Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: czepp on July 10, 2011, 07:26:58 PM
-
Let's say I converted my opponent's evil character into a hero brigade color of my choice.
#1.) If that character is a warrior class, does the WC enhancement already placed on that evil character stay while he/she is converted?
#2.) Does the special ability of the evil character remain, or is it negated?
-
The WC enhancement sticks, and it's ability still works.
As long as the evil character's ability doesn't harm a hero or do something that is unheroic (loose definition) it sticks.
For instance, Woman as Snares' ability would still work because she is capturing evil characters, but Disbeliving Sadducees ability wouldn't work because it removes heroes from the game.
-
The converted character loses all abilities that:
-target a hero
-allow them to play an evil enhancement
WaS won't work, as she says "When blocking"
-
The converted character loses all abilities that:
-target a hero
-allow them to play an evil enhancement
WaS won't work, as she says "When blocking"
I think your are incorrect on that first point, I think they lose all abilities that "harm" heroes, not just target them. Normal heroes target other heroes all the time.
-
Korunks is correct. The REG (http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/default.htm?turl=defaultconditions13.htm) sums it up very nicely.
If an Evil Character is converted to a Hero, it’s special ability works as long as it does not harm Heroes (e.g., the special ability of Otho does not work as a Hero because it would be discarding himself, a Hero). Game rules are still operative (e.g., Heroes may not use evil enhancements or band to Evil Characters).
-
Korunks is correct. The REG (http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/default.htm?turl=defaultconditions13.htm) sums it up very nicely.
If an Evil Character is converted to a Hero, it’s special ability works as long as it does not harm Heroes (e.g., the special ability of Otho does not work as a Hero because it would be discarding himself, a Hero). Game rules are still operative (e.g., Heroes may not use evil enhancements or band to Evil Characters).
And the REG also defines what "Harm" means. Specifically...
Harm
See Negative Effect
-and-
Negative Effect
A negative effect is any effect from cards not of the same alignment (i.e., good, evil, or neutral) targeting a character.
And since a converted evil character is now of good alignment, absolutely nothing he or she does will "harm" another hero (by the definition of harm). So the passage that Gabe quotes form the REG contradicts itself.
This has been a known issue ever since the "harm" redefinition was floated. For consistency sake, can we please get clarification on what EC abilities convert?
-
It doesn't contradict itself if you interpret it correctly. ;) It should probably be changed because I know more than one player has been confused by the way it's worded. The "harm" or "negative effect" is talking about the ability prior to conversion. Before the EC is converted does it harm a Hero? Yes = ability doesn't convert. No = it does convert.
-
Now what if an Evil Characters ability "harms" a captured hero does it convert? I.E. can a converted Salome discard a captured hero?
-
It doesn't contradict itself if you interpret it correctly. ;) It should probably be changed because I know more than one player has been confused by the way it's worded. The "harm" or "negative effect" is talking about the ability prior to conversion. Before the EC is converted does it harm a Hero? Yes = ability doesn't convert. No = it does convert.
Really? To make it clear to me, can we look at a simple example...
I have Sapphira. As an EC, does her by the numbers SA harm a hero? By the definition of "harm" it certainly does. We have always played that BTN abilities convert, however. Are you saying that Sapphira's SA does not convert?
I would have no real complaints with that--and it would be consistent. What it would mean, however, is that the vast majority of evil SAs would not convert. This would be a huge change to how I (and I believe most others) have ruled this in the past.
-
I think this should go in the unresolved rulings thread. A few years ago (2007?) this was debated and the rule changed several times in the same tournament year. It ended with Rob announcing we were going to get a list of what did and did not convert to finally settle this. I never saw that list. I wonder if that is waiting on the new Reg to get released?
I agree that Gabe's answer might work but that it would be a change from how most people I know (if not all) have played it.
This is also not a complete answer because it doesn't cover things like abilites that could harm a hero but don't necessarily do that. Like "discard an Egyptian" which potentially target a hero or evil character but are decided by the player's choice.
It also lets many non heroic abilities like: shuffle a lost soul, increase evil characters, search for Asherah Pole, etc convert while stopping abilities like Sapphira's that make sense as a hero. I personally think the original "in the nature of a hero" worked better than any of the unclear attempts since then.
P.S. Can heros like Women as Snares now be "blocking" in response to a taunt? What do you call your hero blocking an opponent's taunt?
-
It doesn't contradict itself if you interpret it correctly. ;) It should probably be changed because I know more than one player has been confused by the way it's worded. The "harm" or "negative effect" is talking about the ability prior to conversion. Before the EC is converted does it harm a Hero? Yes = ability doesn't convert. No = it does convert.
Really? To make it clear to me, can we look at a simple example...
I have Sapphira. As an EC, does her by the numbers SA harm a hero? By the definition of "harm" it certainly does. We have always played that BTN abilities convert, however. Are you saying that Sapphira's SA does not convert?
I would have no real complaints with that--and it would be consistent. What it would mean, however, is that the vast majority of evil SAs would not convert. This would be a huge change to how I (and I believe most others) have ruled this in the past.
Sapphira's ability doesn't target characters, it only targets abilities. If I/P/N abilities targeted cards, and not just their abilities, then Benedictus couldn't negate Caesarea Phillipi. So Sapphira doesn't harm heroes.
I do agree that there is still some confusion surrounding the issue, and that it should be resolved. It has made sense to me for the most part, but I can see how it might be complicated to others. I'll try to bring it up on the other side.
-
Now what if an Evil Characters ability "harms" a captured hero does it convert? I.E. can a converted Salome discard a captured hero?
and for the record, Captured Heroes aren't Really "Heroes",right? i know there have been threads about this surrounding whether captured heros retain their identifiers for sake of cards that need certain factions in play to function (e.g. Iron Pan Needs a Bab in play)
-
Look this seemed pretty cut and dry to me. If a characters special ability targets hero's then it doesn't convert. If it can target anything then it doesn't. You guys are looking at harm the wrong way. Take the Sapphira example. yes, when she's an evil character her special ability harms heroes in the sense that it negates their special abilities. But that is only because at the time she is in battle with a hero. If she is converted, she is no longer fighting against heroes, so her ability does not harm them.
Simple breakdown that may later be overruled, but for now its a good guideline.
Does the special ability specifically target hereos? (i.e. capture a hero)
Yes: Then it doesn't work when they are converted.
No: Then it's still in effect
-
Just out of curiosity, are there any special abilities that target, but do not harm, a card of the opposite alignment?
-
Just out of curiosity, are there any special abilities that target, but do not harm, a card of the opposite alignment?
No...harm is defined as being targeted by cards of a different alignment, based on the REG quote MJB provided. So technically, Elijah's Mantle "harms" heroes. Harm is one of the things that will likely be overhauled/clarified in the new REG, but for now we have a system that is fairly sufficient, with perhaps a few holes.
-
few holes? I still have no idea how to rule at a tournament. I thought I knew what was going on, but somehow, not?
-
Look this seemed pretty cut and dry to me. If a characters special ability targets hero's then it doesn't convert. If it can target anything then it doesn't. You guys are looking at harm the wrong way. Take the Sapphira example. yes, when she's an evil character her special ability harms heroes in the sense that it negates their special abilities. But that is only because at the time she is in battle with a hero. If she is converted, she is no longer fighting against heroes, so her ability does not harm them.
Simple breakdown that may later be overruled, but for now its a good guideline.
Does the special ability specifically target hereos? (i.e. capture a hero)
Yes: Then it doesn't work when they are converted.
No: Then it's still in effect
This is simply incorrect (currently), the rule as it listed in the REG is anything that harms a hero does not convert. It is entirely possible to convert an Evil Character that could band to a hero. Based on your wording that ability would not convert because it could target a hero.
-
Saph can band to a warrior-class philly. This doesn't directly target a hero, but if converted, he could band to Ittai. Since it doesn't directly target a hero, it'd be converted too.
/My bet:5 minutes until I'm told otherwise.
Side question: If I convert both Ananias and Sapphria, can they still band?
-
Side question: If I convert both Ananias and Sapphria, can they still band?
I believe so, yes.
-
A few guidelines that I use when determining if an ability converts:
Does the ability say if blocking? If yes, then the ability doesn't convert, if no, then go to next question.
Does the ability cause an impossible situation, like a Hero banding to an Evil Character or playing an Evil Enhancement? If yes, then the ability doesn't convert, if no then go on to next question.
Is there any Hero in the game whose special ability can do exactly what the converted EC would be able to do? If yes, then the ability does convert, if not go on to next question.
Does the ability target characters at all? If no, then the ability does convert, if yes, go to the next question.
Would the converted ability allow for the discard, capture, removal from the game, shuffle, withdraw, ignore, or set-aside of a Hero, or would it cause a side battle involving two Heroes? If yes, then the ability doesn't convert, if no, then it does.
Following these guidelines will make you correct at least 98.7% of the time. The rest of the time you might have to make a judgment call.
In your example, Saph can't band to Ittai, because his ability actually says WC Philly EC. However, Ananias can band to Sapphira if they are both converted.
-
If Ananias is converted before Sapphira, wouldn't it violate your "impossible situation" clause? Does that magically get undone if Sapphira is converted later?
-
If Ananias is converted before Sapphira, wouldn't it violate your "impossible situation" clause? Does that magically get undone if Sapphira is converted later?
I should clarify that all EC's that have SAs keep their SAs when converted. The only thing is that some of them can work as Heroes, while others can't. So while Ananias is a Hero and Sapphira is an EC, Ananias still has the SA "May band to Sapphira, CBN" but it doesn't do anything unless a Hero Sapphira is in play.
-
Sapphira's ability doesn't target characters, it only targets abilities. If I/P/N abilities targeted cards, and not just their abilities, then Benedictus couldn't negate Caesarea Phillipi. So Sapphira doesn't harm heroes.
"Hmmmmmmmmm.... That is an interesting way to approach the question," he says in a serious intended as a compliment sort of way.
One tangentially-related question...
I should clarify that all EC's that have SAs keep their SAs when converted.
Does the same hold true when a hero is corrupted? Is the original hero SA simply unusable or is the SA actually removed?
-
it is ruled that heros abilities to not convert when "corrupted"
what if a hero is holding a weapon and is "corrupted"? does the weapons ability convert?
-
A few guidelines that I use when determining if an ability converts:
Does the ability say if blocking? If yes, then the ability doesn't convert, if no, then go to next question.
Does the ability cause an impossible situation, like a Hero banding to an Evil Character or playing an Evil Enhancement? If yes, then the ability doesn't convert, if no then go on to next question.
Is there any Hero in the game whose special ability can do exactly what the converted EC would be able to do? If yes, then the ability does convert, if not go on to next question.
Does the ability target characters at all? If no, then the ability does convert, if yes, go to the next question.
Would the converted ability allow for the discard, capture, removal from the game, shuffle, withdraw, ignore, or set-aside of a Hero, or would it cause a side battle involving two Heroes? If yes, then the ability doesn't convert, if no, then it does.
Following these guidelines will make you correct at least 98.7% of the time. The rest of the time you might have to make a judgment call.
In your example, Saph can't band to Ittai, because his ability actually says WC Philly EC. However, Ananias can band to Sapphira if they are both converted.
This is similar to how I think about converted EC SAs.
what if a hero is holding a weapon and is "corrupted"? does the weapons ability convert?
I think that WC enhs all convert with their characters. So I would say, "yes".
-
Does the same hold true when a hero is corrupted? Is the original hero SA simply unusable or is the SA actually removed?
The original Hero SA is still there, it's just unusable. Thus a corrupted David still has a special ability, he just can never use it.
-
Does the same hold true when a hero is corrupted? Is the original hero SA simply unusable or is the SA actually removed?
The original Hero SA is still there, it's just unusable. Thus a corrupted David still has a special ability, he just can never use it.
This is important in considering whether a card is a "banding card," for example. The character can still be a banding card, even if it has no legal targets for banding.
I think that WC enhs all convert with their characters. So I would say, "yes".
This is confirmed in the Rulebook p.35:
If a warrior is discarded or captured, or returned to hand, all weapon cards on the character are discarded. If a warrior is converted, weapons remain on the character. The special ability on the weapon continues to function provided it does not conflict with the nature of a Hero or Evil Character.
-
I didn't think this would be a big debate! lol
-
Alright alright....
Now this all came about because of the game me and Czepp were playing. He converted my "Archers of Kedar" which special ability is "May band to any warrior Evil Character. May discard any Hero in a territory but then discard Archers of Kendar at end of battle."
So, I get it. The card can't band. Fine, but the card has two abilities in one. Your saying that the entire ability is negated because it hurts a hero. But I have a card "Mephibosheth" which special ability says, "Discard this Hero after battle if David is not in play." (please correct me if I'm wrong) but this is a negeatice effect. Why is it helpful to discard my own hero because of his own special ability so why is it considered an "impossible" situation to have a hero harm a hero. So would the entire ability Of "Archer of Kedar negated or just the part about banding?
It is believable that one hero harms another, believe me I've seen it many times in real life and there are several incidents in the Bible. Even Redemtion has an example another card I have is "Christians suing another" which cause Heros to fight other Heros.
It (IS) possible and historically accurate to have chrisians fight one another. I see no reason that the specially abilities be negated based on the concept of "imposible situation"
( all the cards I mentioned in this post I have sitting in front of me this second)
-
Christian Suing Another is an evil card, though, that's the difference. Evil cards can cause heroes to do bad things to each other, but good cards won't generally do that except sometimes they harm themselves (like Shibboleth or Benjamin) or if it's an example from the Bible where harm to a good person caused a greater good to happen (like Samson's Sacrifice).
-
What has been going on since I lost internet? This is the second thread in a row that is overturning a rule that nobody ever said anything about being overturned. It's been ruled that abilities convert unless they target a Hero ever since the problem with the definition of "harm" was brought up. Now we've reverted back to the old, broken definition?
-
In the Old testament King David has any army raised up against him by Absalom who is one of his sons. David is forced to flee the city.
In Acts Paul and Barnabas are arguing over wheather John Mark should travel with them. They argued so sharply that they separated and went there separate ways.
Nither of those incidents hand a positive outcome. So, why can a hero not keep or use a specialy ability against a hero. I think weather they are converted to a hero or not is irrelevant. We are all born as sinners and all have fallen short of the glory if God. In a sense every hero in the game was "converted" at some point.
-
It's been ruled that abilities convert unless they target a Hero ever since the problem with the definition of "harm" was brought up. Now we've reverted back to the old, broken definition?
[/quote]
I just think there both broken.
There is no reason a hero couldn't harm another hero.
Is it tragic and harmful, but it has... Is... And will happen again
-
Jmbeers, They have ruled that Heroes can't harm other Heroes and that is not likely to change, Mephi's ability that discards himself if David is not in play is not targeting another hero, but himself. They are not the same situation.
What has been going on since I lost internet? This is the second thread in a row that is overturning a rule that nobody ever said anything about being overturned. It's been ruled that abilities convert unless they target a Hero ever since the problem with the definition of "harm" was brought up. Now we've reverted back to the old, broken definition?
I guess so, it would be nice to know which version of the rules we are expected to use sometimes.
-
Jmbeers, They have ruled that Heroes can't harm other Heroes and that is not likely to change, Mephi's ability that discards himself if David is not in play is not targeting another hero, but himself. They are not the same situation.
What has been going on since I lost internet? This is the second thread in a row that is overturning a rule that nobody ever said anything about being overturned. It's been ruled that abilities convert unless they target a Hero ever since the problem with the definition of "harm" was brought up. Now we've reverted back to the old, broken definition?
I guess so, it would be nice to know which version of the rules we are expected to use sometimes.
In case you guys are referring to my post on the topic, those were more guidelines that I sometimes use. I didn't mean to suggest that anything had actually changed. I'm fairly certain that any ability that doesn't target a Hero when the character is an EC converts as long as it doesn't break any game rules. My guidelines were more about how to think through the logic, rather than any set ruling.
-
In the Old testament King David has any army raised up against him by Absalom who is one of his sons. David is forced to flee the city.
In Acts Paul and Barnabas are arguing over wheather John Mark should travel with them. They argued so sharply that they separated and went there separate ways.
Absalom and his soldiers are evil characters, and they do nasty things to David, so that's represented already.
If there isn't already an evil card about this, then there totally could be. Evil actions, even between good people, are represented in Redemption as evil cards. Saul's Disobedient Sacrifice, for example, is an evil card despite the fact that there is a King Saul hero.
-
If there isn't already an evil card about this, then there totally could be. Evil actions, even between good people, are represented in Redemption as evil cards. Saul's Disobedient Sacrifice, for example, is an evil card despite the fact that there is a King Saul hero.
He's also an Evil Character. There's two versions of him.
-
If there isn't already an evil card about this, then there totally could be. Evil actions, even between good people, are represented in Redemption as evil cards. Saul's Disobedient Sacrifice, for example, is an evil card despite the fact that there is a King Saul hero.
He's also an Evil Character. There's two versions of him.
Okay, if you need another example, Aaron and Miriam's Dissent. They are both green (and, in Aaron's case, teal) heroes. AaMD is a Brown enhancement.
Aaron and Miriam’s Dissent (H)
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Brown • Ability: 3 / 3 • Class: none • Special Ability: Decrease all O.T. heroes in play by 2/2 until the end of the turn. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Numbers 12:1 • Availability: H Deck
-
I'm not arguing that the rules don't work. They make sense and I just played a game with a conversion where we needed to follow the explanations on the form for how to deal with converted abilities. The process worked well and the game played without another catch. I just think all the conditions could have been skipped in the first place. I just don't see a conceivable reason why in the very first place that a hero can't harm a hero.
Again, the rules work... But were pointless to begin with. Could have just kept all the abilities and simply reversed the rolls of good and evil. But at this point, it really doesn't matter.
-
From a game standpoint, you could totally make an argument that preventing demons from being redeemed is pointless (or even detrimental to the game in some regards), however the Elders/Rob decided to make that ruling for theological reasons. It's similar with heroes not harming each other. In terms of game mechanics, either way could work, the Elders/Rob just chose to create heroes and good cards that don't generally harm heroes (except in the circumstances which I mentioned before) and also to create rules so that converted evil characters don't either. Unlike other card games, there is more than just game rules/mechanics to be considered when creating rules/cards for Redemption. Sometimes theological soundness is broken (*cough*Falling Away*cough*), and other times it's upheld to an extreme (redeeming demons), but most of the time they attempt to keep a balance.
-
Haha (I'm not even getting close to that cold of yours. That thing could light this fourm on fier with off topic debates)
I see your point, and yea it's foolish to expect a card game to be entierly accurate to theological parameters. Besides those parameters would change every time you drove 5 miles.
Don't think I'm attacking the game. In the opposite, I love and enjoy playing it. I was never looking for a rule change. I can see why they chose the rules to play the way they do. The ONLY thing I was ever trying to say, for a third time, was why was this ever an issue in the first place...
No rule change.
No big secret .
No rewriting the story of Jesus so he has a wife that is protected by the free masons.
-
No rewriting the story of Jesus so he has a wife that is protected by the free masons.
I see what you did there. ;)
-
Props 8)
-
We're not really arguing about whether abilities that damage Heroes should be able to convert. We're questioning why the definition "targets" heroes, which was simple and worked, has reverted back to "harms" which is complicated and broken.
-
We're not really arguing about whether abilities that damage Heroes should be able to convert. We're questioning why the definition "targets" heroes, which was simple and worked, has reverted back to "harms" which is complicated and broken.
I don't think so. With Gabe's clarification (harms before conversion), and the good Prof's explanation of why Sapphira would work (targeting and whatnot), aren't the two definitions basically one and the same? Or, put another way, can you give me an example of a card that would work differently under the two definitions?
-
There shouldn't be a difference, but I often hear from the "harms" crowd things like "Discarding top of deck doesn't convert because it can Harm Heroes."
The real question is between whether conversion hinges on only actual targeting of Heroes by name, or any ability that could target a Hero as an EC.
-
There shouldn't be a difference, but I often hear from the "harms" crowd things like "Discarding top of deck doesn't convert because it can Harm Heroes."
I would find that distinction odd since there are "good" abilities that discard the top card of the deck. Warriors spear is the first that comes to mind. So I would question why that ability would not convert.
-
The real question is between whether conversion hinges on only actual targeting of Heroes by name, or any ability that could target a Hero as an EC.
OK, gotcha. So "Discard an opponent's character from battle" would convert under the "targets explicitly" rule, but would not under the "harms" rule.
-
That's the impression I get from the other side of the aisle, yes.