Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: SirNobody on September 01, 2008, 07:44:19 PM
-
Hey,
Lost Soul: "When you draw this card, you may set aside a Hero from each territory for two turns."
Can I choose to set aside a hero from my opponent's territory and choose not to set one aside from my territory? Or am I choosing between setting aside one from each and setting aside none?
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly, WildCard Secretary of Defense
www.freewebs.com/redemptionne
-
I asked the same but I think it's all or nothing
-
It is all or nothing.
Unless you don't have any heros down..... ;)
-
I would think that you have the option for each territory because it's after the "may".
-
I would say no because it is one ability not 3 seperate ones.
-
I would think that you have the option for each territory because it's after the "may".
That is correct. In Redemption, anytime a list is preceded by a "may," the may option is given to each part.
-
I would think that you have the option for each territory because it's after the "may".
That is correct. In Redemption, anytime a list is preceded by a "may," the may option is given to each part.
For once happy to be wrong ;D
-
Like in reach of desperation. You can interrupt and draw. You don't have to play next enh.
-
I would think that you have the option for each territory because it's after the "may".
That is correct. In Redemption, anytime a list is preceded by a "may," the may option is given to each part.
Seriously? I thought it was kinda balanced by forcing you to set one aside too. Wow.
-
yea..when someone at my BD table at natz asked the judge said it was all or nothing.....
there is almost no point to set-aside one of your own dudes(besides some combo you find out with the red dude) then and it seems like it was worded wrong.
-
yea..when someone at my BD table at natz asked the judge said it was all or nothing.....
there is almost no point to set-aside one of your own dudes(besides some combo you find out with the red dude) then and it seems like it was worded wrong.
Yeah same. But there are many reasons to set people aside.
-
Um hello really now? Are you failing this hard? There's a very very good reason to set him aside.
-
Don't you love raiders camp?
-
:D
-
I sense a new deck for RR, we should all be very afraid
-
That is correct. In Redemption, anytime a list is preceded by a "may," the may option is given to each part.
But in this case it is not a list in that way. It does not say you may set aside an opponent's hero and set aside one of your own heroes. If this were the case, then I would completely agree with you. But it says "you may set aside a hero from each territory". In this case this seems to be a single choice and therefore if you chose to set aside your opponent's hero, then you must set aside your own as well (unless you didn't have one).
Lost Soul: "When you draw this card, you may set aside a Hero from each territory for two turns."
-
I agree with prof. Its worded as "you may do the ONE thing listed, or you may not."
It doesnt say..
"You may set aside a hero in opponents territory, in your territory, or both territories.
-
The may applies to "each territory". If there are 4 players (Prof, Lambo, Tim and myself) then I may set aside a Hero in Prof's territory and I may set aside a Hero in Lambo's territory and I may set aside a Hero in Tim's territory (but I'll choose not to since his only Hero is the Captain I want to band to this turn) and I may set aside a Hero in my territory but I'll choose not to for obvious reasons. Does that make sense?
-
Hey,
"May" in an ability with multiple targets makes it an "up to" ability right? Haman's Plot says "may discard three characters" and is played as "discard up to three characters." The lost soul is a may ability with multiple targets, so that should make it an "up to" ability.
Although it could work the other way too.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly, WildCard Secretary of Defense
www.freewebs.com/redeptionne
-
"May" in an ability with multiple targets makes it an "up to" ability right? Haman's Plot says "may discard three characters" and is played as "discard up to three characters." The lost soul is a may ability with multiple targets, so that should make it an "up to" ability.
Although it could work the other way too.
This is a good point. I guess I can see it both ways, too. I just wanted a bit more discussion on the matter before the issue was closed.
-
I sense a new deck for RR, we should all be very afraid
I've HAD that deck made. :D drove my last opp to yelling at me. Ah such fun
-
I always thought you had to discard 3 characters or none with haman's plot. (and therein also think that you have to either set one from each territory or none with that lost soul)
-
I sense a new deck for RR, we should all be very afraid
I've HAD that deck made. :D drove my last opp to yelling at me. Ah such fun
Was that the Nats deck when you killed all his Dominants?
-
I don't know. Does anybody play Reach and draw "up to" three cards?
-
If i only have 2 cards in my deck yes i do.
-
I sense a new deck for RR, we should all be very afraid
I've HAD that deck made. :D drove my last opp to yelling at me. Ah such fun
Was that the Nats deck when you killed all his Dominants?
Naw. I had people hitting walls over that. It is much more sinister :D
-
If i only have 2 cards in my deck yes i do.
But there's a difference between choosing to draw less than three cards, and drawing less than three cards because you have to (i.e. less than three cards in your deck). The wording on the Lost Soul does seem to indicate that it's all or nothing. Your example would be more like I'll set aside heroes from my opponents' territories, but I can't set one aside from mine since I don't have one. If you have a hero to set aside, it seems from the wording on the card that it should be all or nothing.
-
i am all for overpowered cards however i agree with a healthy balance too- whenplaying with this card i respected the balance of it because it gave me the challenge of getting around it.
-
I don't know. Does anybody play Reach and draw "up to" three cards?
Yes, especially that time my opponent had RBD activated.