Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Stalks of Flax
Type: Artifact • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: On activation, discard this card to exchange two O.T. human Heroes in your territory with two Heroes in an opponent's territory for two turns.

Is the returning of the exchanged Heroes also an exchange ability?

For example, I "Stalks" two of my Heroes for two of my opponent's Heroes.  During the following two turns one or more of the "Stalks" Heroes leaves play.

Do Heroes still return to their owner since it wouldn't be an even 1 for 1 exchange?

Are my Heroes returned to their owners territory after two turns even if the other players Heroes didn't survive to be returned?

What happens if some of the "Stalks" Heroes are set aside at the end of two turns?

I agree with the honorable professor.  When the second turn comes 'round, return the heros that can return.

No.  I 'd say that the hero who is set aside simply moves to the set aside area of the original player.

The "ownership and holdership" of the hero reverts after two turns expire.

you could set aside that hero if you played the set aside card in a battle though.....

Hey,

Cards that are exchanged are considered "owned" by the player who has possession of them.  At least that's the way the exchange with Seven Wicked Spirits was ruled.  I don't see why Stalks would be any different.  You should be able to set aside a Hero that you received with Stalks.

Stalks could be done differently than Seven Wicked Spirits because it is a temporary exchange rather than a permanent exchange.  I'm not sure how I feel about the issue in general.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Cards that are exchanged are considered "owned" by the player who has possession of them.  At least that's the way the exchange with Seven Wicked Spirits was ruled.  I don't see why Stalks would be any different.  You should be able to set aside a Hero that you received with Stalks.

That doesn't make sense to me at all. So you're saying if I exchange my Hero who has Destructive Sin on him, my opponent's Fortresses are negated, since he is now the "owner"? That doesn't make sense to me.

Destructive Sin
 "Place on a hero. While this card remains, negate that hero's special ability and it's owner's good Fortresses."

One interesting thing I find about the past discussions is that Bubbleboy has always agreed with the ruling.  Suddenly he "hates" Redemption because of it.

I'd like to say that I've learned quite a bit about the game since last year. My current self would probably disagree with a lot of the things I said in those posts.