Author Topic: Wrath of Satan + AotL (Read 6014 times)

Master KChief · « **Reply #25 on:** November 09, 2009, 08:33:40 PM »

nice find! z's sin just got a whole lot stronger!

Cameron the Conqueror · « **Reply #26 on:** November 09, 2009, 08:53:09 PM »

I don't think so. Z's sin does not discard the evil character before the rescuer gets the chance the negate. The AotL is what makes this work.

However, it would work will all the cards which say "discard a hero in battle".

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #27 on:** November 09, 2009, 09:36:58 PM »

Quote

The AotL is what makes this work.

and dont forget about grapes

christiangamer25 · « **Reply #28 on:** November 12, 2009, 11:44:01 AM »

this is insane if it works my deck just became insane

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #29 on:** November 12, 2009, 06:08:36 PM »

I didn't think you could insert a dominant when an instantaneous ability is being resolved, and interrupting is the only way to get around that, but I could be wrong on my exact interrupt rules

lightningninja · « **Reply #30 on:** November 12, 2009, 09:32:13 PM »

Wrath of Satan "completes." you can now play a dominant, and you get first since you can respond to your action. Is this right?

Kevin Shride · « **Reply #31 on:** November 12, 2009, 11:05:12 PM »

I've given this some thought, and this is how I see it:

a. All abilities must complete before another card can be played.

b. An opponent has the opportunity to play an interrupt card (if possible) if they are losing in battle.

c. Dominants may only be played after all instant abilities are completed.

Therefore, if you play Wrath immediately followed by Angel of the Lord on your own Evil Character, your opponent gets the chance to play an interrupt PRIOR to the AotL because the ability of Wrath isn't truly completed until after the opponent has his interrupt opportunity. If your opponent plays an interrupt, AotL's effect must wait to happen until Wrath's ability is completed, which, in tihs case, is after the interrupt ends.

So, you throw down Wrath and AotL. I play Five Smooth Stones and negate Wrath. Now Wrath's ability is completed (it is negated in this case, but the card is still completed), and so your AotL carries out its ability, discarding the Evil Character.

In short, no, playing AotL immediately after Wrath does NOT make Wrath unnegatable.

Kevin Shride

Gabe · « **Reply #32 on:** November 12, 2009, 11:16:54 PM »

Thanks, Kevin. I couldn't have said it better myself.

christiangamer25 · « **Reply #33 on:** November 12, 2009, 11:28:28 PM »

but what about with darius decree

SirNobody · « **Reply #34 on:** November 12, 2009, 11:30:44 PM »

Hey,

I disagree with Kevin because....

Quote from: Kevin Shride on November 12, 2009, 11:05:12 PM

...because the ability of Wrath isn't truly completed until after the opponent has his interrupt opportunity.

That doesn't jive with the age old Foolish Advice vs Council of Abigail ruling.

Even disregarding the Foolish Advice precedent, you can't play cards while an instant ability is being carried out. And if Wrath isn't completed then I can't play Angel of the Lord, but you can't play a negate either (it's not just dominants that can't be played while an instant ability is being carried out).

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Gabe · « **Reply #35 on:** November 12, 2009, 11:35:24 PM »

What do Foolish Advice and Council of Abigale have to do with this? Foolish Advice isn't causing anyone to lose the battle so it doesn't require that you give the opponent an opportunity to interrupt/negate.

Kevin Shride · « **Reply #36 on:** November 12, 2009, 11:55:13 PM »

Quote

but what about with darius decree

Let's deal with this first. DD makes no difference, because the EC is still in play, because AotL's ability must wait for the interrupt.

Quote

That doesn't jive with the age old Foolish Advice vs Council of Abigail ruling.

I believe the ruling in question that Tim's referring to is that CoA does not negate FA. That's because FA is preventing CoA. You're right, Tim, but if CoA could not be prevented, then it would, in fact, negate FA. Just because a particular interrupt card is prevented does not mean there is no opportunity for one.

Quote

Even disregarding the Foolish Advice precedent, you can't play cards while an instant ability is being carried out. And if Wrath isn't completed then I can't play Angel of the Lord, but you can't play a negate either (it's not just dominants that can't be played while an instant ability is being carried out).

Ah, but, Tim, you're forgetting the one exception, which is in the rulebook, and it clearly states that the only card that can be played here is an interrupt. Until that opportunity is played out, nothing else can be played. Not even a dominant.

Kevin Shride

SirNobody · « **Reply #37 on:** November 13, 2009, 12:18:34 AM »

Hey,

Quote from: BrianGabe on November 12, 2009, 11:35:24 PM

What do Foolish Advice and Council of Abigale have to do with this?

Foolish Advice followed by Council of Abigail was a very, very, very long discussion (500+ posts) back in 2000-2002 era that set the groundwork for how interrupts and negates would be played. The conclusion was that abilities complete instantly, which means that a card must complete before you are given the opportunity to negate it.

Quote from: Kevin Shride on November 12, 2009, 11:55:13 PM

Quote
Even disregarding the Foolish Advice precedent, you can't play cards while an instant ability is being carried out. And if Wrath isn't completed then I can't play Angel of the Lord, but you can't play a negate either (it's not just dominants that can't be played while an instant ability is being carried out).
Ah, but, Tim, you're forgetting the one exception, which is in the rulebook, and it clearly states that the only card that can be played here is an interrupt. Until that opportunity is played out, nothing else can be played. Not even a dominant.

Where in the rulebook does it say that bolded part? If it is in the rulebook it would be news to me.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

The Schaef · « **Reply #38 on:** November 13, 2009, 11:40:17 AM »

Wrath removes all Heroes in battle. This is a winning scenario for the defender, and so initiative is transferred to the rescuing player.

Angel of the Lord has no effect on this, regardless of who plays the card. There are still no Heroes in battle because of Wrath's special ability. Initiative remains with the rescuer.

The rescuer can negate Wrath to return his Heroes to battle. The Evil Character having already been discarded by Angel of the Lord, the defender is now losing the battle, and has initiative if he wants to play Unknown Nation or something.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #39 on:** November 17, 2009, 12:32:23 PM »

so what say ye about darius decree active and i play hunger on defence killing all opponents heros? can i play AotL to stop opponent from negating?

lightningninja · « **Reply #40 on:** November 17, 2009, 03:35:49 PM »

Yes because hunger doesn't instantly kill, the heroes die after the battle phase. So, they are losing by the numbers and you can play aotl. But they don't die till after battle so they'd get the ls.

Cactus Game Design Message Boards

News:

Author Topic: Wrath of Satan + AotL (Read 6014 times)

Master KChief

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

Cameron the Conqueror

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

RTSmaniac

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

christiangamer25

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

ChristianSoldier

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

lightningninja

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

Kevin Shride

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

Gabe

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

christiangamer25

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

SirNobody

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

Gabe

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

Kevin Shride

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

SirNobody

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

The Schaef

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

RTSmaniac

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL

lightningninja

Re: Wrath of Satan + AotL