Author Topic: Sinning Hand (Read 7782 times)

DaClock · « **on:** November 15, 2009, 09:11:07 PM »

Remove a Hero from the game. Any player may discard half the cards in their hand (rounded down) to negate this. Otherwise, it cannot be interrupted.

If my opponent has 0 cards, can he "discard" his hand of 0 to negate?

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #1 on:** November 15, 2009, 10:23:27 PM »

If Jephthah can be considered a precedent for this situation, then no.

Instant Abilities > Discard or Remove > Special Conditions
.• When using Jephthahs special ability, the holder must have a draw pile and must discard two characters in the same territory unless only one character is available.

Master KChief · « **Reply #2 on:** November 15, 2009, 10:25:38 PM »

this has been brought up before. there is a difference between cost and effect. jepthah is a cost. i believe the alternate option on sinning hand is an effect. if so, then the opponent can discard his hand of 0 cards to satisfy the ability.

browarod · « **Reply #3 on:** November 15, 2009, 10:35:12 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on November 15, 2009, 10:25:38 PM

this has been brought up before. there is a difference between cost and effect. jepthah is a cost. i believe the alternate option on sinning hand is an effect. if so, then the opponent can discard his hand of 0 cards to satisfy the ability.

Why wouldn't Sinning Hand also be a cost?

Gabe · « **Reply #4 on:** November 15, 2009, 10:49:24 PM »

Sinning Hand
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Orange • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Remove a Hero from the game. Any player may discard half the cards in hand (rounded down) to negate this. Otherwise, it cannot be interrupted.

Discarding your hand is the cost to negate Sinning Hand. If you don't have at least two cards then you can't discard anything.

crustpope · « **Reply #5 on:** November 16, 2009, 01:42:16 AM »

Yeah, this has been brought up before. And Gabe is wrong. Well, acording to how I see it and how Bryon sees it.

THe difference is that Jepthah's ability requires you to d/c the Top Card. SO you have to have a deck with a top card to d/c in order to use jepthah's ability. Bu Sinning hand is simply a number of cards (1/2 of your hand rounded down) so if your hand is 0, 1/2 of 0 is 0 and you can d/c 0 cards in order to fulfill it. Playing sinning hand on a player with a hand of 1 card or less would be futile because they would simply choose to d/c 0 cards to fulfill the SA of Sinning hand.

Master KChief · « **Reply #6 on:** November 16, 2009, 02:01:50 AM »

thats why i remembered it being a player could choose to discard 0 cards. i just couldnt remember the reasoning behind the ruling.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #7 on:** November 16, 2009, 07:53:08 AM »

I'm not sure whether I like this ruling or not, but I do remember that the official ruling was that you CAN discard 0 cards to stop Sinning Hand.

STAMP · « **Reply #8 on:** November 16, 2009, 10:16:18 AM »

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #9 on:** November 16, 2009, 10:21:28 AM »

Gabe is incorrect and here's why - This goes way back to two years ago when I made the 'One turn Wonder' using Primary Objective and Long day. It was ruled at the time that 'Hand' is a location and regardless of how many cards are in your hand, you can discard it, If you have 0 cards in your 'Hand' you can still discard your 'Hand' - I hated the ruling at the time, and I still hate it now, as it seems to defy all logic.

Gabe · « **Reply #10 on:** November 16, 2009, 10:39:16 AM »

I remember the ruling. It's completely inconsistent with the Jephthah ruling. If I can discard a hand of 0 to satisfy Sinning Hand's cost then I can also discard from a deck of 0 to satisfy Jephthah. That just doesn't make any sense, regardless of how it was ruled in the past.

I'm sure that using Sinning Hand against a player who has 0 cards rarely ever happens so I can't imagine that this really matters, but consistency would be nice.

browarod · « **Reply #11 on:** November 16, 2009, 10:47:06 AM »

Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on November 16, 2009, 10:21:28 AM

Gabe is incorrect and here's why - This goes way back to two years ago when I made the 'One turn Wonder' using Primary Objective and Long day. It was ruled at the time that 'Hand' is a location and regardless of how many cards are in your hand, you can discard it, If you have 0 cards in your 'Hand' you can still discard your 'Hand' - I hated the ruling at the time, and I still hate it now, as it seems to defy all logic.

I hate it, too. There is no logical reasoning behind being able to discard a "hand" of 0 cards. I still think discarding your hand is a cost and as such you have to actually discard something more than nothing otherwise you're not paying anything for the cost. As the card and its reference say, if your Hand is Sinning you need to cut it off, and cutting off nothing doesn't solve anything.

Arch Angel · « **Reply #12 on:** November 16, 2009, 10:51:39 AM »

Sinning Hand and Assyria Conquers Israel work the same way. Jepthah doesn't apply to this scenario at ALL. Jepthah says "Discard the top card of your deck" (read: discard 1 card from the top of your deck) where as Sinning hand says "Discard half..." (read: Discard X)

If a card says discard 1, you must discard 1. If a card says discard 0 then it basically undoes itself.

Would you guys argue that TGT and Pride before Calamity work the same way?

SirNobody · « **Reply #13 on:** November 16, 2009, 11:03:43 AM »

Hey,

Quote from: browarod on November 16, 2009, 10:47:06 AM

I hate it, too. There is no logical reasoning behind being able to discard a "hand" of 0 cards. I still think discarding your hand is a cost and as such you have to actually discard something more than nothing otherwise you're not paying anything for the cost. As the card and its reference say, if your Hand is Sinning you need to cut it off, and cutting off nothing doesn't solve anything.

Whether or not you can discard 0 cards is kinda like what 0! (zero factorial) is. 0! is 1 because the mathematicians said it is. You can discard 0 cards because the PTB said you can. There is no right or wrong answer in these cases until some authority defines what is the correct answer. And TPTB have defined that discarding 0 cards is possible.

(To run with your example, having a hand of 0 cards would be equivalent to already having your hand cut off. If you've already cut off your hand, you've already taken care of the Sinning hand problem, you can't have a sinning hand if you don't have a hand.)

Quote from: BrianGabe on November 16, 2009, 10:39:16 AM

I remember the ruling. It's completely inconsistent with the Jephthah ruling. If I can discard a hand of 0 to satisfy Sinning Hand's cost then I can also discard from a deck of 0 to satisfy Jephthah. That just doesn't make any sense, regardless of how it was ruled in the past.

I don't think it is inconsistent with the Jephthah ruling. You can discard 0 cards from a set of 0 cards. You cannot discard 1 cards from a set of 0 cards. If you have an empty hand Sinning Hand requires you to discard 0 cards (half of zero is zero). If you have an empty draw pile, Jephthah requires you to discard 1 card. So Sinning Hand falls into the first case, which you can do, while Jephthah falls into the second case, which you cannot do.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

browarod · « **Reply #14 on:** November 16, 2009, 11:09:33 AM »

Quote from: SirNobody on November 16, 2009, 11:03:43 AM

(To run with your example, having a hand of 0 cards would be equivalent to already having your hand cut off. If you've already cut off your hand, you've already taken care of the Sinning hand problem, you can't have a sinning hand if you don't have a hand.)

If one hand is sinning, you need another hand to cut it off (2 cards in hand), so if you have less than 2 hands (1 or 0 cards in hand) you cannot fix your sinning problem and your hero is lost.

I know this seems like a silly example, I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind the PTB's decision to allow discards of 0 cards to satisfy the cost of the negate.

TimMierz · « **Reply #15 on:** November 16, 2009, 01:22:41 PM »

And if you have eight hands, you need to cut four of them off.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #16 on:** November 16, 2009, 04:09:34 PM »

I can do the math, but I agree with Gabe that the ruling is inconsistent. The point here is not the math, it is the part of the REG I quoted. Notice that it says "the holder must have a draw pile." Consistency would indicate that in order to negate Sinning Hand, you must have a hand.

If math was the reason, then math should be in the REG. Logic is in the REG and this is clearly a logical inconsistency.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #17 on:** November 16, 2009, 07:31:29 PM »

Jephthah says to discard one card. It specifies a number: no math. If you don't have that number left to target, you can't complete the ability. Sinning Hand involves math: you must divide the number of cards in your hand by half. If that number is 0, 0/2=0, so you may discard 0 cards to complete the ability. That's my logic.

Master KChief · « **Reply #18 on:** November 16, 2009, 07:34:45 PM »

redemptioncousin · « **Reply #19 on:** November 16, 2009, 07:37:23 PM »

what if you have 1 card in your hand??? By your argument you could negate it by discarding 0 cards as long as you have one in your hand...

Cameron the Conqueror · « **Reply #20 on:** November 16, 2009, 07:38:26 PM »

Quote from: crustpope on November 16, 2009, 01:42:16 AM

Playing sinning hand on a player with a hand of 1 card or less would be futile because they would simply choose to d/c 0 cards to fulfill the SA of Sinning hand.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #21 on:** November 16, 2009, 08:13:37 PM »

Quote from: BubbleBoy on November 16, 2009, 07:31:29 PM

Jephthah says to discard one card. It specifies a number: no math. If you don't have that number left to target, you can't complete the ability. Sinning Hand involves math: you must divide the number of cards in your hand by half. If that number is 0, 0/2=0, so you may discard 0 cards to complete the ability. That's my logic.

Jepthah says to discard from your deck, which requires a deck in order to target. Sinning Hand says to discard from your hand, which requires a hand in order to target.

My logic still stands.

browarod · « **Reply #22 on:** November 16, 2009, 08:22:15 PM »

YMT

I hate math, because it leads to illogical decisions like this.

A cost is by very nature costly. 0 is nothing. Nothing cannot satisfy a cost because costs require something (even if it's half of something) and half of nothing is still nothing.

SirNobody · « **Reply #23 on:** November 16, 2009, 08:31:55 PM »

Hey,

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on November 16, 2009, 08:13:37 PM

Jepthah says to discard from your deck, which requires a deck in order to target. Sinning Hand says to discard from your hand, which requires a hand in order to target.

My logic still stands.

You always have a deck, even if it there are no cards in it. You always have a hand, even if there are no cards in it.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

SirNobody · « **Reply #24 on:** November 16, 2009, 08:34:29 PM »

Hey,

Quote from: browarod on November 16, 2009, 08:22:15 PM

A cost is by very nature costly. 0 is nothing. Nothing cannot satisfy a cost because costs require something (even if it's half of something) and half of nothing is still nothing.

My salvation disagrees with your logic.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

News:

Author Topic: Sinning Hand (Read 7782 times)

browarod

browarod

browarod

browarod