February 15, 2012, 11:28:57 PM »

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on February 15, 2012, 10:54:09 PM

Quote from: LordZardeck on February 15, 2012, 09:34:25 PM
Like the subject says, does lampstand protect your LoR like Guardian?

I don't think it should, but I'm not the one making the rules.

"Not in Battle" is considered to be every card face up on the table aside from the discard pile. Cards in hand, deck, artifact piles, and discard piles don't count.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #5 on:** February 15, 2012, 11:56:34 PM »

Quote from: Chronic Apathy on February 15, 2012, 11:28:57 PM

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on February 15, 2012, 10:54:09 PM
Quote from: LordZardeck on February 15, 2012, 09:34:25 PM
Like the subject says, does lampstand protect your LoR like Guardian?

I don't think it should, but I'm not the one making the rules.

"Not in Battle" is considered to be every card face up on the table aside from the discard pile. Cards in hand, deck, artifact piles, and discard piles don't count.

I know what it means, I just don't agree with it, I still think that it should default to play like every other ability, as in "[cards in play that are] not in battle", rather than "[cards in play or not that are not in deck, hand, discard pile or removed from game that are] not in battle".

Since the first one is already the default rule, why should it be different for the handful of cards that say "not in battle" as well

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #6 on:** February 16, 2012, 12:04:34 AM »

Because the "default to in play" rule only applies to cards that do not specify a location. Lampstand does specify a location - not in battle - and the Elders decided that what that entailed.

Praeceps · « **Reply #7 on:** February 16, 2012, 12:05:18 AM »

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on February 15, 2012, 11:56:34 PM

Quote from: Chronic Apathy on February 15, 2012, 11:28:57 PM
Quote from: ChristianSoldier on February 15, 2012, 10:54:09 PM
Quote from: LordZardeck on February 15, 2012, 09:34:25 PM
Like the subject says, does lampstand protect your LoR like Guardian?

I don't think it should, but I'm not the one making the rules.

"Not in Battle" is considered to be every card face up on the table aside from the discard pile. Cards in hand, deck, artifact piles, and discard piles don't count.

I know what it means, I just don't agree with it, I still think that it should default to play like every other ability, as in "[cards in play that are] not in battle", rather than "[cards in play or not that are not in deck, hand, discard pile or removed from game that are] not in battle".

Since the first one is already the default rule, why should it be different for the handful of cards that say "not in battle" as well

Because they are modifying their target list the same as a card that says "In play or a set-aside area". The protected area is specifically expanded beyond just play.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #8 on:** February 16, 2012, 12:07:21 AM »

I agree with CS. If "not in battle" means what it says, then it should include face-down cards as well. Limiting it to face-up cards is not sufficient, since the top card of the discard pile is face up.

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #9 on:** February 16, 2012, 12:11:31 AM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on February 16, 2012, 12:07:21 AM

I agree with CS. If "not in battle" means what it says, then it should include face-down cards as well. Limiting it to face-up cards is not sufficient, since the top card of the discard pile is face up.

That logic would mean it would include cards in decks, hands, and discard piles, as well as cards from other games, or cards not currently in games. The line has to be drawn somewhere, and frankly, it's a pretty logical line to draw it at. I had problems with it when I first heard about the ruling immediately after Nats, but I've since understood why the line was drawn there, and it really does make sense.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #10 on:** February 16, 2012, 12:17:08 AM »

Face down cards are untargetable except by specification. That's always been a rule.

Also, Angry Mob would be unbelievably broken, and no "clarification" could fix that.

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #11 on:** February 16, 2012, 12:17:55 AM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on February 16, 2012, 12:17:08 AM

Face down cards are untargetable except by specification. That's always been a rule.

But "Not in Battle" is a specification!

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #12 on:** February 16, 2012, 12:20:15 AM »

Quote from: Chronic Apathy on February 16, 2012, 12:17:55 AM

Quote from: Ring Wraith on February 16, 2012, 12:17:08 AM
Face down cards are untargetable except by specification. That's always been a rule.

But "Not in Battle" is a specification!

No, it's not. It doesn't specify face down cards. Ambushed characters cannot be Christian Martyr'd, for example.

I know what you were getting at though, CA.

lp670sv · « **Reply #13 on:** February 16, 2012, 12:24:20 AM »

The only real question this brings up for me is (and I know that I am going to be poisoned in .2 seconds for this) is why Lampy's specification is good enough to mean something but Split Altar's is not. Why does split altar default to in play when it specifically says all artifacts in the pile? (goodbye cruel world!)

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #14 on:** February 16, 2012, 12:25:40 AM »

Quote from: lp670sv on February 16, 2012, 12:24:20 AM

The only real question this brings up for me is (and I know that I am going to be poisoned in .2 seconds for this) is why Lampy's specification is good enough to mean something but Split Altar's is not. Why does split altar default to in play when it specifically says all artifacts in the pile? (goodbye cruel world!)

Because it doesn't specify pile.

lp670sv · « **Reply #15 on:** February 16, 2012, 12:27:46 AM »

Why did I think it did

what a waste of one of the last posts of my life

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #16 on:** February 16, 2012, 12:45:50 AM »

The whole thing about Lampstand protecting play, set aside area and land of redemption is arbitrary, why not just play and set aside? I really think the logical choice would be to default in play, this would be simpler (being that there is a blanket rule for all abilities) and "Not in battle" does not to me make any sense to add targets to a card, only restricting it more. If there were no defaults then I wouldn't have a problem, but I really think "not in battle" (by itself) should follow default rules.

Wings of Music · « **Reply #17 on:** February 16, 2012, 01:08:49 AM »

Well thing is this. If the creators of the card had wanted it to be restricted to 'in play' they would have worded it as in play. Instead they worded it as 'not in battle,' indicating that it's supposed to protect more that just 'in play.'

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #18 on:** February 16, 2012, 01:21:51 AM »

Quote from: Wings of Music on February 16, 2012, 01:08:49 AM

Well thing is this. If the creators of the card had wanted it to be restricted to 'in play' they would have worded it as in play. Instead they worded it as 'not in battle,' indicating that it's supposed to protect more that just 'in play.'

I've learned a long time ago that what the creators intended and what the cards do are often fairly different. (see Split Altar)

Keep in mind that this is one of the few rules that seriously bugs me, I do love the game and I think that for the most part the card designers/playtesters do a fairly good job (considering that they are all volunteers doing it on their own time). This is just one thing that has bugged me ever since I learned of the rule (and I am very glad that it did get more specific as of the last major rules update) but I would still like to see it default to in play.

I also think that cards shouldn't need defaults (like every card say what and where it targets things) so rather than have a card say "discard a hero" it would say "discard a hero in play" however this does add to the total number of words, which they are trying to keep to a minimum, so we really have a problem between being clear and being brief, and I think clarity should be more important.

Wings of Music · « **Reply #19 on:** February 16, 2012, 01:45:05 AM »

I just knew you would bring up *REDACTED*

I think defaults are what strike a balance between clarity and economy. For example: A great example would be capture abilities, when clarity was most important they read something like: capture a character and place in your land of bondage, character is treated as a lost soul. - Instead it just reads, 'capture a character.' It's hard to dispute that the new wording is similar and yet still is at least almost as understandable. The one disadvantage is having to research the definition of capture, and I think a little bit of simple research is a healthy thing.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #20 on:** February 16, 2012, 09:45:14 AM »

The ruling wasn't only made for Lampy, but rather any card that says "not in battle." If we chose all the cards on the table that weren't in battle, Great Image would be insanely OP. This ruling was to make "not in battle" less arbitrary per card. Last year, Lampy protected hand, but Great Image couldn't target heroes in hand. This way, it's less of a headache for hosts, and the rules are better as a whole.

Great Image (Pr)

Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Crimson • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: All opponents' Heroes in play that are not in the Field of Battle at end of this battle must be discarded. • Play As: Discard all opponents' Heroes in play that are not in the field of battle at the end of this battle. • Identifiers: OT, Depicts a Weapon • Verse: Daniel 2:31 • Availability: Prophets booster packs (Rare)

Professoralstad · « **Reply #21 on:** February 16, 2012, 10:32:32 AM »

Quote from: SomeKittens link=topic=29588.msg463417#msg463417

Great Image would be insanely OP. This ruling was to make "not in battle" less arbitrary per card. Last year, Lampy protected hand, but Great Image couldn't target heroes in hand. This way, it's less of a headache for hosts, and the rules are better as a whole.

Great Image (Pr)

Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Crimson • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: All opponents' Heroes in playthat are not in the Field of Battle at end of this battle must be discarded. • Play As: Discard all opponents' Heroes in play that are not in the field of battle at the end of this battle. • Identifiers: OT, Depicts a Weapon • Verse: Daniel 2:31 • Availability: Prophets booster packs (Rare)

Well to be fair, Great Image wouldn't be affected, but Angry Mob might be.

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #22 on:** February 16, 2012, 10:39:05 AM »

Great Image clearly says "in play," so that's not a good example.

As to the subject of cards defaulting to play, that's a necessary rule and a good one. If you don't like it, then I'm sorry, but that's not going to change. It's a simple rule that reduces wording on many cards and makes the game as a whole simpler, since if you didn't have that rule, you'd still have draw the line of what's effected and what's not somewhere, which becomes exactly as complicated as the current system.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #23 on:** February 16, 2012, 10:45:56 AM »

I lifted the Great Image example straight from Maly. Guess it helps if I read my own post....

Still, these are well-thought-out rulings.

TimMierz · « **Reply #24 on:** February 16, 2012, 10:53:07 AM »

Sort of off-topic but not really. I know it's been the case for a while, but I can't find where in the REG that face-down cards are not "in play", but I can't find that anywhere in the REG.

Also, The REG definition for "not in battle" is:
"Several Redemption® cards contain special abilities that refer to cards that are “not in battle”. Cards "not in battle" are cards found in (1) territories, (2) set aside areas, and (3) Lands of Redemption."

Is a face-down card "in" a territory still in that territory? If so, I don't see why Lampstand wouldn't protect a face-down Hero in a territory, or why Angry Mob wouldn't target an already face-down Hero.

News:

Author Topic: Lampstand protect LoR? (Read 6311 times)

Chronic Apathy

Chronic Apathy

Chronic Apathy

Warrior_Monk

Chronic Apathy

Warrior_Monk

Chronic Apathy

Chronic Apathy