« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?  (Read 1304 times)

Offline KingArv

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?
« on: December 06, 2010, 04:37:18 PM »
0
Been looking for rulings on this in the REG or on the boards, but none found through topic search...

My question is: If I put out a hero as a battle challenge (because I do not have access or they have no LS), and my opponent chooses NOT to block, can I then play Mayhem (which forces us to shuffle our hands in and draw 6) to change the battle challenge to a rescue if my opponent draws a LS?

OR, since my opponent chose NOT to block, does the battle challenge end immediately, as the 10th Anniversary Rule Book states that "if your opponent does not block your battle challenge, then your hero must withdraw from the Field of Battle back to your territory without playing any enhancements."
I know I am not allowed to play enhancements, but Dominants are immediate and would precede this forced withdrawal, would it not?

OR is it NOT possible for a battle challenge to become a rescue attempt?
Would that also nullify other cards from changing a battle challenge into a rescue?

I've always played that cards like Seeker of the Lost (which forces my opponent to draw 3 cards and put any LS in play) and the Revealer LS (if perhaps I played Jair, drew a card and it was the Revealer, and then my opponent drew a LS) can change a battle challenge to a rescue as the hero now has access, BUT these abilities take place, according to the REG before I declare my intention of whether it is going to be a BC or a RA. So, they don't really factor into the idea of a BC becoming a RA.

I guess I have also not considered the possibility much that a battle challenge could be made regardless of whether you have access or not?
Therefore, could I make a BC when I DO have access, but still NOT win a LS. I figure that is true? I always figured the only time people make a BC is when they DON'T have access or something. The REG and rulebook only state that "a battle challenge may be given when there is no LS for a player to rescue", should it specify whether it can be made if there is a LS to rescue?

Thoughts? Rulings?
Perhaps a rule in the REG or rulebook about battle challenges not becoming rescues or something?

A lot of thoughts, I originally intended this to be one question. Oh well!
Logged

Warrior_Monk

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?
« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2010, 04:46:38 PM »
0
If they decline your battle challenge, it's over, and it's too late to play Mayhem. However, you can play Mayhem before battle, or before they declare the decline your bc.

Not sure about the second question, because I've always heard it defined that way too, except Possessed makes me think otherwise.
Logged

Offline KingArv

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?
« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2010, 04:55:35 PM »
0
Appreciate your response.
Possessed according to the REG errata (i.e. play as...) is discarded when opponent makes to successful "attacks", so that actually includes RA I guess? So, no conflict there.
Logged

Offline Prof Underwood

  • Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8597
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?
« Reply #3 on: December 06, 2010, 05:01:55 PM »
0
I think that typically people allow the changing of a BC into a RA as long as the defender gets another choice as to whether to block.

Player A: BC with hero who doesn't have site access (to draw a card)
Player B: decline your BC
Player A: Then I'll add Dragon Raid to get access and make it a RA
Player B: In that case, I'll block with ...

Player A: BC with hero with no LSs out (to draw a card)
Player B: decline your BC
Player A: Then I'll play Harvest Time or Mayhem and if a LS results, then it becomes a RA
Player B: In that case, I'll block with ...
Logged

Offline Professoralstad

  • Tournament Host, Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (+47)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10841
  • Everything is Awesome!
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?
« Reply #4 on: December 06, 2010, 05:03:29 PM »
0
Quote from: Prof Underwood on December 06, 2010, 05:01:55 PM
I think that typically people allow the changing of a BC into a RA as long as the defender gets another choice as to whether to block.

Player A: BC with hero who doesn't have site access (to draw a card)
Player B: decline your BC
Player A: Then I'll add Dragon Raid to get access and make it a RA
Player B: In that case, I'll block with ...

Player A: BC with hero with no LSs out (to draw a card)
Player B: decline your BC
Player A: Then I'll play Harvest Time or Mayhem and if a LS results, then it becomes a RA
Player B: In that case, I'll block with ...

+1
Logged
Press 1 for more options.

Warrior_Monk

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?
« Reply #5 on: December 06, 2010, 05:11:00 PM »
0
Quote from: Prof Underwood on December 06, 2010, 05:01:55 PM
I think that typically people allow the changing of a BC into a RA as long as the defender gets another choice as to whether to block.
Typically, but technically, if you're playing strictly by the rules, once your opponent declines, you can't play, correct?
Logged

Offline Professoralstad

  • Tournament Host, Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (+47)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10841
  • Everything is Awesome!
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?
« Reply #6 on: December 06, 2010, 05:14:10 PM »
0
Quote from: Ring Wraith on December 06, 2010, 05:11:00 PM
Quote from: Prof Underwood on December 06, 2010, 05:01:55 PM
I think that typically people allow the changing of a BC into a RA as long as the defender gets another choice as to whether to block.
Typically, but technically, if you're playing strictly by the rules, once your opponent declines, you can't play, correct?

I would say no. If I RA, and you bury the only available LS and then decline, I can still play HT/Mayhem to try to fetch another LS, and you can then decide whether you want to block. The battle only ends when both people have decided its over, which means you have made a decision about blocking and I have made a decision about not playing anything else.
Logged
Press 1 for more options.

Offline KingArv

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?
« Reply #7 on: December 06, 2010, 05:21:44 PM »
0
Quote
I think that typically people allow the changing of a BC into a RA as long as the defender gets another choice as to whether to block.

Yes, that makes perfect sense, but where in the REG or rulebook does it permit a battle challenge AND then a Rescue attempt in one turn? Or, basically, two separate attacks.

By your interpretation, that a BC is over once your opponent refuses to defend, the same player could not also make a RA too just by keeping their hero in battle. They are two separate attacks in this sense, and to note on the Possessed card, would count as two successful attacks IF they rescued a LS (the undefended BC and a rescued LS).
But, the rulebook even agrees that "the hero must withdraw" if a BC is not defended against. How then, could the hero stay in battle for a separate attack, a RA?

Quote
Player A: BC with hero who doesn't have site access (to draw a card)
Player B: decline your BC
Player A: Then I'll add Dragon Raid to get access and make it a RA
Player B: In that case, I'll block with ...

I find that rule in the REG about adding a site to gain access at any time during battle, as long as it is from the player's territory, confusing. The REG also states that if a player does not have access then "it is a battle challenge." Once again, by adding DR later in the battle the BC is becoming a RA. I feel like this rules should read: "a player that wishes to use a site for access should place it on the hero as they enter battle simultaneously." That would make much more sense. Otherwise, it would also allow a player who loses a site in battle, because it is discarded or something, to add another one from their territory, correct? I guess I'm not so much against that, but it seems like a tricky loophole, again.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2010, 05:23:45 PM by KingArv »
Logged

Offline Prof Underwood

  • Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8597
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?
« Reply #8 on: December 06, 2010, 05:30:38 PM »
0
Quote from: Professoralstad on December 06, 2010, 05:14:10 PM
Quote from: Ring Wraith on December 06, 2010, 05:11:00 PM
Typically, but technically, if you're playing strictly by the rules, once your opponent declines, you can't play, correct?
I would say no. If I RA, and you bury the only available LS and then decline, I can still play HT/Mayhem to try to fetch another LS, and you can then decide whether you want to block. The battle only ends when both people have decided its over, which means you have made a decision about blocking and I have made a decision about not playing anything else.
+1

And if a BC turns into a RA, then it no longer counts as a BC.  That takes care of any issues related to that I think.
Logged

Offline KingArv

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?
« Reply #9 on: December 06, 2010, 06:15:02 PM »
0
Quote
And if a BC turns into a RA, then it no longer counts as a BC.  That takes care of any issues related to that I think.
But, can a BC turn into a RA?
According to the rules or REG? It states that you declare either or, OR mandatorily a BC if you don't have access.

Again it goes back, I think, to whether you are allowed to make a BC when you DO have access or not? If you are, then I'd argue that you choose one or the other (period.), and a BC hence cannot become a RA. But, if you can't make a BC when you do have access (all battles where you have access must be RA, in other words), then I'd argue that a BC can become a RA mandatorily once a card like Mayhem or HT is played and adds a LS to play giving the rescuer access.

This latter situation still does not, however, solve the written contradiction in the REG of adding a site for access "at any point during the battle" AND the mandatory rule of when a player does not have access it "is a battle challenge".

Quote
The battle only ends when both people have decided its over, which means you have made a decision about blocking and I have made a decision about not playing anything else.
This makes sense, going along with the initiative model for playing enhancements and when a battle ends, but the REG is unclear to this point when it states:
Quote
"if your opponent does not block your battle challenge, then your hero must withdraw from the Field of Battle back to your territory without playing any enhancements."
Again, it would make a world of difference if a BC is allowed to become a RA. If so, I could take advantage of my "initiative" to play Mayhem or HT and change the BC into a RA. But, if not, I could still play them per initiative, but it would NOT change the BC into a RA.

That is why I still ask whether a BC can become a RA, and not just
Quote
And if a BC turns into a RA
, no offense.

It seems to me like there are a lot of rulings being made that are not backed by specific written example, if only in the REG let alone the rulebook.
Logged

Warrior_Monk

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Mayhem, battle challenges and a BC becoming a RA?
« Reply #10 on: December 06, 2010, 06:34:27 PM »
0
Quote from: KingArv on December 06, 2010, 06:15:02 PM
Quote
And if a BC turns into a RA, then it no longer counts as a BC.  That takes care of any issues related to that I think.
But, can a BC turn into a RA?
According to the rules or REG? It states that you declare either or, OR mandatorily a BC if you don't have access.
Yes. Both. It's just stating at the beginning of a battle, nothing about the middle. It can change.
Quote
Again it goes back, I think, to whether you are allowed to make a BC when you DO have access or not? If you are, then I'd argue that you choose one or the other (period.), and a BC hence cannot become a RA. But, if you can't make a BC when you do have access (all battles where you have access must be RA, in other words), then I'd argue that a BC can become a RA mandatorily once a card like Mayhem or HT is played and adds a LS to play giving the rescuer access.
No, you cannot make a BC when you have access. If there's a lost soul in their Land of Bondage, it's an RA. If there isn't, it's a BC.
Quote
This latter situation still does not, however, solve the written contradiction in the REG of adding a site for access "at any point during the battle" AND the mandatory rule of when a player does not have access it "is a battle challenge".
As previously stated, it's not a BC. Technically, it's still an RA, even though they don't have access to it.
Quote
Quote
The battle only ends when both people have decided its over, which means you have made a decision about blocking and I have made a decision about not playing anything else.
This makes sense, going along with the initiative model for playing enhancements and when a battle ends, but the REG is unclear to this point when it states:
Quote
"if your opponent does not block your battle challenge, then your hero must withdraw from the Field of Battle back to your territory without playing any enhancements."
Again, it would make a world of difference if a BC is allowed to become a RA. If so, I could take advantage of my "initiative" to play Mayhem or HT and change the BC into a RA. But, if not, I could still play them per initiative, but it would NOT change the BC into a RA.
As mentioned, a BC can switch between an RA and vice versa as many times as they need to be.
Quote
It seems to me like there are a lot of rulings being made that are not backed by specific written example, if only in the REG let alone the rulebook.
The REG is outdated, as is the rulebook. We've been griping about this for awhile. For now, the boards can supply official rulings, regardless of written contradictions, if two or more "elders" agree on a ruling. The REG is mostly correct, but there are a lot of things the creator didn't update. They're working on it.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
 
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal