Welcome to the Official Redemption® Message Board!
As to whether or not it can rescue from sites, I'll leave that for somebody more qualified to answer the specifics, and simply state the status quo ruling that it can.
And what of the second point? What would even require a dominant to have site access since sites only restrict heroes?
Access to a SiteTo rescue a Lost Soul in a site, a Hero must have access to the site. If a Hero does not have access to a Lost Soul, then the battle is a battle challenge. A Hero has access to a site if: the Hero’s icon box contains a matching brigade color in the icon box of the site, or a special ability gives the Hero access to the site, or An unoccupied site is placed in battle with the Hero and the icon box on the unoccupied site contains a matching brigade color in the icon box of the occupied site. The unoccupied site can be added at any time during the battle, but it must come from the player’s territory. If the Hero is defeated in battle, the site returns to the owner’s territory. The special ability on a multi-colored site is active only when the site is in battle and being used to give a Hero access to a site.
Trust me then when I tell you that Dominants do not have brigades.
This is the only quote in the REG or rulebook I can find that says anything about needing site access to rescue a soul and it specifically says heroes.
To rescue a Lost Soul in a site, a Hero must have access to the site.
Quote from: Rule BookTo rescue a Lost Soul in a site, a Hero must have access to the site.Is that worded correctly? Does "a Hero" mean "rescuing hero"?
Because it specifically says that sites restrict heroes, therefore things that it does not say are restricted are not restricted.
If SOG functions essentially as a hero than their is no reason that it shouldn't be able to rescue the NT only. No their aren't such rules as they would be unnecassary and redundant.
Quote from: lp670sv on March 19, 2012, 11:01:45 AMBecause it specifically says that sites restrict heroes, therefore things that it does not say are restricted are not restricted. Son of God functions essentially as a hero using rescuer's choice rules. I don't see it as being any different. Are there rules in place for Son of God that are different than rules for hero that don't have to do with the fact that one is a dominant and one is a hero?
postcount.add(1);
Quote from: Alex_Olijar on March 19, 2012, 11:04:05 AMQuote from: lp670sv on March 19, 2012, 11:01:45 AMBecause it specifically says that sites restrict heroes, therefore things that it does not say are restricted are not restricted. Son of God functions essentially as a hero using rescuer's choice rules. I don't see it as being any different. Are there rules in place for Son of God that are different than rules for hero that don't have to do with the fact that one is a dominant and one is a hero?Yeah.-Heroes have to make a rescue attempt-Heroes are blocked by EC's-Heroes are an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT CARD TYPEThis is like saying Grapes and ANB should have the same rules applied to them because they both shuffle.
Quote from: lp670sv on March 19, 2012, 11:06:42 AMIf SOG functions essentially as a hero than their is no reason that it shouldn't be able to rescue the NT only. No their aren't such rules as they would be unnecassary and redundant. Actually, there is, because the NT only specifies NT Hero. Son of God isn't an NT Hero.
To the elders,I am certainly aware of the status quo ruling. I am curious as to the rationale behind that ruling. Obviously Son of God can be restricted (by NT soul, by */4 souls), so why don't sites restrict it?
Quote from: Alex_Olijar on March 19, 2012, 11:09:13 AMQuote from: lp670sv on March 19, 2012, 11:06:42 AMIf SOG functions essentially as a hero than their is no reason that it shouldn't be able to rescue the NT only. No their aren't such rules as they would be unnecassary and redundant. Actually, there is, because the NT only specifies NT Hero. Son of God isn't an NT Hero.And sites only specifies heroes, which SOG is not. What is so hard about this?
Quote from: Alex_Olijar on March 19, 2012, 10:59:34 AMTo the elders,I am certainly aware of the status quo ruling. I am curious as to the rationale behind that ruling. Obviously Son of God can be restricted (by NT soul, by */4 souls), so why don't sites restrict it?There is no rule that says "Lost Souls in Sites can only be rescued by Heroes with access to that site". The only rule given is that in order for a Hero to rescue a LS in a site, that hero must have access to the site. NT and */4 stop SoG via a Protect ability. Sites do not have any sort of inherent protect ability.
No you don't. Lampy says protect from evil cards, it doesn't say don't protect from good cards, So are they protected from good cards too? No. it's the same situation, it specifically says heroes, it doesn't not to state what it DOESN'T restrict when it specifically says what it restricts. It's in the REG, in the rulebook, and that's how we've been playing it. You have not even the smallest sliver of evidence to support that dominants need site access, you have no case, your argument has zero merit, and you are grasping at straws AGAIN. The rulebook does not need to list all the things a card does not protect from when it says what it does, it is perfectly safe to draw the conclusion that if it doesn't say it's protected than it's not protected. And if you want sites to have to specifically NOT restrict doms then you are, by direct correlation, demanding that EVERY SINGLE CARD THAT DOES ANYTHING to be errata'd to also say what it does not do.
In the split altar thread you had a point, one that was ignored and that's been beaten to death, but you had one. In this thread you don't. I didn't believe SOG had brigades before hand. That was a stale tactic until I could find better evidence, which I did in that sites only restrict heroes not dominants.
Author
Topic: SoG not as powerful?? can it be true? (Read 7505 times)
