Author Topic: Questions about searching. (Read 2008 times)

redemption collector 777 · « **on:** October 09, 2014, 02:11:57 PM »

Besides any card that says the word "search" in it

1. Does discarding cards from a player's deck considered "searching " them?

Examples (Are any of these considered searching of some sort?)

Amasai the Raider SA: Discard an evil enhancement from opponent's deck or

Hidden treasures SA: or discard an evil enhancement in opponent's deck

2. If you discard a card from an opponent's deck or exchange with another card in your deck with one in play , with these certain worded abilities do you have to shuffle the deck?

3. Is taking cards out of a player's discard pile considered "searching or search?"

Like Forgotten History , Wonders forgotten etc?

4. Is exchanging cards considered searching the deck? like great faith , or red wheel within a wheel.

Just wondering for cards like Hezey's ring and Nazerth.

Drrek · « **Reply #1 on:** October 09, 2014, 02:15:06 PM »

Quote from: redemption collector 777 on October 09, 2014, 02:11:57 PM

Besides any card that says the word "search" in it

1. Does discarding cards from a player's deck considered "searching " them?

Examples (Are any of these considered searching of some sort?)

Amasai the Raider SA: Discard an evil enhancement from opponent's deck or

Hidden treasures SA: or discard an evil enhancement in opponent's deck

2. If you discard a card from an opponent's deck with these certain worded abilities do you have to shuffle the deck?

3. Is taking cards out of a player's discard pile considered "searching or search?"

Like Forgotten History , Wonders forgotten etc?

1) In both of those cases you listed it requires a search (note not all discard of decks require a search, if you just for example discarded the top card of deck that would not require a search).

2) Yes, if you used a discard that required a search you must shuffle the deck as you would with any search.

3) Yes, that requires a search of the discard pile.

Praeceps · « **Reply #2 on:** October 09, 2014, 03:18:58 PM »

Yes, Exchange has a search component as you have to search for the card you are exchanging for.

redemption collector 777 · « **Reply #3 on:** October 09, 2014, 04:58:14 PM »

Quote from: Praeceps on October 09, 2014, 03:18:58 PM

Yes, Exchange has a search component as you have to search for the card you are exchanging for.

1.So would it be true that , any SA that requires a player to look for any card (s) in any draw or discard pile is a search ability?

2. Any exchange ability that requires looking for another card in a deck or discard pile is also a search ability? or it is similar but not exactly??

3. So would Nazareth SA: Protect all decks from search abilites and Hezekiah's signet ring SA: No opponent may search any draw or discard pile

stop the following cards?

Examples

Susanna (look at the top X cards of deck)
Amasai the Raider (discard an evil enhancement in opponents deck)
Perpetual Priesthood ( exchange this card with a priest in draw pile)

browarod · « **Reply #4 on:** October 09, 2014, 05:03:38 PM »

Susanna's "look" ability does not inherently include a search since you are just taking from the top of the deck (Revealer Lost Soul and anything that lets you look at the top or bottom card of your deck are similarly not searches). Anything that targets a specific card from a deck/discard pile would inherently include a search. Hezekiah's SR restricts both search abilities and any ability that inherently includes a search.

Nazareth, on the other hand, I would interpret differently. Nazareth specifically protects from "search abilities" so I would say that Nazareth would NOT protect from another ability (like exchange) that includes an inherent search because it's not strictly a "search ability."

Drrek · « **Reply #5 on:** October 09, 2014, 07:35:50 PM »

Quote from: browarod on October 09, 2014, 05:03:38 PM

Nazareth, on the other hand, I would interpret differently. Nazareth specifically protects from "search abilities" so I would say that Nazareth would NOT protect from another ability (like exchange) that includes an inherent search because it's not strictly a "search ability."

Well you can try to interpret it that way if you want, but that is not the ruling on Nazareth. Nazareth protects from abilities with inherent searches.

yirgogo · « **Reply #6 on:** October 09, 2014, 07:53:50 PM »

Nazareth is officially: Protect all Decks from search abilities. Based on the wording, You could interpret it either way, so I will try and argue the one I am in favor of.

A search ability is an ability that searches your deck for a specific card, and put's it in your hand, unless otherwise stated after the cards effect, it defaults to hand, not play. I would then say that Discard a card from a deck is not a search ability, but rather a search gamerule, exchanging also I believe falls under this category.

I don't really care if this get's Naz errata'd, but right now I believe that card interpretation, I don't know about precedence or much else based on this ruling, but based on just what the card says and the "search" ability.

Thoughts?

Just my

Redoubter · « **Reply #7 on:** October 09, 2014, 08:50:49 PM »

Drrek is correct on all counts. It is the way it is currently ruled, and the way that the rules work in general for searches. It also won't change or be errata'd.

From Search in the REG:

Quote

An ability that targets a card in a deck, discard pile, or Artifact Pile that is not a specific location in that pile, includes an
implied search of the pile for the target.

browarod · « **Reply #8 on:** October 10, 2014, 12:01:47 PM »

I'm not saying that an exchange or a "discard from deck" doesn't include a search (because they obviously do), I'm merely pointing out that they are not "search abilities" which is what Nazareth protects from.

Hezekiah's SR restricts players from searching so I can totally see why that stops everything that searches regardless of wording, but Nazareth specifically targets search abilities, which exchange et al are not. If cards protecting from "discard abilities" do not protect from discard by game rule, why does Nazareth protect from searching by game rule?

Redoubter · « **Reply #9 on:** October 10, 2014, 02:47:30 PM »

Quote from: browarod on October 10, 2014, 12:01:47 PM

If cards protecting from "discard abilities" do not protect from discard by game rule, why does Nazareth protect from searching by game rule?

Discard is a completely different situation, because there is a clear distinction between abilities that discard and game rules that do. If I decrease your character, it is discarded by game rule, not due to the ability. The decrease ability has no 'inherent' discard quality defined, it is just a part of game rule (and clarified that it applies) that characters are discarded at */0 or less.

The definition of search includes all abilities that search a pile for a target. That is in the conditions. It is the same as how we have different wording for restrict, protect, ignore, and so on that are still negated if I negate that type of ability. Most exchange abilities are also searches, by the definition of search. It is a search ability if it goes to a pile for a target. Therefore, it can be prevented, negated, restricted, or protected against as a search ability for that component of it.

We have a definition of search that includes abilities without the word in them in the exact same way that we define every other ability that does not include the word on the card. This is consistently applied throughout Redemption.

Therefore, any ability with an implied search is also a search ability.

yirgogo · « **Reply #10 on:** October 10, 2014, 04:03:48 PM »

What if it is an exchange ability, say AuTO, and say that Gideon was just underdecked, if Nazareth wasn't in play, as long as you knew exactly where the card was that you wanted to exchange with, withought having to look at any other cards in deck, would this be a search ability?

Praeceps · « **Reply #11 on:** October 10, 2014, 04:15:46 PM »

Still a search. Just as you can't use Chariots of Fire to grab a hero off the top your discard pile if Hezzy's ring is up. Just because you don't have to physically search for the target doesn't mean you aren't using a search ability.

browarod · « **Reply #12 on:** October 10, 2014, 06:00:30 PM »

Quote from: Redoubter on October 10, 2014, 02:47:30 PM

[The definition of search includes all abilities that search a pile for a target. That is in the conditions. It is the same as how we have different wording for restrict, protect, ignore, and so on that are still negated if I negate that type of ability. Most exchange abilities are also searches, by the definition of search. It is a search ability if it goes to a pile for a target. Therefore, it can be prevented, negated, restricted, or protected against as a search ability for that component of it.

We have a definition of search that includes abilities without the word in them in the exact same way that we define every other ability that does not include the word on the card. This is consistently applied throughout Redemption.

Therefore, any ability with an implied search is also a search ability.

Claiming that an exchange ability is a search ability because "no opponent may" is a restrict ability is somewhat flawed. "No opponent may" doesn't have a separately listed and defined entry in the rules/REG establishing it as a separate ability keyword, exchange does. It's one thing to clarify that old wording coincides with newer streamlining, that doesn't mean that 2 distinct and different abilities are really the same (or, rather, that one is a subset of the other).

I'm just not seeing why you take "includes an implied search" to mean "is a search ability." It's like a search ability (sometimes) but has its own definition and defaults. If a card said "negate search abilities" and I attack with Reassuring Angels, what happens? It's not a search ability at face value, but according to your logic would become a search ability if you choose to target deck or discard, so would it be negated or not?

Much like the add to battle v. banding dilemma, this has the same problem. I believe all special abilities that are separately defined should be separate abilities because it's far too confusing if some abilities are sometimes the same as others and sometimes not. Plus, it limits the power of some cards (like Nazareth) to keep things separate.

Redoubter · « **Reply #13 on:** October 10, 2014, 06:48:21 PM »

Quote from: browarod on October 10, 2014, 06:00:30 PM

Claiming that an exchange ability is a search ability because "no opponent may" is a restrict ability is somewhat flawed.

Not sure when I said anything of the sort. I was pointing out that what I am saying is perfectly consistent with the rules, and I was referring to ALL abilities that restrict, protect, ignore, etc. that have different terms. You said we must use exact terms. I proved we don't.

Quote from: browarod on October 10, 2014, 06:00:30 PM

I'm just not seeing why you take "includes an implied search" to mean "is a search ability." It's like a search ability (sometimes) but has its own definition and defaults.

Actually, it is a search. That is the definition of search. It says that anything that meets that definition is a search. Therefore, searching your deck or discard, regardless of the name of the ability, is a search.

Quote from: browarod on October 10, 2014, 06:00:30 PM

Plus, it limits the power of some cards (like Nazareth) to keep things separate.

Limiting the power of cards lies in errata, not in reinterpreting very well-established rules.

This is one of those well-established rules. The definition of search is clear, and these conditions being referenced meet that definition. Therefore, they are searches.

Cactus Game Design Message Boards

News:

Author Topic: Questions about searching. (Read 2008 times)

redemption collector 777

Questions about searching.

Drrek

Re: Questions about searching.

Praeceps

Re: Questions about searching.

redemption collector 777

Re: Questions about searching.

browarod

Re: Questions about searching.

Drrek

Re: Questions about searching.

yirgogo

Re: Questions about searching.

Redoubter

Re: Questions about searching.

browarod

Re: Questions about searching.

Redoubter

Re: Questions about searching.

yirgogo

Re: Questions about searching.

Praeceps

Re: Questions about searching.

browarod

Re: Questions about searching.

Redoubter

Re: Questions about searching.