Author Topic: Leading Others Astray (Read 9681 times)

DJWeb · « **on:** December 26, 2014, 04:35:34 PM »

"Convert a human Hero to a crimson heretic and take it to your territory. That heretic gains the ability, 'Protect a N.T. Lost Soul from rescue.'"

Is this ability similar to an ability gained via set-aside in that it stays with the hero the whole game and cannot be negated?

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #1 on:** December 26, 2014, 04:42:48 PM »

Yes, all gained abilities are like abilities gained from set aside, so it will keep it until the hero is reset (in hand, deck or discard pile) and it's CBN.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #2 on:** December 26, 2014, 04:52:34 PM »

Quote from: DJWeb on December 26, 2014, 04:35:34 PM

Is this ability similar to an ability gained via set-aside in that it stays with the hero the whole game and cannot be negated?

The ability is CBN starting the phase after that battle, but it will not necessarily stay the whole game, as ChristianSoldier pointed out. Interestingly, the SA would remain if the heretic is then converted back to a hero, but it may actually backfire if that hero is trying to rescue the only LS in play and it is N.T. Even more interesting is that if the original hero that was converted was a Territory Class hero, the ability would be in effect even while not in battle.

Which I guess brings up the question as to whether the TC hero with that gained ability could switch targets each turn, or if it remains fixed after the first choice.

The Guardian · « **Reply #3 on:** December 26, 2014, 06:28:01 PM »

Don't take this as an official ruling yet (because it really hasn't come up before and I would prefer to have further input), but I would be inclined to think that just as Magicians who are converted to Heroes lose their "Magician" identifier, so too would Heretics. Therefore, if a Hero was converted to an EC Heretic via LOA, and then converted back to a Hero, it would lose the Heretic identifier and the special ability would also be lost since LOA says "That heretic."

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #4 on:** December 26, 2014, 06:36:53 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on December 26, 2014, 06:28:01 PM

Don't take this as an official ruling yet (because it really hasn't come up before and I would prefer to have further input), but I would be inclined to think that just as Magicians who are converted to Heroes lose their "Magician" identifier, so too would Heretics. Therefore, if a Hero was converted to an EC Heretic via LOA, and then converted back to a Hero, it would lose the Heretic identifier and the special ability would also be lost since LOA says "That heretic."

I'd agree with this. It would make sense that Heretic would be an evil only identifier.

Redoubter · « **Reply #5 on:** December 26, 2014, 07:05:45 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on December 26, 2014, 06:28:01 PM

Don't take this as an official ruling yet (because it really hasn't come up before and I would prefer to have further input), but I would be inclined to think that just as Magicians who are converted to Heroes lose their "Magician" identifier, so too would Heretics. Therefore, if a Hero was converted to an EC Heretic via LOA, and then converted back to a Hero, it would lose the Heretic identifier and the special ability would also be lost since LOA says "That heretic."

I would certainly agree with this interpretation. It is consistent with placed cards that say "that hero" or have the colon meaning the same thing that won't be working if that character is converted, since it is not "that hero" anymore (it is "that evil character").

Heretic would certainly be one of the identifiers that does not transfer (as you cannot have a follower of God also be a heretic at the same time here...), and the logic follows as you pointed out.

YMT does bring up a great point about TC characters, but I feel that this is also easily dealt with. Based on how they work, I would say that only printed abilities on cards are TC. A character can have 'gained' abilities through the course of the game, but those are not tied to the 'Territory-Class' component of the card. So in the case of a TC hero being converted, their new ability is not TC. Though I think we'd need more confirmation of that interpretation, since it is not explicit.

Praeceps · « **Reply #6 on:** December 26, 2014, 08:19:04 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on December 26, 2014, 06:28:01 PM

Don't take this as an official ruling yet (because it really hasn't come up before and I would prefer to have further input), but I would be inclined to think that just as Magicians who are converted to Heroes lose their "Magician" identifier, so too would Heretics. Therefore, if a Hero was converted to an EC Heretic via LOA, and then converted back to a Hero, it would lose the Heretic identifier and the special ability would also be lost since LOA says "That heretic."

The only potential problem I have with this interpretation is that the ability says that the new Heretic gains the Protect ability, it doesn't say the character has to be a heretic to use it.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #7 on:** December 26, 2014, 08:57:02 PM »

"Gain" is an instant ability that does not need to reactivate. As long as the original ability to convert is not negated, the character was a heretic at the time of the gained ability, and it cannot be negated after the phase ended.

I disagree that this card works as a "placed" card would, since the protect ability is not tied to the heretic, only the gain ability is.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #8 on:** December 26, 2014, 10:10:19 PM »

I see it as an instant deal:

If: character = heretic, give ability: "Protect a N.T. Lost Soul from rescue."

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #9 on:** December 28, 2014, 04:32:32 PM »

This is also NOT an official ruling, but another possible way to look at it would be that protecting LSs from rescue goes against the very nature of a hero in Redemption and therefore that ability doesn't convert when an EC converts to a hero. We already do this with abilities that target other heroes.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #10 on:** December 28, 2014, 05:00:41 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on December 28, 2014, 04:32:32 PM

... goes against the very nature of a hero in Redemption and therefore that ability doesn't convert when an EC converts to a hero. We already do this with abilities that target other heroes.

As far as I know, the current rule is just that the SA cannot target a hero. The "nature of a hero" condition had been removed.

Redoubter · « **Reply #11 on:** December 28, 2014, 06:56:12 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on December 28, 2014, 05:00:41 PM

Quote from: Prof Underwood on December 28, 2014, 04:32:32 PM
... goes against the very nature of a hero in Redemption and therefore that ability doesn't convert when an EC converts to a hero. We already do this with abilities that target other heroes.

As far as I know, the current rule is just that the SA cannot target a hero. The "nature of a hero" condition had been removed.

This is true, and 'by the rules' YMT makes good points.

I think that it would solve this (and other?) issues if we just specified that evil abilities on characters do not convert if they target a Hero or a Lost Soul. I cannot think of a situation where this would cause a problem instead of solving it. That's not the rule now, but I would think that change would make sense.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #12 on:** December 30, 2014, 12:35:07 PM »

Quote from: Redoubter on December 28, 2014, 06:56:12 PM

This is true, and 'by the rules' YMT makes good points.

I think that it would solve this (and other?) issues if we just specified that evil abilities on characters do not convert if they target a Hero or a Lost Soul. I cannot think of a situation where this would cause a problem instead of solving it. That's not the rule now, but I would think that change would make sense.

I know that the "nature of a hero" ruling was thrown out a looong time ago, and we'd have to go back and revisit why we did that. As I recall it was more about avoiding having to decide on a case by case basis what really went against the nature of a hero.

However it would seem that we could have some general rules that would cover it pretty well. Here's a starting point:
"Evil abilities include:
1 - an ability on an evil card (EE, EC, Curse, Evil Fort) that targets a hero
2 - an ability targeting LSs that makes them harder to rescue"

Having these NOT convert would go with the current rule that evil identifiers (magician, heretic, demon) don't convert. Just some things to think about

Redoubter · « **Reply #13 on:** December 30, 2014, 01:03:08 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on December 30, 2014, 12:35:07 PM

2 - an ability targeting LSs that makes them harder to rescue"

If we want to avoid any more subjectivity on it (which I agree with as a reason to have the old rule go away), we can just have any ability that targets heroes or souls fail to convert. That would stop protection, shuffle, discard, underdeck, topdeck, place, or any other ability that EC use to make rescues harder, but it would be objective and clean as a rule. It would also keep the same concept as the current rule, just expand it, so there would not be any confusion.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #14 on:** December 30, 2014, 02:18:40 PM »

I agree that a blanket change of "no targeting heroes or LSs" would be easier to implement, and easier to make spot rulings on.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #15 on:** December 30, 2014, 02:34:22 PM »

Are we really discussing changing the definition of "what abilities convert" based simply on a case of a what happens when you re-convert a hero after it has been converted to an EC using one specific card?

Is this really a problem?

The Guardian · « **Reply #16 on:** December 30, 2014, 03:19:56 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on December 30, 2014, 02:34:22 PM

Are we really discussing changing the definition of "what abilities convert" based simply on a case of a what happens when you re-convert a hero after it has been converted to an EC using one specific card?

Is this really a problem?

In the past, we simply wanted to avoid an EC converted to a Hero from harming other Heroes. There were few (if any) EC abilities that targeted LS. Now that we have several of those, it would be wise to explore if we need to expand the range of abilities that do not convert.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #17 on:** December 30, 2014, 03:40:26 PM »

Let me clarify that I do not support a change at this time, but if we are going to change the rule, it needs to be less subjective than what Mark is suggesting. We want to make rulings as objective as possible, especially for new hosts.

The proposed change would hurt nice conversion SAs, like Nebushasban ("You may exchange a LS in opponent's territory with a LS in your territory.") or King Asnapper ("You may capture an Egyptian or a Syrian, or you may transfer a captured character from your territory to opponent's Land of Bondage.").

I think that there should simply be an inherent penalty for converting ECs that protect LSs and trying to use them for a rescue. They could still do a BC.

Chris · « **Reply #18 on:** December 30, 2014, 07:08:33 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on December 30, 2014, 02:34:22 PM

Are we really discussing changing the definition of "what abilities convert" based simply on a case of a what happens when you re-convert a hero after it has been converted to an EC using one specific card?

Is this really a problem?

Redemption's biggest pitfall is that it's incredibly complex while trying to appeal to a young demographic. Anything that simplifies the rules even a little bit is probably a good thing. Frankly, I would rather just change the rule to be no special abilities convert either way, but that's just me.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #19 on:** December 30, 2014, 11:27:03 PM »

Quote from: Chris on December 30, 2014, 07:08:33 PM

Redemption's biggest pitfall is that it's incredibly complex while trying to appeal to a young demographic. Anything that simplifies the rules even a little bit is probably a good thing. Frankly, I would rather just change the rule to be no special abilities convert either way, but that's just me.

This would also be my preference--especially given the amount of rigamarole that changes to this same ruling have had in the past. *If* it is determined that a change should be made, then saying "nothing converts" is simple, clean, easy to teach, and has very little chance of causing an unforeseen issue.

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on December 30, 2014, 03:40:26 PM

Let me clarify that I do not support a change at this time,...

FWIW, that was how I read your posts.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #20 on:** December 31, 2014, 12:47:52 AM »

Personally I think keeping the status quo is the best option, since we are all used to it now.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #21 on:** December 31, 2014, 02:25:35 PM »

Quote from: Redoubter on December 30, 2014, 01:03:08 PM

we can just have any ability that targets heroes or souls fail to convert.

I like this. It's simple, and makes sense thematically. Having a hero make a "rescue attempt" at the same time as making a LS harder to rescue, just doesn't make sense. So I think it's worth having this simple rule to stop that from happening.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #22 on:** December 31, 2014, 02:40:18 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on December 31, 2014, 02:25:35 PM

Quote from: Redoubter on December 30, 2014, 01:03:08 PM
we can just have any ability that targets heroes or souls fail to convert.
I like this. It's simple, and makes sense thematically. Having a hero make a "rescue attempt" at the same time as making a LS harder to rescue, just doesn't make sense. So I think it's worth having this simple rule to stop that from happening.

I actually disagree with this from a thematic point of view. Especially in this example. Think about it, a heretic reforms but the legacy of their heresy could still keep people from being redeemed by that person.

Of course I really don't care how this ends up getting resolved, I'd be in favor of not allowing any abilities to convert, just for simplicity's sake, but I'm not strongly on any side of the argument.

Redoubter · « **Reply #23 on:** December 31, 2014, 02:57:27 PM »

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on December 31, 2014, 02:40:18 PM

I actually disagree with this from a thematic point of view. Especially in this example. Think about it, a heretic reforms but the legacy of their heresy could still keep people from being redeemed by that person.

However, their 'old self' is gone, and we have a perfect example to counter that thought in Saul. He was responsible for imprisoning and killing followers of Christ, and while perhaps they were hesitant to accept him at first he was the most influential missionary of all time and spread the Gospel to many regions and cities.

A true convert cannot still be a 'stumbling block' to the redemption of others, thematically.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #24 on:** December 31, 2014, 03:12:05 PM »

Thematically, having a converted King Asnapper or Nebushasban be awesome as heroes makes more sense than making them useless. I think the idea of nixing all converted EC abilities is a terrible idea. It will kill self-conversion as a strategy for all but Paul.

There are two few cards that the current rule affects, and too many cards that would be hurt by it, to make it a good choice at this time.

News:

Author Topic: Leading Others Astray (Read 9681 times)

Lamborghini_diablo

Chris