Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Rawrlolsauce! on December 20, 2011, 02:08:57 PM
-
I have HHI up. My opponent Gathers his The Generous Widow. He then plays Meeting the Messiah on her during prep phase. Can he convert any of the human ECs in play? It seems like a no to me, but I just want to double check. HHI is kind of an old card and I'm not sure if the artifact is actually doing the ignoring.
Household Idols
Type: Artifact • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Heroes may not band. Good banding cards have no effect. • Play As: Prevent band abilities of Heroes. Ignore good banding cards. • Identifiers: NT, Depicts an Idol, False Religious Practice • Verse: I Corinthians 12:2 • Availability: Apostles booster packs (Ultra Rare)
Gathering of Angels
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Silver • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Set Hero aside for 4 turns. Hero returns with ability to band to any Hero until discarded. • Play As: Set aside Hero for 4 turns. On return, Hero gains the ability "Band to any Hero until discarded." • Identifiers: None • Verse: Matthew 13:41 • Availability: Kings booster packs (Common)
Meeting the Messiah
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Yellow • Ability: 2 / 2 • Class: None • Special Ability: If used by a Luke or John Hero, convert a human Evil Character to a gold Hero. Its owner must draw two cards. • Play As: If used by a Luke Hero or John Hero, convert a human Evil Character to a gold Hero. Its owner must draw two cards. • Identifiers: None • Verse: John 4:42 • Availability: Thesaurus ex Preteritus booster packs ()
-
Oh, this again. Wake me after the 13 pages reach a "consensus."
-
My ruling threads usually don't reach past 1 page because my questions are incredibly dumb. I know she can't enter battle, so I assume the artifact is ignoring her in territory. Like I said, just want to double check.
What if I try to set her aside with The Sabbath instead of playing MTM, also?
-
I would rule he could play the convert because the evil characters aren't the ones doing the ignoring.
-
I have HHI up. My opponent Gathers his The Generous Widow.
Household Idols
Play As: ... Ignore good banding cards. ..
Gathering of Angels
Type: Hero Enh.
Play As: ...gains the ability "Band to any Hero...
How does your opponent even play Gathering of Angels (which is a good banding card)?
-
Let's say he gathered her before I had HHI up.
@CS: I suppose that's true. Does this mean "Household Idols ignores good banding cards"? If that is indeed the case, why can it prevent banding on heroes? That is harming them (different alignments), and you can't harm them if you're ignoring them.
-
Ignore is a special ability that protects a card from being defeated, harmed, or affected by the ignored card. It also prevents the card with ignore from harming or affecting the ignored card. An ignore card stops an ignored character from entering the Field of Battle.
Here's my take. Household Idols is the card doing the ignoring, so that's what's protected from harm against good banding cards. (So they couldn't play a hypothetical territory class enhancement that would discard it, for instance.) The ECs don't factor into this equation at all. As for entering battle, it doesn't matter what's ignoring the Hero, as long as a Hero is being ignored by something, it cannot enter battle.
@CS: I suppose that's true. Does this mean "Household Idols ignores good banding cards"? If that is indeed the case, why can it prevent banding on heroes? That is harming them (different alignments), and you can't harm them if you're ignoring them.
Interrupting/negating/preventing does not fall under the definition of harm (see the big Protection of Angels brouhaha from a couple years back).
-
Here's my take. Household Idols is the card doing the ignoring, so that's what's protected from harm against good banding cards. (So they couldn't play a hypothetical territory class enhancement that would discard it, for instance.) The ECs don't factor into this equation at all. As for entering battle, it doesn't matter what's ignoring the Hero, as long as a Hero is being ignored by something, it cannot enter battle.
I like this way of thinking.
Interrupting/negating/preventing does not fall under the definition of harm (see the big Protection of Angels brouhaha from a couple years back).
Thanks for bringing back that painful memory :)
-
Bringin' it back 2009 style. Here's a quote from Rob about Household Idols during a Reuben's Torn Clothes thread:
...artifacts have to work differently from characters because of how each activates and interacts with Battle. Ignores on artifacts such as Household Idols are universal ignores whereas ignores on characters allow the character to ignore but are not universal ignores (unless a card specifically states otherwise).
That seems to support my position. Evil Characters aren't ignoring anything, and are still subject to territory-class enhancements.
-
Wow. Leave it to Tim to come up with something simple and easy-to-follow.
-
so what happens when such a quote gets purged from the boards?
-
so what happens when such a quote gets purged from the boards?
Solution (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/new-card-ideas/an-open-letter-to-cactus-game-design/msg452301/#msg452301)
-
What about the Second part of the ability, Good Banding cards have no affect. If a TC is played on an GC(that has a banding ability) then that GC "performs" the action. Wouldn't that be prevented by HHI? Or are we treating that as "clarifying text"?
-
"Good banding cards have no effect" is old-timey language for "Ignore good banding cards." The phrase "have/has no effect" doesn't have a distinct definition from "are/is ignored."
-
"Good banding cards have no effect" is old-timey language for "Ignore good banding cards." The phrase "have/has no effect" doesn't have a distinct definition from "are/is ignored."
Source? REG, Rulebook? As a host that would not be the conclusion I come to from a plain reading of the card.
-
"Good banding cards have no effect" is old-timey language for "Ignore good banding cards." The phrase "have/has no effect" doesn't have a distinct definition from "are/is ignored."
Source? REG, Rulebook? As a host that would not be the conclusion I come to from a plain reading of the card.
REG:
The word “repel” and the phrases “has no effect,” “may not be blocked by,” and “cannot enter battle” mean the same as “ignore”.
-
REG:
The word “repel” and the phrases “has no effect,” “may not be blocked by,” and “cannot enter battle” mean the same as “ignore”.
Is that from the old REG? I cannot not find it the new one, the closest I could find is:
Ignore
Ignore is a special ability that protects a card from being defeated, harmed, or affected by the ignored card. It also prevents the card with ignore from harming or affecting the ignored card. An ignore card stops an ignored character from entering the Field of Battle. An ignore ability can be a successful blocking or rescuing card. Ignore is the same as “has no effect” and repel.
-
REG:
The word “repel” and the phrases “has no effect,” “may not be blocked by,” and “cannot enter battle” mean the same as “ignore”.
Is that from the old REG? I cannot not find it the new one, the closest I could find is:
Ignore
Ignore is a special ability that protects a card from being defeated, harmed, or affected by the ignored card. It also prevents the card with ignore from harming or affecting the ignored card. An ignore card stops an ignored character from entering the Field of Battle. An ignore ability can be a successful blocking or rescuing card. Ignore is the same as “has no effect” and repel.
It's in the new REG under Ongoing abilities>Ignore>Clarifications. http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/
-
Even so, Mr. Runks, the last sentence of the Ignore excerpt you quoted says "Ignore is the same as 'has no effect' and repel."
-
Even so, Mr. Runks, the last sentence of the Ignore excerpt you quoted says "Ignore is the same as 'has no effect' and repel."
I agree, I am just sourcing my rulings so when I rule a certain way at the tournament, I can point back to this conversation as well as the REG as sources for my ruling. I like to be thorough. Thank you all for helping me fully understanding this. :)