Check out our Event Calendar! View birthdays, holidays and upcoming tournaments!
Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on April 11, 2010, 02:18:48 PMWow. I really think the REG is wrong there, I just can't remember who said that winning BTN doesn't allow dominants. Time to go look.That quote is not from the REG, it is from the 10th Anniversary Rulebook. Schaef's comments in the thread you linked seem to indicate that you cannot play a dominant during Battle Resolution, which is contradictory to the Rulebook. Were Schaef's comments an official overruling of the rulebook?
Wow. I really think the REG is wrong there, I just can't remember who said that winning BTN doesn't allow dominants. Time to go look.
After searching a while, I found this thread http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=15834.0. Schaef answers my question there.
[Were Schaef's comments an official overruling of the rulebook?
This still strikes me as not being very conducive to fun and fellowship.
The 10th Anniversary rulebook was printed in 2005.The release of Priests and the coinciding rule changes about Dominant play were made in 2006.The statement in the rulebook is obsolete because Dominants now follow the 8th Commandment. Son of God and NJ must be played at the same time by the same player, you cannot use Son of God or Burial in the middle of shuffling Lost Souls, and you cannot play Dominants to affect the outcome of the battle once the battle is declared "ended" and moves into Battle Resolution.
Just to get this straight for future reference....If I let my ec die in battle or cannot negate anything in battle, I don't have a change to play any doms before I can give the ls to the opponent and after my ec dies?
Later they try the same trick after discarding their EC by the numbers only to have the judge called over and their CM made basically useless by this rule. This still strikes me as not being very conducive to fun and fellowship.
Quote from: 3-Liner And Bags Of Chips on April 11, 2010, 11:10:52 PMJust to get this straight for future reference....If I let my ec die in battle or cannot negate anything in battle, I don't have a change to play any doms before I can give the ls to the opponent and after my ec dies?Removing or otherwise incapacitating an opposing character by a special ability does not end the battle (unless the card says so). Unknown Nation can still be used if your opponent plays AotL or a battle-winner which you are unable to negate. However, if you are losing by the numbers and it is your initiative, you have the choice as to whether or not you want to play something. If you choose to die, then you are signifying that the battle is over and your opponent has won. And so, there is no excuse for saying, "Oh, by the way, Dominant." Get it? (I think I do. )
[Response on fun and fellowship deleted. I'm just adding the quote to provide context for my comment--mjb]
Quote from: EmJayBee83 on April 11, 2010, 07:49:26 PMLater they try the same trick after discarding their EC by the numbers only to have the judge called over and their CM made basically useless by this rule. This still strikes me as not being very conducive to fun and fellowship.I disagree with the idea that it does not promote fun and fellowship to tell a player that the rules incentivize him to play a card that defeats you without having to lose his own card in the process. I would think he would be rather pleased to learn that this rule works to his benefit.The only people who have their fun truly hampered are the people who try to game the system so that their opponent's characters are on both sides of the battle, and they are trying to kill both of that player's characters AND prevent the rescue AND prevent him from doing anything about it. My sympathy for them is appropriately diminished.If he really wanted to do that, he would play Babel, band in all of his opponents' ECs plus his own Rab/2K Horses, then play DoU. Then Martyr the Hero just because.
but why stop there? why not Babel in all of their ECs, and Esau and a Rab + Horses, play a Seige, then a Korah's Rebellion. with Asherah Pole active, of course!
Given this, if you can't even play Dominants, I do not believe you could play Unholy Writ or Unknown Nation or... I am unsure about what happens with triggered abilities such as Hormah, however. I believe that as soon as the trigger is tripped (i.e., the EC is discarded), the SA would carry through (i.e., Hormah and any lost soul gets put under the deck).
Quote from: Ring Wraith on April 12, 2010, 07:36:44 AMbut why stop there? why not Babel in all of their ECs, and Esau and a Rab + Horses, play a Seige, then a Korah's Rebellion. with Asherah Pole active, of course!... because banding in all those ECs will give your opponent initiative. You only get one play after the band with Horses, so it has to be one that stops the rescue. Korah's Rebellion works almost as well but has that annoying quality of being in the brown brigade, which does not have a horsey card unless I'm forgetting one, and does not match up with the pale green character that both plays the next Enhancement AND cannot be interrupted. Not to mention you're adding to a combo that already requires like six cards.
The second thing is that when numbers only are used to determine initiative, an Evil Character is still considered to be in battle even if losing, and can still play Enhancements and so forth. An Evil Character losing by the numbers only dies when the battle has ended. Play goes on until the players agree that the battle has ended, and then in Battle Resolution you determine that the Evil Character was defeated, and so is discarded by game rule. And because the EC was discarded as a result of the battle ending, it is too late now to play anything else to affect the battle.
I think you are saying Hormah's SA would not take effect until after the battle resolution of a by the numbers EC loss, but I want to make sure.
Giving the Lost Soul is always the last thing that happens.
Hormah would shuffle after the EC dies by numbers, but before the Lost Soul is awarded. Of course, this may not have been your question.
