Author Topic: Revealer (Read 1741 times)

Drrek · « **on:** January 17, 2012, 09:53:46 PM »

quick question on the revealer, if both revealed cards are not lost souls, does the person who drew the revealer get to decide what in what order the two cards are placed on the bottom. I would think so, but I thought I better check.

Romans 3_23 (AW)

Type: Lost Soul • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: When you draw this card, each opponent must reveal the top two cards of his draw pile. Place each revealed Lost Soul in owner's Land of Bondage. Place the rest beneath owner's draw pile. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Romans 3:23 •

SomeKittens · « **Reply #1 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:00:29 PM »

I would say yes, as they are the one who control the place ability.

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #2 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:00:54 PM »

The person who drew Revealer is doing the placing, so yes, they would get to pick.

Drrek · « **Reply #3 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:01:37 PM »

That's what I thought, but I like to make sure on these things.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #4 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:02:42 PM »

The person who is having their deck revealed chooses. I believe the reason was that although the Revealer forces an action, your opponent is the one doing the placing.

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #5 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:06:42 PM »

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on January 17, 2012, 10:02:42 PM

The person who is having their deck revealed chooses. I believe the reason was that although the Revealer forces an action, your opponent is the one doing the placing.

I don't think so. The opponent does the revealing, yes, but it still orders the person who drew it to do the placing.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #6 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:09:06 PM »

Loser gets a tat. Deal?

http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/ruling-questions/revealer/

Tim agrees with me. Jordan agrees with you. I also had this ruled my way at NC Regionals by (Shride? Gabe? I know it was an elder.... I don't think it was Tim again...).

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #7 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:11:06 PM »

I agree that that's how I've seen it ruled in the past. As to whether it's correct, idk. On the one hand, it seems that the person whose ability is causing the placement should control it, but on the other hand, the specific wording on the card could be designating the revealed player as controlling the order.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #8 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:28:03 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on September 06, 2010, 02:49:49 PM

The "each opponent must" applies to the reveal and to the place abilities. It is the opponent (the owner of the deck that the cards go under) that is placing cards beneath their deck, they get to choose.

Drrek · « **Reply #9 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:37:05 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on January 17, 2012, 10:28:03 PM

Quote from: SirNobody on September 06, 2010, 02:49:49 PM
The "each opponent must" applies to the reveal and to the place abilities. It is the opponent (the owner of the deck that the cards go under) that is placing cards beneath their deck, they get to choose.

hmmm, I hadn't thought about reading the card in that way, but I guess that makes sense.

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #10 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:41:43 PM »

I still disagree. The ability is split into two parts.
When you draw this card, each opponent must reveal the top two cards of his draw pile.
Place each revealed Lost Soul in owner's Land of Bondage. Place the rest beneath owner's draw pile.

Unless the card is switching who it's talking to, it clearly tells the holder of the card to do the placing, NOT the person doing the revealing.

lp670sv · « **Reply #11 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:43:49 PM »

Quote from: Chronic Apathy on January 17, 2012, 10:41:43 PM

I still disagree. The ability is split into two parts.
When you draw this card, each opponent must reveal the top two cards of his draw pile.
Place each revealed Lost Soul in owner's Land of Bondage. Place the rest beneath owner's draw pile.

Unless the card is switching who it's talking to, it clearly tells the holder of the card to do the placing, NOT the person doing the revealing.

The opponent is the one doing the revealing though, therefore they also do that placing.

Gabe · « **Reply #12 on:** January 17, 2012, 11:04:54 PM »

"When you draw this card, each opponent must reveal the top two cards of his draw pile. Place each revealed Lost Soul in owner's Land of Bondage. Place the rest beneath owner's draw pile."

The first sentence instructs the opponent to do the revealing, so the owner of the deck is the person who reveals their top 2 cards. I think we all agree on that.

The next two sentence could be read two different ways:

1) As two independent place abilities, no longer controlled by the opponent, but by the owner of the Revealer Lost Soul.

2) As instructions for the "opponent" who did the revealing, as to what they should do with the two revealed cards.

I believe that the second option is the correct interpretation. The two place abilities are instructions tied to the reveal ability. For that reason I've always allowed my opponent to choose the order of the two cards from my "Revealer" (if neither were Lost Souls), and chosen the order myself when my deck was revealed. It seems right that such a powerful Lost Soul as the "Revealer" would have a small, potential drawback of allowing the opponent stack their own bottom of the deck to their possible benefit.

For those that are unfamiliar with the reason a player is allowed to choose the order of the two cards, this is from the REG entry on Place abilities.

"If multiple cards are placed in the same location by the same place ability, the player placing them chooses what order to place them."

Drrek · « **Reply #13 on:** January 17, 2012, 11:08:07 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on January 17, 2012, 11:04:54 PM

"When you draw this card, each opponent must reveal the top two cards of his draw pile. Place each revealed Lost Soul in owner's Land of Bondage. Place the rest beneath owner's draw pile."

The first sentence instructs the opponent to do the revealing, so the owner of the deck is the person who reveals their top 2 cards. I think we all agree on that.

The next two sentence could be read two different ways:

1) As two independent place abilities, no longer controlled by the opponent, but by the owner of the Revealer Lost Soul.

2) As instructions for the "opponent" who did the revealing, as to what they should do with the two revealed cards.

I believe that the second option is the correct interpretation. The two place abilities are instructions tied to the reveal ability. For that reason I've always allowed my opponent to choose the order of the two cards from my "Revealer" (if neither were Lost Souls), and chosen the order myself when my deck was revealed. It seems right that such a powerful Lost Soul as the "Revealer" would have a small, potential drawback of allowing the opponent stack their own bottom of the deck to their possible benefit.

For those that are unfamiliar with the reason a player is allowed to choose the order of the two cards, this is from the REG entry on Place abilities.

"If multiple cards are placed in the same location by the same place ability, the player placing them chooses what order to place them."

Yeah the only reason I thought that the player with the revealer did the placing is it never occurred to read the card in the second way, but now that I see it, that ruling makes sense to me.

Cactus Game Design Message Boards

News:

Author Topic: Revealer (Read 1741 times)

Drrek

Revealer

SomeKittens

Re: Revealer

Chronic Apathy

Re: Revealer

Drrek

Re: Revealer

Rawrlolsauce!

Re: Revealer

Chronic Apathy

Re: Revealer

Rawrlolsauce!

Re: Revealer

Minister Polarius

Re: Revealer

Prof Underwood

Re: Revealer

Drrek

Re: Revealer

Chronic Apathy

Re: Revealer

lp670sv

Re: Revealer

Gabe

Re: Revealer

Drrek

Re: Revealer