Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Split Altar (P)

Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Green • Ability: 3 / 3 • Class: • Special Ability: Shuffle all Artifacts of each opponent into owners’ deck. You may play the next Enhancement. Cannot be negated. • Play As: Shuffle [return] all Artifacts of each opponent into owners’ deck. You may play an Enhancement. Cannot be negated. • Identifiers: OT, Based on Prophecy • Verse: I Kings 13:3 • Availability: Promotional cards (2008 National Tournament)

So, the Split Altar ruling is one that has ultimately lived in infamy for two and a half years now. It's been the butt of many jokes over that time period, and has even largely become the Godwin's Law of Redemption (Godwin's Law states that in an argument or debate, as soon as anyone involved mentions Hitler, that person loses the debate and the subject is changed). For those of you who don't know, Split Altar was released as the national promo in 2009, and was intended to shuffle all opponents' artifact piles into their decks. However, there was a minor oversight, and the green enhancement instead shuffles just any artifacts in play, effectively nerfing it and keeping it from becoming all that it could (and should) have been. A lot of people are less than happy with this ruling, and I want to present two solid arguments as to why the card should simply receive an errata allowing it to do what it was intended to do:

A New Beginning (Pa)

Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Green • Ability: 4 / 5 • Class: None • Special Ability: ALL players shuffle ALL cards in the field of play, set-aside areas and their hands back into their draw pile. Only cards in Land of Redemption and discard piles remain. ALL players Draw 8 new cards. Holder may begin a new turn. • Errata: If making a rescue attempt, remove this card from the game to shuffle [return] all cards in play, set aside areas, and hands into decks. End the battle. All players draw 8. End the turn. Begin a new turn. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Genesis 8:15-17 • Availability: Patriarchs booster packs (Ultra Rare)

Ah yes, perhaps the only card that's the butt of more jokes than Split Altar, A New Beginning. Beyond mentioning this card to assure a +1 from STAMP when he sees this post, I think that the comparisons between ANB and SA offer up some serious inconsistencies with the way cards are handled. ANB has been errata'd twice now, the biggest errata being that the card, when played without being negated, is removed from the game along with the abilities. At no point on the card itself does it say that the card is removed from the game, but it was errata'd that way to fix some very broken combos, specifically in T2. The reason this bothers me is because, apparently, allowing a card to do what it was supposed to do in the first place but was worded wrong is not okay, but adding an ability that is not even on the card to begin with is acceptable. I feel like there's a huge inconsistency there, and even though ANB is a special case, one could argue that Split Altar is an equally special case.

The Lord Fights for You (RA)

Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Red/Yellow • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Set aside a Hero. Each upkeep phase while set aside, each player with more than one evil brigade in territory must discard an evil card in his territory. • Identifiers: OT, Based on Prophecy • Verse: Joshua 23:10 • Availability: Rock of Ages booster packs (None)

My second argument is one I brought up in a thread recently (for those who saw it, yes, I did delete it). The Lord Fights for You is a card that was released just a couple years ago, and does not really fall into the category of cards old enough to be interpreted through a filter of "old wording". The part I want to look at is the last bit, when the words on the card say "in his territory," referring to the opponent. What happens if the opponent is female? The intention of the card is clear, however, the card specifically references a male player, not a female one, and as per the Split Altar ruling, intention should not matter, it should be based on what the card says.

These arguments may be reaching, but I don't think anyone can really look at these examples and not see the inconsistencies here. The card gets joked about a lot, but I'm not kidding around; I think the Elders (and specifically Rob) should take a good hard look at this card and see if an errata isn't possible. I recognize what the card says, but that doesn't always matter, and I don't really think it would kill anyone if we let the card work the way it was supposed to.

I don't have much to say on any of them, but
1) Split Altar wasn't broken the way it is, there are no ridiculous combos involving Split Altar to make it need an errata, and the card works perfectly well within the game (although not as powerful as they would have liked) so there is no reason to give it an errata
2) A New Beginning was a very powerful card that allowed ridiculous combos and it became a major problem for the game, thus warranting an errata
3) It is perfectly acceptable to use male pronouns to refer to people who's gender is unknown (such as in the case of whoever is playing/being affected by a card in a game) so there is no reason that it should be an issue that cards refer with male pronouns rather than trying to find gender neutral ones.

The answers above are correct.  ANB got an errata because playing it as it was written was breaking the game.  Playing SA as it was written does NOT break the game, therefore it did NOT get an errata.  That is the consistency.  Cards play like they are written unless they break the game, and in those cases we errata them.

I understand people's frustration with a National Promo being relatively weak on the playable scale, but I don't see the whole system of why cards get erratas changing anytime soon.

IMHO, unfortunately if they did errata SA then it would probably go like it could target artifacts face-down which would go against all of our work to make the default to play ability inconsistent and frankly, I still wouldn't play with it (T1) if it did get an errata so why bother.

I'm well aware why ANB has an errata, I don't need that explained to me, because I think I did a pretty good job of explaining it in my original post. My point is that erratas are given out in extenuating circumstances, and it wouldn't be such a big deal to errata this card.

Rob didn't errata my copy of SA, even when I asked nicely.

I'm actually willing to bet this is, at the most, the third thread you've ever seen actually legitimately arguing that Split Altar should be errata'd, and it's probably the first.

errata's aren't given to cards unless they are broken/OP. Split Altar does neither of these things. Answer:Given

That would still be you, the rest of us are trying to get you to leave the poor horse alone.

Quote from: Chronic Apathy on February 19, 2012, 04:05:17 PM

Quote from: SomeKittens on February 19, 2012, 04:02:45 PM

SA should be banned?  When did this come up?

And this is one of four million threads complaining about SA.

I edited my post. I want links. I only see a thread on Split Altar once in a blue moon, and most of the time it's asking why everyone is talking about it.

Link: http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/search2/

Not a single thread that argues why Split Altar should be errata'd, a couple threads questioning it and the original ruling thread, but that's all.

The PTB have pretty clearly stated their position.  Maybe you should try an internet petition.  Those totally work.

The PTB have pretty clearly stated their position.  Maybe you should try an internet petition.  Those totally work.

...says the unredeemable demons. 

We are making progress, at least they can rescue lost souls now.

I don't think STAMP would view that as progress...

It's a bit of a Rube Goldberg. You have to place a Demon on a captured Hero with Possessed, then free the Hero, then make a successful RA with that Hero (Demon in tow).

It's a bit of a Rube Goldberg. You have to place a Demon on a captured Hero with Possessed, then free the Hero, then make a successful RA with that Hero (Demon in tow).

Happens everyday in the real world, so no problems here.