Cactus Game Design Message Boards

In the Jacob+Captain scenario, TFG made it as if Captain was never there, but that doesn't make the game revert to the "present a hero" part of the battle. Helmet of Salvation does make it as if PG was never in battle, but it doesn't make the game revert to the "present a blocker" part of battle. There's no time travel involved in either of these situations, it's more like a rewriting of history.

This still seems to contradict all Redemption knowledge that I possess.  Similar situation:

I make a RA with Claudia banded to Peter.  Opponent blocks with a little black character and plays Wrath of Satan.  I then play Walking on Water to become immune.  If my opponent plays flight to negate banding, Claudia is still immune even though the enhancement is gone (or so I thought).

I actually don't think Claudia is still immune, because by negating the band, Peter was never in battle for WoW to activate on. So WoW would be indirectly negated. Again, not time travel, but rewriting of history. However, it doesn't change the fact that when Wrath took effect, WoW was active and Claudia was protected, so she would survive, as would Peter. But the next enhancement played could affect either of them.

I hope you can see how these two are different.  The first example is the norm.  The second is an exception to alleviate weird things from happening.

I do see that, and I know that the reason for the FBN stickiness is to prevent weirdness.

What if (in the Jacob + Captain battle) opponent doesn't block w/ 12FG and enhancements get played and then 12FG gets banded in by unknown nation or the likes later on.  Do the enhancements just magically "unnegate"  (of course not! ...at least to my knowledge).

But isn't this also weirdness?  Enhs that are negated at first, but then end up not negated due to CotH never really being there after all...it just seems like it would be a lot easier to say that the "exception" of FBN stickiness would apply in this situation too.

Negates undo an effect.  So you do everything you can to undo abilities.

So in the case of Jacob + Captain blocked by 12 Fingered Giant the negate negates Jacobs banding ability, which then undoes the FBTN

In the case of Maharia (wa) to Ira (wa) the negating of Maharia's ability would send Ira back which would cause it to be not BTN but because that would cause an infinite loop it was rule that in that case only BTN sticks.

In the case of Philistine Outpost pulling out Philistine Garrison you are negating the search for the Garrison, so to undo that you have to put Garrison back into the discard pile, Immunity doesn't matter because you aren't targeting Garrison and even if you were Immunity doesn't affect negates.  And the reason why you can't reblock is because its already past that point and negates don't go back phases they just cascade to other abilities.

So the moral of the story is negates are awesome but they don't time travel

I disagree, the moral of the story is that Helmet of Salvation's SA is now useful 

I bring this specific example up b/c I had the exact thing happen to me at Nats in NY.  Except the EC was Herod the Great instead of 12fg.  It was ruled that I could keep philosophy since the ability had already completed (at least I think that was the reasoning)... but either way.

It sounds like you think that Herod the Great and 12FG have the same ability.  Maybe that's what's causing your confusion.  That ruling is correct because Herod the Great doesn't negate banding (unlike 12FG).  He prevents future banding and returns characters already banded to their territory.  The end result is similar because only 1 Hero remains in battle.  In your example, because Claudia's banding ability isn't negated, the ability of characters she brought into battle work, then Herod the Great kicks the Hero out of battle.

Herod the Great
Type: Evil Char. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 8 / 9 • Class: None • Special Ability: No Heroes may band this turn. Any already banded must return to their territories. • Play As: Prevent banding of Heroes. Return all Heroes banded into battle to owner’s territory.

I've only been playing Redemption for four and a half years but during that time we've always been able to indirectly negate abilities, such as ET's recur ability.  The only time a card isn't indirectly negated is if it falls under a CBN/CBI umbrella.  Examples of that are ET's play an enhancement ability and AoCp.

You can go back and negate abilities, but not core parts of the game itself.

This idea about "core game actions" is interesting.  I suppose that could explain the contradiction, but we'd have to define what exactly are "core game actions"

How about this for a definition of core game actions. A core game action is any action that is initiated without the help of a special ability. This includes things like Drawing during the draw phase, activating an artifact, putting a fortress on the table, putting a hero in battle, playing cards due to initiative, etc...

Basically any actions that take place due to game rules rather than abilities. You can't negate initiative, you can't negate someone putting a hero in battle to begin a rescue attempt, you cant negate the d3 during draw phase... because none of these are special abilities. So, therefore, you can't attempt to indirectly negate them.

So, in the case of Helmet vs Philly outpost, you negate the existence of a philistine, but you don't negate the action of blocking, because it is a core game action.

I don't quite have a total REG backing for this, but it makes a lot of sense to me.

In this case, you could potentially recur Philistines and keep having to re-d/c them and bring out another one using PO, but Helmet would continue to negate the Philistine's existence, so you keep re-blocking with a Philistine?

New time-out strategy, anyone?

So she is a successful rescue? Poopy..........

That's a good question, and it applies regardless of the re-block question.

 

EDIT: But wouldn't they NOT be able to play an enhancement since there is no EC to play it on?