Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: YourMathTeacher on August 30, 2013, 06:49:00 PM
-
If my opponent plays Sinning Hand when my hand is protected does that mean I cannot negate it? Sinning Hand says that "Any player may discard half his hand to negate this."
-
Yes you cannot negate it because the source of the effect comes from the card Sinning Hand itself not you. It's like Drachma Coin versus Entrapping Pharisee. You cannot instead the capture if you have coin up because your hand is protected from the discard which originated from EP. Personally I don't like the because the card specifically gives you the option of discarding your hand. You are doing the action not your opponent and that's a big difference. Other ccgs handle this scenario differently and I agree with their reasoning.
-
I disagree, if the protect is from "discard abilities," I would rule that Sinning Hand is not a "discard ability." The SA itself does not force the discard; the discard is an out-of-sequence event from a game standpoint. I would allow it, but then again I'm not one of the best judges in Redemptionland.
-
I know that this has been mentioned in the past, but if those plusses on Hobbit's post are from Elders, there is no way for us to know that. Should I assume that his post is correct?
-
The Hobbit is correct as far as I know. It's the same reasoning that FW can't be discarded by Job Overcomes. Even though your opponent is choosing what to discard, your ability is causing it and therefore FW is protected. Same goes for Four Drachma Coin and others' protection against TEP or SH.
-
And if you think of it, the Goliath/Wall of Protection reasoning is similar. Even though Goliath says "Opponent may present a new hero", it is Goliath's ability that is causing your opponent to choose to present a hero. Who makes the decision does not matter; where the ability comes from that allows the decision does. If your hand is protected from discard, you cannot negate Sinning Hand.
-
That is what I thought. Thanks guys! ;D I guess the Elders fall under the "Those who are silent are presumed to consent" clause. ;)
-
That is what I thought. Thanks guys! ;D I guess the Elders fall under the "Those who are silent are presumed to consent" clause. ;)
At least until the ruling goes against them. ;)
-
In all seriousness, though, has anyone looked into possibly adding a feature that the Elders can click on to show they approve of the ruling? It had been mentioned in the past, but I don't know if it is even possible in this system. That way Elders will not need to post "I agree," they can just click on the "Elder Approved" icon. Even better would be to have two icons so we know that it has reached the official "two Elder" seal of approval. ;D
-
Interesting side note: The REG states that the discard ability targets cards in play by default. That needs changing, since there are discard abilities that target the hand.
-
Interesting side note: The REG states that the discard ability targets cards in play by default. That needs changing, since there are discard abilities that target the hand.
The ones that target the hand specify that they are doing so. If they did not specify, the discard would default to play.
-
And if you think of it, the Goliath/Wall of Protection reasoning is similar. Even though Goliath says "Opponent may present a new hero", it is Goliath's ability that is causing your opponent to choose to present a hero. Who makes the decision does not matter; where the ability comes from that allows the decision does. If your hand is protected from discard, you cannot negate Sinning Hand.
+1
-
I would love to see a feature where people could see that Elders confirm a ruling by just clicking something, but I'm not sure if it's possible. What might be possible is, for at least the ruling section, to enable all members to see who up or downvoted a post. I assume it is possible, because moderators are already given that privilige, to help avoid abuse of the +/- system.
As for the other points:
1. Yes, a protected hand cannot be half-discarded to negate Sinning Hand.
2. No, the REG doesn't need to change the Default conditions, it just needs to explain better what they mean. I've probably posted a dozen times in various places what it means, but it still can be confusing. Essentially, the default conditions only apply in cases where the ability does not specify otherwise. They are not hard rules about what can and cannot be done. When the next update to the REG is released, that will be clarified.