Cactus Game Design Message Boards

I think the Play As for PB (C) should read: Negate abilities with "repel" or "ignore", since preventing words doesn't really mean anything in today's game. So then the question is, is 7YoFs negate one ability or 2 (i.e. is negate draw and ignore abilities shorthand for "Negate draw abilities. Negate ignore abilities.") I could see an argument either way on that, but I would lean toward no, and therefore PB would actually prevent the entire negate ability of 7YoF. That said, it would probably make more sense to simply give PB an errata that says "Prevent ignore abilities with "ignore" or "repel" in the ability", but it's another case of does it really matter?

I think it might actually stop the whole card. i had a thing like this many years ago with Hamans plot exposed. I killed something that negates discard abilities, and it was ruled at the time that it works.

That's a slightly different situation, since it's simply targeting the card based on a word in the card. That should clearly work. However, this doesn't say negate cards with "ignore" or "repel" it just says prevent the words ignore and repel, which as I said earlier, doesn't really mean anything.

Quote

That said, it would probably make more sense to simply give PB an errata that says "Prevent ignore abilities with "ignore" or "repel" in the ability", but it's another case of does it really matter?

Probably not, but might depend on the errata - that errata stops something like 12 cards.  If it was flipped ("Ignores" or "Repels" in the ability), there might be some use, utilizing the cards it doesn't stop.

Well, since in reality PB (C) generally stops 0 cards no matter which way it goes (since no one uses it) it probably doesn't matter either way. However, the errata I would propose would keep it more in line with what the card does say. In any case, it will probably continue on being an obscure card few people will use, since it has been reprinted with a more useful ability anyway.

PB (and HoH, before the errata) were unique in that they didn't target the whole card, like I think all of the other cards that reference specific words.

Speaking of HoH, is this errata correct?  I thought the D versions were errata'd to be the same as the Priests version, not the other way around.
Holy of Holies (all versions) - The words negate, interrupt, and prevent on all character cards are prevented. Holy of Holies cannot be negated. [Note: if HoH is deactivated or discarded, it continues to function until the end of the current phase].

I think that errata was functionally correct previous to the introduction of TC characters, but now probably needs an update, since characters can now negate things in phases other than the battle phase. The main intention of the errata was the same as the intention of the second printing, to stop loops (you attack with The Strong Angel, I block and play Men as Gods to negate and discard HoH, TSA kicks in an negates Men as Gods, etc.) Thus I think that only the 1st print version should be errata'd to match the 2nd print version, and both should have an errata to account for the odd "negate the words" wording, but that they should remain distinct from the Priests version, which only CBN during the battle phase. I'm not sure if that would cause any loops or not at this point, but if it did, then we'd have to consider them all to have "CBN all the time".

I can see an errata there to change PB to "negate ignore and repel abilities," since that is clearly the intent and as mentioned it really does nothing in the modern terminology (since preventing words doesn't stop abilities).  I'd probably prefer that to "negate abilities with..." but I can see that being further from the original wording.  And interesting point brought up about whether Famine has one negate ability or two, so it 'matters' somewhat.