Cactus Game Design Message Boards

I would say that even though your male hero doesn't withdraw, you still have to place a female hero in battle. And if you can't put a female in battle, you would lose the rescue. The two sentences aren't a "do x to do y," they are a "do x and do y. if you can't do y, you lose." So even though you can't do x, you still can and must do y.

I'm pretty sure but I could be wrong. But I don't think it's like the last sentence of Prince of this World.

But I don't think it's like the last sentence of Prince of this World.

Why not? That example was the first one that popped into my mind (okay, I was thinking of Nero, but same thing).

Ruling those differently would seem a bit inconsistent to me, but I don't feel strongly either way.

No but seriously, I'd say not because Prince of this World was not intended to REQUIRE banding. It was just a clarification. However, in temptation the point is that you need to place a female.

I disagree. Women's era cards should be read with a grain of salt. The second sentence clearly was assuming that the first sentence would succeed. Since it did not, there is no need for an additional clause.

So if an ability was active that said "Negate all Evil Banding Abilities" then cards like Outburst of Anger would be an instant win in a scenario like this?

And that would be a Play As, since it doesn't change the way the card is played.

So if an ability was active that said "Negate all Evil Banding Abilities" then cards like Outburst of Anger would be an instant win in a scenario like this?

I don't understand how negating evil banding has anything to do with this.

Uhm... I think that would still be a good banding ability, since it is adding the hero.

Man... I am losing my credibility on these things, lol. I would still LIKE to see it my way... but that seems reasonable. Oh well. 

Some cards, like The Long Day, say: "If Rescue Attempt fails, do X." Other cards, like Temptation, say (approximately): "If X is not true, then Rescue Attempt fails."

The first is the condition, and X must happen if and only if a rescue attempt has ended with no LS rescued. The second is a clarifier, so that the Rescue Attempt would really fail only under normal rescue-attempt-failing circumstances. So if Temptation does in fact force a withdraw, and your opponent can't place a female hero in battle, or negate Temptation, the rescue attempt fails. Not because of Temptation's clarifying text, but rather because of the fact that no heroes are in battle.

If Temptation were to be made today, it would probably say something like what YourMathTeacher suggested.