Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: christiangamer25 on February 12, 2014, 03:01:56 AM
-
ok just got thru a game and need a concise ruling cause im getting arguments on it
if i enter battle with nebby + swift horses and go get nergalsharazar out of deck add him to battle can or can't i use the swift horses cbn off of nergals ability ive heard it argued both ways and i need to know b4 the t2 only
-
The Interrupt and D2 would play off Nebby, as that's who was holding horses. That being said, the player plays the enhancement so you can choose to play the enhancement horses lets you play on Nerg.
Follow-up question.
You win the battle with both Nebby and Nerg surviving. Can Nebby pass horses off to Nerg at this point, or would Nebby have to die for Nerg to take the weapon?
-
im not sure i agree with this id appreciate if elders would chime in cause honestly i thought characters went first then enhancements and since nerg is in battle b4 horse goes off nerg can use horse thats how ive always played it or been told it works
-
So I'm going to say what my understanding is (I am fairly sure both of you are right if I'm understanding you correctly)
Neb's ability goes through, adding Nerg to battle. Then Swift Horses activates, allowing you to draw 2 and play next. At this point you can play an enhancement on either character in battle, so you could make whatever enhancement you play CBN by playing it on Nerg.
However you can't move a weapon to a different character normally, I'm not even sure if there are any situations where you can move a weapon between characters anymore (besides returning a weapon to your hand or something like that) since they've been ruled to work like placed cards for following hosts.
A friend of mine used a deck using this combo quite well so I'm fairly confident that it works.
-
my problem is i need this combo to work with iron pan active i think it should because nebby brings the horses into the battle but nerg is there b4 they quote get used?? so i think the d2 play next should also be cbn
-
I agree with Christian Soldiers.
FWIW I think you can still transfer weapons after battle.
-
I agree with Christian Soldiers.
FWIW I think you can still transfer weapons after battle.
I believe the weapon activates on Neb making it negated by Iron Pan even though Nerg is in battle. Also I'm pretty sure I remember a thread where Gabe had ruled weapons may only pass in battle of the holder is discarded or captured and another warrior class character of the weapons brigade is in battle with the original holder. I also believe the "your" term was used to describe the weapon. So I couldn't use Manny to band to your SoT and the your ASA/horses play an EE then angel your ASA to take "your" horses and pass them to Manny.
-
Swift Horses activates as soon as it enters battle with Nebuchadnezzar, it just has to wait to carry out it's special abilities because of the order of operations (much like mass banding enhancements bring all the characters in at once but the abilities resolve in a chosen order) and at that time Nergal is not in battle so Horses is being negated by Iron Pan. Adding Nergal to battle doesn't undo that because cards are either CBN or not CBN when they are played and cannot retroactively gain CBN.
-
Swift Horses activates as soon as it enters battle with Nebuchadnezzar, it just has to wait to carry out it's special abilities because of the order of operations (much like mass banding enhancements bring all the characters in at once but the abilities resolve in a chosen order) and at that time Nergal is not in battle so Horses is being negated by Iron Pan. Adding Nergal to battle doesn't undo that because cards are either CBN or not CBN when they are played and cannot retroactively gain CBN.
I agree with this.
-
Swift Horses activates as soon as it enters battle with Nebuchadnezzar, it just has to wait to carry out it's special abilities because of the order of operations (much like mass banding enhancements bring all the characters in at once but the abilities resolve in a chosen order) and at that time Nergal is not in battle so Horses is being negated by Iron Pan. Adding Nergal to battle doesn't undo that because cards are either CBN or not CBN when they are played and cannot retroactively gain CBN.
+1
-
Well boo makes my deck a tad weaker
-
Also I'm pretty sure I remember a thread where Gabe had ruled weapons may only pass in battle if the holder is discarded or captured and another warrior class character of the weapons brigade is in battle with the original holder.
I thought it was still legal to transfer weapons from one surviving character to another after a battle, but perhaps I missed that change? Do you recall at all how long ago that was from?
-
So you cannot use Nebuchadnezzar to get Nergal and play an enhancement off horses on Nergal because he is not in battle?
-
You can do that, but Horses is still activated on Nebby so if Iron Pan is active or Samuel is the rescuing Hero, Horses does not have CBN status and therefore the play next ability is negated.
-
Also I'm pretty sure I remember a thread where Gabe had ruled weapons may only pass in battle if the holder is discarded or captured and another warrior class character of the weapons brigade is in battle with the original holder.
I thought it was still legal to transfer weapons from one surviving character to another after a battle, but perhaps I missed that change? Do you recall at all how long ago that was from?
Maybe I lost my mind, I can't seem to find the thread I was referring to.
-
Um... Point of Order
I think there is a bit of a problem with the assumptions being made here. Neb cannot go grab Nerg until after Swift Horses goes off.
There are two types of special abilities that define how a special ability is carried out: Ongoing Abilities and Instant Abilities. When a single card has more than one special ability (including gained abilities), perform the abilities in this order:
First, complete all special abilities in the order written on the card except those that add a character to the battle. Note that some special abilities can happen together even though they may be separated by a period. Second, if the card is a character with either a gained ability or a weapon-class enhancement, then activate the gained abilities in the order gained. Finally, activate the special abilities on the carried weapon-class enhancement.
Complete banding abilities.
Complete any Choose Blocker or Rescuer abilities.
Band
Clarifications
Any ability that adds a character to a side of the battle where at least one other character is present is a band ability.
So, deciding to use Nebuchadnezzar (http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/Nebuchadnezzar_(TP))'s ability to search for a character and add it to battle is, by definition, a band ability, and regardless of how it is defined, would still "add a character to the battle." Therefore, the weapon activates first, and then he may pull Nergalsharezer (http://redemption.wikia.com/wiki/Nergalsharezer_(FF)), if so desired.
Basically: If you have a Nebby + any weapon, you must decide what you are searching for. If a non-character, the search + add to battle happens before the weapon. If a character, the weapon goes first and then you may perform the search + add to battle. It also basically means you are limited to the type of card you can pull based on whether you decide to use the weapon first or second, which is an interesting implication.
TL;DR - It doesn't matter whether Nerg could make Swift Horses CBN, because he cannot even be in battle until after Swift Horses finishes via Neb's ability.
-
Nebuchadnezzar is not a band ability until it finds a target that is an evil character when it's searching deck (since he can also find enhancements or even curses). Even if the player knows ahead of time that they're searching for a character, the game doesn't know this until the search finds the character. You don't then suddenly stop his ability and make the rest of any other abilities, like Horses, finish (your deck would be mid-search in some sort of limbo), you finish his ability and then continue with other abilities per the order of operations.
For this reason, a converted Nebuchadnezzar could still enter battle even with Household Idols active.
-
For this reason, a converted Nebuchadnezzar could still enter battle even with Household Idols active.
Of course he can, because add to battle is not defined as a band itself. However, using it to add a character is defined as a band, and also fits the criteria of "except those that add a character to the battle." Therefore, the weapon must go first if that is how the ability would be used.
-
It's the same situation, though. Whether a Hero or an Evil Character, Nebuchadnezzar enters battle with an "add to battle" ability. The game doesn't know and can't quantify intent so it doesn't know that Nebby will eventually become a band ability and it fits him in the place any "add to battle" ability would happen in the order of operations.
If the game knows he's going to band for moving him around in the OoO, then it should also know such for ignoring him before entering with HHI.
-
I'm fairly certain this has been discussed/ruled on before. Perhaps some digging around is in order. 8)
-
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/ruling-questions/weapons-a-consensus-please/msg507830/?topicseen#msg507830
I found it although it was Tim Maly that made the last post.
-
In a Hosea versus Egyptian Cupbearer/Baker (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/ruling-questions/'add-to-battle'-is-it-a-band-ability/msg512994/#msg512994) question thread it was confirmed that their add to battle abilities were not bands before the fact, only if they added a character to a battle that already had one on that side. Hosea can capture them if banded in after they add a character but not before.
The same would be true in this case I would think.
-
The Hosea/Cupbearer rule is exactly the same as the HHI/Neb rule, which does not actually affect this case. Add to battle is not always a band, it is separate, so any abilities that specifically reference banding do not target cards with add to battle. That is established, and I never disputed that. Those rulings do not come into play here, however, because we are talking about a band ability at this point, if a character is selected. At the very least, it is an ability that adds a character to battle, which must wait until after weapons per the order of ability activation.
Also, I disagree with the final part of the ruling in that thread, as Hosea should never be able to capture Cupbearer because add to battle is not the same as band for targeting, just like you cannot get past immunity with a 'regardless of protection' ability. They may end up doing the same thing, but they are not the same for targeting. That may not be exactly relative to the current discussion, but I feel that may be important to the overall definition of add to battle.
Honestly, we just need some definitive clarification on add to battle and how it interacts with cases like this, so that we can end the constant questions it causes ;)
-
because we are talking about a band ability at this point, if a character is selected. At the very least, it is an ability that adds a character to battle, which must wait until after weapons per the order of ability activation.
In that case, my next question to you would be: does Nebby's search always have to wait until last to fire even if the person declares they're searching for an enhancement? Also, what about if the person doesn't know yet if they're going to retrieve a character or enhancement?
My point with these questions is that the choice (or lack thereof) of the person using it shouldn't change how the game treats the ability because that creates confusion and inconsistency. If something like Household Idols can't determine Neb is a banding card before he actually bands then neither should the game state that leads to determining order of operations. Nebby's ability has already started resolving by the time the character is selected and abilities always finish so by then it's too late to postpone it.
-
My answer is three-fold:
First, if you were to use it prior to activating the weapon, then you would be limited to not adding a character, as per the abilities activating which would prevent such an action prior to the weapon going off. I would also argue that not using it prior to the weapon would limit what you could select when using after.
Second, I am not arguing what would be best for the game here. I am arguing what the rules say, as they stand. If I take more out of it, and say how things should be for the benefit of the game and players, that would go past what the rules actually say. Changing the rules is probably needed here, just because add to battle is so convoluted and ill-defined.
Third, again, cards like HHI and Hosea specifically mention the band ability. Immune and protect are not the same for targeting, and even though they do the exact same thing, you can't target a card with immune with something that targets protect. You cannot target a card that has add to battle as a card that has band. However, what they do is still defined in the rules and affected by other rules. If you cannot add a character to battle until after weapons, then you cannot use an ability to add a character to battle. That is different than targeting based on the name of an ability.
-
Household Idols actually just says "good banding cards" not "band abilities." :P
I guess I just don't see where the rules don't say exactly what to do with this. Is it an ability that adds a character to battle? Not at face value. Okay! Then it goes at the regular time. If the ability then does something that goes against the rules (Add a character to battle before the "add a character to battle phase" of the OoO) that's fine because that's what special abilities do, lol.
-
Except it specifically says adding characters to battle, not 'band'. If the rules specifically disallow something from happening, or dictates that they happen in a specific order, that is the way it happens. Special abilities do let you do things that the rules don't normally (like having multiple characters in battle), but the rules still dictate how that happens. In this case, it dictates when characters can be added to battle. In the case of drawing, it dictates at what point you have to stop drawing, no matter what a card says. That's what the rules do.
I also don't see where the rules don't say exactly what to do with this, but unlike you, I don't take the 'at face value' bit to be allowable. If it adds a character to battle, it adds a character to battle, and the rules say you cannot do it then. They are very specific. If that needs to change, that is one thing, but it is crystal clear.
-
At the very least, it is an ability that adds a character to battle, which must wait until after weapons per the order of ability activation.
Nebuchadnezzar does not have 'add evil character battle'/ "May band.." written on the card so the OoO exceptions for characters do not apply. Nebuchadnezzar activates first, regardless of the O.T crimson card, and then horses draws and you can play and enhancement on Nergal.
-
At the very least, it is an ability that adds a character to battle, which must wait until after weapons per the order of ability activation.
Nebuchadnezzar does not have 'add evil character battle'/ "May band.." written on the card so the OoO exceptions for characters do not apply. Nebuchadnezzar activates first, regardless of the O.T crimson card, and then horses draws and you can play and enhancement on Nergal.
The order of operations does not specify ability names that apply. It is literally any ability that adds a character to battle (including choose the blocker/rescuer, which are also not "add evil character"/"may band" but are still included). It is the effect that is referred to in the order, not the abilities. You cannot add a character, of any type or to either side of the battle, until the weapon activates, per the order.
-
It could add a character to battle, but is also could not, that's the whole point. You don't know when it activates which one it's going to be (it could be neither if you don't add anything to battle or if you add the searched thing to hand). Yes, the OoO says cards that add a character to battle go after weapons, but it also says that other abilities go before weapons. Considering 4 of the 5 possible results of Neb's ability fall under the second category, I don't know why you want the default to be the timing of the 5th option. Adding a character to battle before a weapon resolves is just as much a violation of the OoO as adding an enhancement to battle after a weapon, so either way the OoO is going to be mad at you. In the end you have to pick one or the other to go with and the Elders have consistently chosen to have the ability carry out before weapons with other abilities. I don't see where a change is necessary but maybe I'm just missing it, lol.
Also it's interesting to be on the other side of a ruling debate from you. It doesn't happen often. :P
-
Adding a character to battle before a weapon resolves is just as much a violation of the OoO as adding an enhancement to battle after a weapon, so either way the OoO is going to be mad at you.
I'm saying you can't do either, not that there is an option to do the second, so the anthropomorphized rule will have no beef with me ;)
It does not matter if X possibilities are okay, it is the one that is against the rules that I say cannot be done, that's the point. I'm also not saying that you default it to after the weapon, but that as the rules read now, using it prior to the weapon (which you can) just means that the crimson card cannot be a character. Hopefully the point I'm trying to make now is clearer, since you seemed to have a different understanding of what I'm trying to say ;)
-
But what if you didn't know? Sure in this case you can choose when to activate it, but what if the card didn't give you a choice.
Evil Spawn says something along the lines of "Reveal the bottom card of your deck. Add it to hand or battle." Does this mean that you can't add an evil character to battle because it's in the wrong step? Or does the character just wait around until it is the right time?
Perhaps the rules should be clarified somewhat, but whatever it does say, Adding cards to battle when they could be either a character or enhancement should happen at their primary place, not the banding section.
-
If you can't do either then Neb just misfires because he misses the timing of both, which would make him useless, lol.
The rules don't say that you can't add a character to battle before weapons activate, it just says abilities that specifically add characters to battle get queued after weapons. Neb doesn't specifically add characters to battle, though he has the possibility to, so 1. I don't see any reason to restrict him to resolving after the weapon, and 2. I see no reason why you can't choose to add a character if he resolves before the weapon. Nothing is being restricted in any way by the OoO.
If we take your ruling to be correct then the following hypothetical would be true: If there is a character made with an identifier "if drawn during the battle phase, you may add this to the battle on the appropriate side" then any draw ability could add a character to battle (because the possibility exists to add this character to battle since the card exists) so then, by your definition, all draw abilities must wait to resolve until after any weapons because they could add a character to battle.
I feel like interpreting rules based on what ifs, like you propose, will eventually lead to all abilities always being carried out after all other abilities just in case they add a character to battle and nothing will ever get done (or, we'll end up with "add character to battle" abilities happening first instead of last, haha).
-
If we take your ruling to be correct then the following hypothetical would be true: If there is a character made with an identifier "if drawn during the battle phase, you may add this to the battle on the appropriate side" then any draw ability could add a character to battle (because the possibility exists to add this character to battle since the card exists) so then, by your definition, all draw abilities must wait to resolve until after any weapons because they could add a character to battle.
You need to stick with the example ChristianSoldier used, that one is far too contrived to be relevant ;) His not only is a real card (and one that is realistic), but is a great counter-concept.
Hobbit...not...sure what you mean...that is one crazy quote block, and it doesn't look like your actual post got through.
Like I have been saying, I have been speaking of the rules as they are. If we are going to make the rules match what is being stated in your posts, then we need to change the order to:
There are two types of special abilities that define how a special ability is carried out: Ongoing Abilities and Instant Abilities. When a single card has more than one special ability (including gained abilities), perform the abilities in this order:
First, complete all special abilities in the order written on the card except those that add a character to the battlebanding, choose the rescuer, and choose the blocker. Note that some special abilities can happen together even though they may be separated by a period. Second, if the card is a character with either a gained ability or a weapon-class enhancement, then activate the gained abilities in the order gained. Finally, activate the special abilities on the carried weapon-class enhancement.
Complete banding abilities.
Complete any Choose Blocker or Rescuer abilities.
-
Show us a Nebuchadnezzar that says "band" or "add a character to battle' and you are correct.
On a side note: Why does Spy+Warriors spear work? Spies ability is completed and withdraws before the weapon has time to activate right?
-
Show us a Nebuchadnezzar that says "band" or "add a character to battle' and you are correct.
Add to battle has the ability to add a character to battle. And you may have missed my earlier response to you, but that rule does not specify abilities, it specifies effects. Otherwise, choose the rescuer and choose the blocker would happen at that stage, but they don't because they add a character to battle. Neb's ability can do that, that's the point here. That part of the rule does not target specific abilities (like in the HHI or Hosea examples), it affects all abilities that have the effect to add a character to battle.
So am I correct now ;)
On a side note: Why does Spy+Warriors spear work? Spies ability is completed and withdraws before the weapon has time to activate right?
Nothing to do with this ruling, but I don't like that well-established ruling either, since the weapon never had the activation period before being removed from battle.
-
Show us a Nebuchadnezzar that says "band" or "add a character to battle' and you are correct.
Add to battle has the ability to add a character to battle. And you may have missed my earlier response to you, but that rule does not specify abilities, it specifies effects. Otherwise, choose the rescuer and choose the blocker would happen at that stage, but they don't because they add a character to battle. Neb's ability can do that, that's the point here. That part of the rule does not target specific abilities (like in the HHI or Hosea examples), it affects all abilities that have the effect to add a character to battle.
So am I correct now ;)
Except those are two different cases: choose the rescuer/blocker MUST add a character to battle; therefore, it has to go where that ability is listed in the OoO (it has no other options). Nebuchadnezzar can add 2 different things with his ability - add an enhancement or add a character. As such, since there is no way to tell what he will add before he adds it, and abilities cannot be stopped in the middle, he must complete (whether he is adding a character or enhancement).
-
If we take your ruling to be correct then the following hypothetical would be true: If there is a character made with an identifier "if drawn during the battle phase, you may add this to the battle on the appropriate side" then any draw ability could add a character to battle (because the possibility exists to add this character to battle since the card exists) so then, by your definition, all draw abilities must wait to resolve until after any weapons because they could add a character to battle.
You need to stick with the example ChristianSoldier used, that one is far too contrived to be relevant ;) His not only is a real card (and one that is realistic), but is a great counter-concept.
Okay, then use that one. You never actually posted a refutation of it. :P
-
That part of the rule does not target specific abilities (like in the HHI or Hosea examples), it affects all abilities that have the effect to add a character to battle.
If 'add a character to battle' ability='band' ability then, yes, an add a character to battle ability is target-able as a band ability or an add to battle ability. These abilities are the same thing as far as the rules are concerned. What is not the same is an ability that adds a card to battle and abilities that add characters to battle. No where in the quotes you have posted on this thread does it say that if I add any card to battle I have banded with that card. So an add to battle ability that does not specify a character is not literally an add a character to battle ability or a band ability. Besides, no where in the OoO quote you posted says anything about effects , but only implies that abilities must be written explicitly on the card in order to be abilities. Since OoO operates under the assumption that abilities, not effects, dictate order it follows that Nebuchadnezzar's effect of adding a character to battle is not restricted. You would have to make a distinction that adding "add card to battle "= "add a character to battle"="band" band ability in order for OoO to restrict Nebs ability. Or you could say if the "effects" are the same then the "abilities" are the same but that would mean immune and protect would be able to be targeted as the same thing.
-
Hobbit, reread the OoO again, and see that if your determination that it must be specifically an ability "add a character to battle", then you could band, CTR, or CTB. It is the effect of adding a character to battle that it refers to, not any specific ability. It refers to all abilities that have the effect of adding a character to battle, saying you just cannot do it until the other abilities and the weapon resolve. If you think I did not address that, then you'll need to go back and read through my posts, because I have done so multiple times in this thread.
Browarod, we may have an issue if Evil Spawn were WC, but as it stands, there is nothing in the OoO that would be contentious with that particular card. I was more referring to the ability on the card, which was more reasonable than an identifier on a character that when you drew it (and therefore it was still out of play in your hand) you could do something with it ;)
-
I believe "those that add a character to the battle" in the OoO IS just shorthand for "banding, choose the blocker, and choose the rescuer abilities" as I've never seen any indication (and the current status quo of Nebby agrees) that "add to battle" abilities have to wait until after weapons just because they have the possibility to add a character to battle.
The point I'm trying to make is this: Nebby says "OT crimson card." Said card can be a character but isn't unless you choose one. At face value it's literally just "OT crimson card" which is not specifically a character so, in my opinion, I don't feel as though it falls under the clause of the OoO. If Nebby instead said "OT crimson character or enhancement" then I might agree with you because it specifically says the word "character," but as it stands I don't think it hits the clause.
-
I believe "those that add a character to the battle" in the OoO IS just shorthand for "banding, choose the blocker, and choose the rescuer abilities" as I've never seen any indication (and the current status quo of Nebby agrees) that "add to battle" abilities have to wait until after weapons just because they have the possibility to add a character to battle.
The point I'm trying to make is this: Nebby says "OT crimson card." Said card can be a character but isn't unless you choose one. At face value it's literally just "OT crimson card" which is not specifically a character so, in my opinion, I don't feel as though it falls under the clause of the OoO. If Nebby instead said "OT crimson character or enhancement" then I might agree with you because it specifically says the word "character," but as it stands I don't think it hits the clause.
But then you would still have the problem of doing it wrong if it fires before the weapon and you added a character or if it fires after the weapon and you added an enhancement/curse.
-
But then you would still have the problem of doing it wrong if it fires before the weapon and you added a character or if it fires after the weapon and you added an enhancement/curse.
Exactly, which is why I specified I "might" agree, because I'm pretty sure I'd still have the same stance as I currently do, lol.
-
Frankly, I don't see how an unspecific add to battle card can be held to the same OoO standard as a specific add to battle card. And there is sort of a precedence for treating them differently. With a specific search you have to show and with the three non-specific search cards you don't. Is this a different ability entirely? Yes. Was the difference emphasized to prevent cheating? Yes. But we have one ability that has two separate qualifications: one the standard, one the exception. I say the same applies here. A non-specific add to battle can pull one of three things: a Character, an enhancement, or a curse/covenant. Two of these would trigger before the weapon, while only one would have to wait.
The easiest way to resolve this is to rule it the way the two elders who spoke up earlier did. there's no confusion, it makes sense, and you're not shooting yourself in the foot just by putting Nebby or the others into your deck.
-
Browarod, we may have an issue if Evil Spawn were WC, but as it stands, there is nothing in the OoO that would be contentious with that particular card.
So in a mass banding situation with Evil Spawn and a warrior class guy with horses, what order do they happen?
What about blocking with an archer with 2k horses and playing a choose the rescuer card?
I agree that the rule needs to be cleaned up and clarified. I think the cleanest way is to say that the OoO defines when the abilities happen not activate. So Neb activates his ability and searches but if it is a character then it doesn't complete or the second part doesn't happen until after the weapon abilities complete because the OoO defines when that effect happens.
-
So in a mass banding situation with Evil Spawn and a warrior class guy with horses, what order do they happen?
You know, mass banding is an issue regardless. Does each character activate completely, treating the "band" that is bringing them in as an ability to be completed last for the purpose of activating the next character, or does the 'each enters at the same time but the holder chooses the order' thing mean that you would activate abilities except additional bands/CTR/CTB and weapons, then do those in the order defined? I think we have been working under the first assumption, but this is an interesting question as well.
What about blocking with an archer with 2k horses and playing a choose the rescuer card?
That's not an issue, because you are activating abilities on a different card (OoO says "When a single card has more than one special ability...", which for characters also includes their weapons).
I agree that the rule needs to be cleaned up and clarified. I think the cleanest way is to say that the OoO defines when the abilities happen not activate.
Agree wholeheartedly. As I have said before, I am arguing my position based on how I see the rules currently reading. It could definitely use some work IMO :)
-
If you begin a search with Nebby you have to go all the way to the end (the card going to your hand or battle), you can't just stop it in the middle. Abilities don't work like that, lol.
In mass banding situations, you'd follow the OoO for sure, but as you said the OoO only applies to individual cards so if you choose to have Rachel take effect before Zebulun, for example using Creation of the World, then Rachel completely finishes (including the band if you so choose) and then Zebulun activates. You don't postpone parts of some cards until after other cards (except weapons), that's not what the OoO is for.
I'm still not seeing where the current OoO needs clarification. Maybe if you post what your clarification would be that might help me understand?
-
I'm still not seeing where the current OoO needs clarification. Maybe if you post what your clarification would be that might help me understand?
I agree with galadgawyn that I would like the OoO to just list the order in which things occur, not to have open-ended language at any part. So, only the first part would really change, but it'd be nice it it were presented more as an linear order instead of a lot of stuff together (including non-specific clauses).
1. All abilities printed on the card except band, CTR, and CTB.
2. Gained abilities (if character).
3. Weapon (if character).
4. Band.
5. Choose the Rescuer/Blocker.
-
browarod, I think you're newer to the game so you might not remember this but I'm pretty sure those OoO rules were intended to mean that in a group of abilities activating, banding and then choose opponent always happens last no matter what even if that ability is on a different card. I'm not sure it is as relevant to today's metagame but at the time (2003?) it was a major concern that people would be able to choose a blocker and then band in an ignore hero to auto win the rescue.
While cards don't normally pause in the middle, the alternative interpretations also have inconsistencies from how things are supposed to work.
In mass banding situations, you'd follow the OoO for sure, but as you said the OoO only applies to individual cards so if you choose to have Rachel take effect before Zebulun, for example using Creation of the World, then Rachel completely finishes (including the band if you so choose) and then Zebulun activates. You don't postpone parts of some cards until after other cards (except weapons), that's not what the OoO is for.
This is wrong. The rule I found:
When a banding ability adds multiple cards into battle, add them in any order and activate them one at a time in the order the cards were added. Exception: Abilities that add other characters to battle activate after all other abilities on cards banded into battle.
-
Well I'm just going off the OoO itself which specifies "When a single card has more than one special ability (including gained abilities), perform the abilities in this order:" and the only exception to that is weapons, not any other cards. :P
-
Well I'm just going off the OoO itself which specifies "When a single card has more than one special ability (including gained abilities), perform the abilities in this order:" and the only exception to that is weapons, not any other cards. :P
No, galadgawyn is actually correct, as the quote provided is from the REG's clarifications on Band, and therefore establishes its own additional rules to the OoO. If you use a card that bands in multiple cards, those cards all complete all abilities except those that add any other characters to battle (same argument as is being had here on what that means), and then the adding of characters happens. It is not an exception in the OoO, but a clarification in band for this situation, so galadgawyn is absolutely correct.
-
I've never had anyone disagree when I used a banding Genesis character before a different Genesis character after playing CotW. Are we sure that clarification is correct? I guess it makes sense since it follows the same procedure as the OoO, I've just never seen it played that way.
-
Are we sure that clarification is correct?
It is a direct quote from the REG, and I don't see how it could be misinterpreted or added accidentally. It is certainly the current rule.
-
Are we sure that clarification is correct?
It is a direct quote from the REG, and I don't see how it could be misinterpreted or added accidentally. It is certainly the current rule.
Well, it wouldn't be the first thing that was "changed" with the release of the new REG. ::)