Cactus Game Design Message Boards

This came up in yesterday's tourney and need clarification.

Outsides (B/G)
"If blocking and opponent has more cards in play than you.."

If he uses one of his heroes to band to one of my heroes that has a placed enh on that hero, and by banding to that hero with the placed enh on it causes my opponent to now have more cards under his control, would the cited portion of Outsiders' ability work (he's temporarily controlling my two cards) or does it not qualify for "more cards in play than you" since it doesn't say "more cards that he controls than you"?  In other words, would him now having the hero and placed enh count as the "more cards in play" or not since he doesn't permanently control them?

30 Pieces of Silver
(play-as) "After a battle, discard a Hero that was in that battle.  Negate David's Harp.  Limit Twice."

Is this a mandatory discard of any hero that's in battle, or does the controller of 30 Pieces chose when to use the discard?  For example, if the controller of 30 Pieces does a rescue attempt or battle challenge, and his Hero survives the battle, does it automatically get discarded or does he chose when to do the discard?

Seize Him!
"...look at opponent's hand and search their deck:  Set aside a good card for 3 turns."

Is it 3 of my turns (my upkeep) or three of my opponent's?  Also, when the 3 turns is up, the good card that was set aside goes back to the original location it was set aside from, correct?

I believe the cards a player "has" means cards that the player "owns and controls", not just controls. If that's accurate then the the your banded Hero doesn't count for either player when determining "more" for Outsiders. The placed Enhancement doesn't change control so it still counts.

So basically 30 pieces of silver is useless!?
The only time you could use it is if you weren't going to make a rescue attempt (when does that ever happen) and you hope to kill your opponent's hero after they make a rescue attempt. Crazy! I'm pretty sure that was not the way it was supposed to work originally.

It's absolutely not. We used to play it similarly to the Fool soul back in  Warriors days. It was intended to get rid of strong guys like TSA,  Captain,  and Gabriel you may not be able to block more than once or twice. It was a meta card in those days along with Chariot of Fire!

Seems the general consensus is that it's useless as is.

Thanks for the replies.

Concerning Gabe's reply, it was a little confusing to me and I'm not sure I understand completely, and it sounded as if a second elder opinion was needed.  What's confusing to me is "the banded hero not counting for either player" (so what would the total number be for each player when he bands to the hero with the enh?) and "the placed enh doesn't change control so it still counts."  It still counts for what, exactly?

Let's say I had 9 cards in play and my opponent had 7 cards in play, then he bands to my hero with the enh.  Does he now have 9 cards in play and I have 7 cards in play?

He still has 7, you now only have 8. The placed enhancement is still owned and controlled by you, but the Hero is not.

When a player bands to an opponent's character, neither player "has" that character because "has" requires ownership and control.

I’m sorry but that’s not making sense to me. Why would nobody own or control the hero when clearly someone does? And why would the banded hero not be owned or controlled by anyone but the enh on him is still owned and controlled by me? Isn’t this more complicated than it needs to be? How would the average tournament host or player know this?

Quote from: Watchman492 on July 01, 2018, 02:23:51 PM

Quote from: The Guardian on July 01, 2018, 01:57:31 PM

He still has 7, you now only have 8. The placed enhancement is still owned and controlled by you, but the Hero is not.

When a player bands to an opponent's character, neither player "has" that character because "has" requires ownership and control.

I’m sorry but that’s not making sense to me. Why would nobody own or control the hero when clearly someone does? And why would the banded hero not be owned or controlled by anyone but the enh on him is still owned and controlled by me? Isn’t this more complicated than it needs to be? How would the average tournament host or player know this?

The hero is owner by one player but controlled by another. It's not that neither of them have ownership or control, its that neither of them have both.

Then why doesn’t that apply to the placed enh as well?

Because placed enhancements are always owned and controlled by the player who placed them--regardless of where they got placed. That's outlined in the REG.

Is the part about when a hero is banded it’s not being owned or controlled by anyone also in the REG? If so, I didn’t see it. Regardless, why would the banded hero still not be considered owned by the one who’s territory it can from but a placed enh is?

The Hero is owned by whoever's deck (or Reserve) it came from. See Owner in the REG Glossary.

If the Hero is banded into battle, it is temporarily controlled by the player controlling that side of battle. Banding to a character does not change the control of cards placed on that character.

Thx for the REG reference. But the question of why the banded hero not being considered to be owned by “anyone” hasn’t been answered yet. It is still owned by the player whose deck it originated. So why wouldn’t the banded hero not be considered owned when counted towards the number of cards the owner has when compared to the other player for the purpose of Outsiders’ ability (or other cards/scenarios similarly worded)?

I think "opponent has more cards in play than you" translates as "if the number of opponent's cards in play is greater than the number of your cards in play", which by the definition of opponent's card (under Opponent in the Glossary) does not count cards that are not both owned and controlled by the same player.

So imagine a tournament host trying to find the answer to this question during a timed game.  If the host (or another player) isn't familiar with these particular definitions and rules, it would have taken quite a long time for the host to have searched for the answer and figured it out (when one card is not counted towards "has" (the banded hero) while the other is: the enh).  It's a good thing the host made the right call, although I don't believe it was because he knew the exact reasoning that was spelled out here.

Thanks to all who responded.

I guess that it is not spelled out exactly how I mentioned, but here are the relevant entries:

Permanent Control
If a player has permanent control of a card, then he can treat that card as if it came from his
deck. By default, a player has permanent control of all cards on the playing surface that he
owns. A player also has permanent control of all cards in their hand. A player may gain
permanent control of an opponent’s card with a take or give effect that targets that card, or by
using an exchange effect that exchanges one of the player’s cards with an opponent’s card.

Temporary Control
A player has temporary control of a card when they are able to use that card as one of their
own but do not have permanent control of the card. A player may gain temporary control of
an opponent’s card with a band effect that targets that card.

When you use a band ability to band to an opponent's character, you gain temporary control of that character. However, you do not gain control of cards placed on that character. (Note--weapons are equipped, not placed, so you would gain temporary control of weapons and thus be able to use the abilities).

Correct--Joy requires that it be placed on "your Clay or White" Hero. If you have banded to an opponent's character, that character is not yours.

That is why banding to an opponent's Children of Light allowed it to be discarded by Christian Martyr despite having Armor/Fruit protection.

Yes, that would still work because the condition is still true.

From the original question about Outsiders, Call would count for it's owner however, not the player controlling Isaiah.