New Redemption Grab Bag now includes an assortment of 500 cards from five (5) different expansion sets. Available at Cactus website.
"Discard an evil card in battle to shuffle all remaining characters in battle into owners' decks. If the current rescuer doesn't have the most Redeemed Souls, he may begin a new battle."
"Place on your clay, red, or teal N.T. Hero: Protect Hero from black, capture, and opponents' Dominants. While Hero is in battle, protect up to X Lost Souls from opponent's cards."
"A card that is immune or protected cannot be targeted by an ability that is on a card to which it is immune or protected, nor an enhancement played on that card (if a character)."
"A shuffle ability targets the cards that are to be shuffled."
A shuffle ability targets the cards that are to be shuffled.
I know he has played MTG, though the only card games I ever see him play are Hearthstone (which is entirely digital and not really relevant to this) and Redemption.This is also far from the first time he's tried to make a bogus ruling when the rules were inconvenient for him.
Quote from: ArmedKevin117 on August 29, 2017, 02:19:06 PMThis is also far from the first time he's tried to make a bogus ruling when the rules were inconvenient for him.The important part is that you, at least, did understand the correct way to play it and made a post to get a second opinion. It's never a bad idea to make a rule questions post, even for things that seem trivially simple.
This is also far from the first time he's tried to make a bogus ruling when the rules were inconvenient for him.
Quote from: Kevinthedude on August 29, 2017, 02:24:21 PMQuote from: ArmedKevin117 on August 29, 2017, 02:19:06 PMThis is also far from the first time he's tried to make a bogus ruling when the rules were inconvenient for him.The important part is that you, at least, did understand the correct way to play it and made a post to get a second opinion. It's never a bad idea to make a rule questions post, even for things that seem trivially simple.Yeah, but if he tries to pull that at a tournament he's hosting I'll be overruled in a second.
Judges and referees are not permitted to play in any of the categories that they are officiating.
Quote from: ArmedKevin117 on August 29, 2017, 02:28:05 PMQuote from: Kevinthedude on August 29, 2017, 02:24:21 PMQuote from: ArmedKevin117 on August 29, 2017, 02:19:06 PMThis is also far from the first time he's tried to make a bogus ruling when the rules were inconvenient for him.The important part is that you, at least, did understand the correct way to play it and made a post to get a second opinion. It's never a bad idea to make a rule questions post, even for things that seem trivially simple.Yeah, but if he tries to pull that at a tournament he's hosting I'll be overruled in a second.He shouldn't be judging a category he is playing in, at the very least not his own games. If he is that's an issue beyond simply ruling poorly.Quote from: Host GuideJudges and referees are not permitted to play in any of the categories that they are officiating.
"Shouldn't," but not required to if it is a local or district tournament, particularly if there are no other players who are experienced enough to judge. If there is an odd number of players they can either agree for the judge to play and judge or someone can get a buy.
Quote from: YourMathTeacher on July 26, 2010, 03:39:35 PMHmmm.... the rules say that there has to be a non-playing judge. Are we just tossing that rule because we trust each other? Does Rob give his stamp of approval on this policy? I would certainly love to play in my own tournaments.Officially the Tournament Guide States that the judge/host is permitted to play in a category he is not judging provided it does not interfer with his duties judging the other categories. That said, I don't enforce this on local play groups if the players want their host to play with them and believe that the host/judge will rule fairly for everyone. Last year I hosted the NC State Tournament here in Hayesville. Clift Crysel, Eric Largent, Tyler Stevens, the Kamke family and a few others joined the Andersons for the tournament. I was planning to judge and not play. Those who traveled here asked that I play too. I joined in and we had a great time. I can't recall any problems. I can't see it making sense in a big multi-category event. There is just too much to do as host. But, for events of 20 players or less, it's okay with me if it's okay with the players there.
Hmmm.... the rules say that there has to be a non-playing judge. Are we just tossing that rule because we trust each other? Does Rob give his stamp of approval on this policy? I would certainly love to play in my own tournaments.
Quote from: Watchman492 on August 29, 2017, 02:37:21 PM"Shouldn't," but not required to if it is a local or district tournament, particularly if there are no other players who are experienced enough to judge. If there is an odd number of players they can either agree for the judge to play and judge or someone can get a buy. I agree for the most part. Tournaments that level in my area tend to be extremely small and I do regularly judge other people's games in the same category I am playing but still not ever a question from an individual game I am participating in. Even with the most limited of options, a player should never be judging their own game.
