Cactus Game Design Message Boards

I agree with that line of reasoning. I am still scratching my head as to why the thread went the other way.

I agree, cannot be negated means cannot be negated, no matter what you can never negate a cannot be negated ability

Asaph's CBN SA only grants CBN status against evil cards.  Blessings is a good card, which does not fall under Asaph's CBN.  The only reason that CBN granting SAs are themselves considered CBN is to get around the case where someone would circumvent the intent of the granting and negate a CBN enhancement.  Is that the case here--I don't see how it could be.

Let's say Asaph is in battle and plays a non-banding enhancement involving music. Then for whatever reason Blessings is played. Does Blessings negate the previous musical enhancement?  Of course it does. If it didn't then there is no point in adding "by evil cards" to Asaph's SA. So it is clear that Blessings can negate musical abilities played on Asaph.

So, if musical enhancements played by Asaph are *not* CBN against good cards, then Asaph's CBN granting SA would not be CBN against good cards.

If a card states that it cannot be negated, then it cannot be interrupted, prevented, redirected, or negated.

So are you saying that you believe that in the case I presented above, Blessings would *not* negate a musical ability played by Asaph prior to it in the battle?

Michael cannot be negated by anything because he grants cannot be negated by anything status. There's your difference right there.

I agree, cannot be negated means cannot be negated, no matter what you can never negate a cannot be negated ability

You're right, but since Asaph doesn't say that I don't really see how it's at all applicable in this discussion.

Michael cannot be negated by anything because he grants cannot be negated by anything status. There's your difference right there.

The thing is you're making this up out of thin air. Where, in any kind of RULE, is there a distinction? All the REG says is that abilities granting cbn are CANNOT BE NEGATED. You have come up with an imaginary rule that you can be negated by the same cards that can negate your enhancements. That has never been a rule.

There is a rule blanketing "grant cbn" abilities in general. There is none regarding this exact scenario, so I take the blanket rule.

And Gabe's ruling was never confirmed, and isn't quite the same scenario because there is no rule regarding lost souls.

There is a rule blanketing "grant cbn" abilities in general. There is none regarding this exact scenario, so I take the blanket rule.

And Gabe's ruling was never confirmed, and isn't quite the same scenario because there is no rule regarding lost souls.

So you're bias against Lost Souls then? You're perfectly willing to lump "cannot be negated by an evil card" with "cannot be negated" if it's on a hero, but "cbp by a good card" isn't in that group just because it's on a Lost Soul? What about it being a 'blanket rule'? Either you default to it in both cases or neither, but having different opinions on each just serves to invalidate your specific position as a whole. You really should figure out which you believe before arguing against anything.

Can we now have a two-Elder confirmed ruling on this matter to put it to rest?

Due to Gabe's post in the LS thread, I believe we need one of the following:
1. One elder to confirm Gabe's ruling that conditions on the granting of cbn/p/i extend to the granting ability (though 2 confirming elders would be even better). OR
2. Two elders to overrule Gabe and confirm that cbn/p/i granting abilities are always cbn by anything regardless of which they grant and any conditions.

Gabe is correct. (I'm older than Gabe so I must be an elder.)

I'm older than Gabe, too. So as an "elder," I disagree. 

Using the precedent on the Asahel ruling, now that the new REG is out its language replaces any prior rulings. Since the new REG says that any abilities that grant CBN are themselves CBN (and mentions no caveats or exceptions), that is the rule. It will take a new ruling made after the release of the new REG to overturn that. Both sides of the argument are not equally valid in this case.

That would be all well and good if the new REG actually came out and said what you are claiming it does. In the passage quoted, it was providing an explanation for a specific example where the CBN status was granted unconditionally. A case where no one has any dispute about the ruling.
 
The question before us, however, is a different one--namely whether an SA that grants conditional CBN status itself subject to the condition. I think it is (for the reasons laid out earlier); others disagree. I do not think the person who wrote the particular sentence in the REG was actually thinking about conditional CBN in this case. I grant, however, that I could be wrong.

To be honest I am hard pressed to think of an example where this is going to make any difference. Can someone give me a specific example where they think the pro- and anti- forces would come to a different conclusion. Let's look at the example given above...

Yes, Blessings would negate it. But it would NOT negate Asaph's ability, and therefore if your opponent played Bringing Fear, it would NOT negate your musical enhancement, even though blessings DID negate it. In fact, if they played Bringing Fear, that would negate blessings, and then your cbn enhancement would take effect.

OK so I rescue with Asaph and play Blessings and then (since I still have initiative) play a musical enhancement. (I claim Blessing DOES negate Asaph's SA, but I am not sure that is relevant.) This musical enhancement is negated by Blessings. Now you have initiative and play Bringing Fear, which negates Blessings and so Asaph's SA kicks back in because it was an ongoing SA that has been activated.  The musical enhancement would not, however, magically activate at this point. It was negated when it was played and so it stays fizzled. From this point on any additional musical enhancements played by Asaph would not be effected by Bringing Fear.

Are both sides in agreement on this?

Cards have CBN or not when they are played. When the music was played, it gained CBN by Evil cards, but was Negated by a good card. When Bringing Fear was played, it Negated the good Negate, and now the music, not having been negated, takes effect.

I'm not actually sure on this: I think that if a card is negated before it's played, it can't ever activate, but I could be wrong. I think if I was though, it could lead to some odd targeting issues, since you typically don't declare targets when you play a card that is prevented.

FTR, I believe that CBN/CBI/CBP abilities should be treated more like identifiers, in that they are inherent aspects of certain abilities, and cannot be negated. The same would be said of abilities that grant other cards CBN/CBI/CBP I'm not sure how other Elders feel about this though, so I will see what others may say.

If you negate something that prevented an ability, the ability won't try and reactivate.

FTR, I believe that CBN/CBI/CBP abilities should be treated more like identifiers, in that they are inherent aspects of certain abilities, and cannot be negated. The same would be said of abilities that grant other cards CBN/CBI/CBP I'm not sure how other Elders feel about this though, so I will see what others may say.

So is this one elder agreeing that even conditional abilities granting cbn are cannot be negated at all?