Cactus Game Design Message Boards

You put Satan's Seat on a site. Your opponent plays Land Dispute and takes that site. What happens to Satan's Seat, does it follow, get discarded, or something else.

Satan's Seat (FF)

Type: Fortress • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Place on your single-color Site to negate all protect abilities on opponent’s Heroes. If a Hero rescues a Lost Soul from that Site, discard that Hero. • Play As: Place on your single-color Site to negate all protect abilities on opponent’s Heroes. Discard all Heroes that rescue a Lost Soul from that Site. • Identifiers: Play to territory. • Verse: Revelation 2:13 • Availability: Faith of our Fathers booster packs (None)

See also:

Discard

Negate

Place

Land Dispute (TP)

Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 1 / 3 • Class: Territory • Special Ability: If used by a Philistine, take an opponent's Site. If he doesn't have one, discard one of his Fortresses instead. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Genesis 26:20 • Availability: Thesaurus ex Preteritus booster packs ()

See also:

Discard

Take

I would presume it would be discarded, but I'm not sure.

Disagree.  All placed cards follow the card they are placed on, including returning to hand or deck or going to discard or going to another territory.  The only exception is that weapons are discarded if the character they are on is captured.

Once it is taken with the site, here is what I would read the card doing:

It would not negate heroes.  It says to place on "your single color site TO...", and 'your' is not being satisfied as you only have control.  Currently 'your' requires both ownership and control.

However, the second part does not require any condition to be true.  If a rescue attempt is successful at the site, all heroes involved would still be discarded.

The ability is read from the perspective of the placer. As long as Satan's Seat is still active, then it negates the protect abilities of the placer's opponents, no matter where the card is located. This ability cannot be negated beginning the phase after it is placed.

I disagree.  Quoting the pertinent part of the ability:  Place on your single-color Site to negate all protect abilities on opponent’s Heroes.

If the first part ever becomes false, then the 'cost' is not paid, therefore the 'benefit' cannot be gained.  If it is not 'your' site at any point, then there is no negation of opponent's heroes.

It is an ongoing cost-benefit, otherwise it would only work in the phase in which it was played, because the ability after the "to" could not be activated.

I disagree. 

Place is an instant ability. The cost only needs to be paid once. The benefit is then gained as an ongoing ability.

I disagree

If we go with the cost only being paid once and then the card activating ongoing forever from that point, then the player whose heroes are being targeted by it should never change.  If it doesn't refer to 'your' site when it changes possession, then it doesn't change the reference on 'your opponent's heroes'.

If we're talking 2-player, then there's only one opponent and no problem. If we're talking multiplayer, you only have a singular opponent when you're in battle, at which point those heroes would be being negated and still no problem.

I was not arguing that is how it works.  I was showing how you can't have it the way YMT described and yet still have it target the opponent's heroes.

The card's saying "Oh, I'm placed on a a single-color site in my controller's territory that they own, then I can negate some protect abilities."

"Place" in this case is also a state, not an instant.

The discard does not target opponent's heroes. It targets heroes that make a rescue at "that" site, "that" being the site that it was placed on. The placing was done and over, as long as the site was yours in the first place. The sceond part of the ability is not conditional, it only references the original site that SS was placed on.

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on May 07, 2012, 09:34:14 PM

The discard does not target opponent's heroes. It targets heroes that make a rescue at "that" site, "that" being the site that it was placed on. The placing was done and over, as long as the site was yours in the first place. The sceond part of the ability is not conditional, it only references the original site that SS was placed on.

That's not what I said nor what Chris said (I think).  I'm talking about the first ability.  If it is instant and the target of 'your' does not change or need to reactivate, and the ability is ongoing, then the negation of heroes does not change targets either.

This. I'm only referring to the first part of the ability.

Oh, I see. Then I would argue that you have to choose which opponent in a multiplayer game, as it would only affect one of them. This would be consistent with the Judas Iscariot ruling.

I still completely disagree with your assertion that this is how the card works in any case.  The 'place' is a condition upon which the rest of the first part of the ability rests.

Also, unless this card were played in battle...somehow...it would apply to the opponent you are currently blocking by the definition of "opponent's", as it did not activate during battle.  This of course goes off of my assertion that this is ongoing, and not a single-activation.

Our discussion is pointless, since we both disagree. It would be nice if an Elder could just make a ruling and let us be at peace. 

Yes, well, I have one thing to add.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev1Vsnf6LGs

By your definition, the negate would only happen in one phase.  If there is no ongoing cost, there is no ongoing benefit.  The very wording doesn't state that the negate is ongoing, does it?  Nope.  Then by your logic it isn't ongoing.

If you want to argue that the card's cost is only paid on an instant basis, then you also argue that the benefit is made on an instant basis and would end at the end of the current phase.

The only way it has an ongoing negate when there was ever a cost is to have an ongoing cost.

Disagree with your example for the reason you gave in your edit AND because it says "while in battle".  That is, by definition, an ongoing ability that is active every time the card is in battle.  And IC really does not have abilities outside of battle, so again, not the same.

The same argument being made that the cost is instant and only activates once based on the wording of the card can be applied to the benefit as well, that's my point.  I don't agree that either case is true.

AND because it says "while in battle".  That is, by definition, an ongoing ability that is active every time the card is in battle.

That is faulty reasoning. It's not that the ability isn't there outside battle (IC is ongoing and is never "off" unless you negate it), it's just that it doesn't negate anything or grant anything unless he's in battle. It's still "active", just doing nothing (much like the anti-ignore Lost Soul is active but doesn't affect ignore cards if you have more than one evil brigade in play).

As far as the instant cost versus ongoing benefit thing, the burden of proof would be on you to show a rule that says you can't have an instant cost with an ongoing ability (cards like IC already do that, even if there isn't a "your" restriction). Place is an instant ability, if you think it's also an ongoing state then that, again, requires proof.

I sit corrected. Though I'm not sure I see the entire reasoning behind your ruling. The place already happened, so why would it try to "re-place" just because control switches?