Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: thestrongangel on December 27, 2008, 10:29:25 AM

Title: LoTS and DON
Post by: thestrongangel on December 27, 2008, 10:29:25 AM
Is Lampstand of the Sanctuary protected from DoN?

Lampstand-Protect all cards not in battle from Evil Dominants.
Title: Re: LoTS and DON
Post by: michael/michaelssword on December 27, 2008, 10:31:24 AM
yes its protected
Title: Re: LoTS and DON
Post by: YourMathTeacher on December 27, 2008, 11:13:16 AM
I agree with Caleb. LotS is a "card not in battle" and DoN is an "evil dominant." DoN cannot attempt to negate Lampstand because of the "protect."
Title: Re: LoTS and DON
Post by: BubbleBoy on December 27, 2008, 01:31:24 PM
Protection is hardcore! >:(
Title: Re: LoTS and DON
Post by: Cameron the Conqueror on December 28, 2008, 05:29:14 PM
+1  That is why LuG is still even used....
Title: Re: LoTS and DON
Post by: galadgawyn on December 29, 2008, 06:36:35 PM
Quote
yes its protected

I know that is how it is played and how it has been ruled.  I'm pretty sure that was also the intent of the card.  It is also how I think it should be played.

However, I'm noticing an apparent contradiction here.  In the massive debates over Protection of Angels, it seems like they settled on the rule that negate always trumps protect or in other words, you can't protect from negate.  The only protection from negate is to have an "can't be interrupted, prevented, or negated" ability.  Since Lampstand does not have that status then why would it be an exception to this rule? 

So I think the proper ruling would be that DoN does negate Lampstand but of course that leads me back to my first paragraph. 
Title: Re: LoTS and DON
Post by: Gabe on December 29, 2008, 06:46:10 PM
The Schaef addressed that concern here. (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=3482.0)

Quote from:
Short version, DoN discards an Art, and negates the Art it discarded.  Since Lampstand is protected from evil Dominants, it cannot be discarded, and since no Artifact was discarded, then no Artifact can be negated.
Title: Re: LoTS and DON
Post by: YourMathTeacher on December 29, 2008, 06:52:31 PM
To expound Gabe's quote, the SA of Destruction of Nehushtan is:

Discard one active Artifact in play. Artifact's ability is negated.

There are two sentences. The second sentence is contingent upon completion of the first sentence (i.e. [That] Artifact's ability...). Since the first sentence (discard the artifact) cannot target Lampstand, the second sentence never becomes relevant.
Title: Re: LoTS and DON
Post by: galadgawyn on December 29, 2008, 07:02:06 PM
Yeah, I forgot about that thread :sleepy:   Probably because I never think of DoN like that.  I always think of the abilities happenning together and they would be interchangeable in order but if we're going to be reeaaalllly picky then I suppose that is the correct technical interpretation.   :P  It is amazing how often I'm sure of the ability on a card and forget some small detail in the wording.  Of course there is the Reg but why would I look it up?  It'd be like looking up SoG.  :doh:
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal