Cactus Game Design Message Boards

However, if you focus on the requirement (to shuffle or discard), that is an action and in order for that action to take place, it requires a minimum of 1.  In other words, did the act of discarding take place?  If nothing was discarded then no.

Requirements are defined by their results.  A player who discards three of the four cards in his hand has taken the action of discarding, but with a card still in his hand, has not achieved the result.  Yet your logic credits him more than I, even though I have achieved the desired result and he has not.

What is important here is not that the technical requirement of 0 was met but whether the action took place.

Since the requirement was set by the lunatic, with a consequence for failing to do so, it actually is the more important thing to have met his requirement.  By bringing in the police later, you substituted the original effect that you stated (protection from bad things) with a different effect (going to jail) which was not part of your (coerced) agreement with the lunatic, but you just assume is supposed to take precedence.  The requirement by these cards is only that you apply their effect to any and all cards you have in your hand; there is not some secondary ghost requirement that shows up later to enforce a different set of rules.

What if their were cards that said "every time you discard your hand, you may do x" or "every time your opponent discards their hand you can do x" would they be fulfilled along with PO?  Would they be fulfilled every discard phase when they "discard" their 0 hand?

That is correct.  Which is why you will never see a card like that.

But that's a 1 for 1 exchange, not a discarding of all the contents of a location.

Yes.

"If used by a Greek, place in opponent's territory. Each time opponent draws cards (except during draw phase), you may discard a card in that territory except a Lost Soul."

I would say yes. They are drawing, it's just they're drawing 0 cards. Their hand number doesn't have to change. They still have a deck, it just doesn't have any cards in it.

Those specify drawing cards, they are not referencing the totality of a location.  In particular, "draw a card" has a specific single number, so it either happens or it doesn't.

Except, Abom does not specifically say "Draw a card"

It says "draws cards", with no specific number. Therefore, you can draw zero cards and still trigger it.

But it DOES SAY draw cards.  The objects of this discussion, such as Primary Objective do not say to discard CARDS, but the total contents of your HAND.

The principle is not in fact the same and I told you exactly how they differ.  Discarding zero cards does not constitute discarding cards.  Discarding all the contents of your hand does constitute discarding your hand.

Quote from: The Schaef on January 20, 2011, 04:50:51 PM

Those specify drawing cards, they are not referencing the totality of a location.  In particular, "draw a card" has a specific single number, so it either happens or it doesn't.

Except, Abom does not specifically say "Draw a card"

It says "draws cards", with no specific number. Therefore, you can draw zero cards and still trigger it.

Drawing zero is does not trigger A-Boms ability because it says "when your opponent draws cards" drawing zero would not qualify as drawing cards because zero is nothing so your not drawing anything therefore not meeting the requirement. It don't know if it works the same way with PO. I have used an A-bom deck and I got ruled this against me so I had to use feast of trumpets to keep reseting there deck.

Then why does discarding zero count for discarding your hand? You did not physically place ANYTHING into the discard pile, so therefore the act of discarding did not occur.

Discard by nature is just as much a specific action of manipulating cards as drawing is. You move a card from one location to another. This does not happen in EITHER scenario.

From the REG:

Discard is removing a card from its current location and placing it face up on the top of the discard pile.

Please tell me, what cards are being removed from their current location are are being placed face up on the discard pile? If nothing is doing that, nothing is discarded.

*EDIT*

also from the REG: http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/default.htm?turl=defaultconditions15.htm

If a special ability requires you to draw one or more cards and the draw pile is exhausted, do not draw a card.  If a special ability requires you to discard one or more cards from a target (e.g., draw pile, discard pile, players hand, etc.), and the target is exhausted, do not discard a card.

My hand is exhausted. By GAME RULE I cannot discard anything, and therefore I cannot meet the requirement.

Lambo, they're nuts.  That's the scientific explanation.  

As a result, I replied with my own nutso proposal: if you discard your entire hand, as if it's the entirety of the location, then a player can no longer have a hand.

also from the REG: http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/default.htm?turl=defaultconditions15.htm

If a special ability requires you to draw one or more cards and the draw pile is exhausted, do not draw a card.  If a special ability requires you to discard one or more cards from a target (e.g., draw pile, discard pile, players hand, etc.), and the target is exhausted, do not discard a card.

My hand is exhausted. By GAME RULE I cannot discard anything, and therefore I cannot meet the requirement.

No one is arguing that you discarded a card if you have discarded a hand of zero.

Thank you Lambo for finding the REG quotes to prove what I've been trying to get across.

Primary Objective is.

It says you need to discard to do the optional ability. If your hand is empty, you cannot discard anything from your hand, and therefore cannot meet the requirement for the optional ability.

I am not discarding anything from my hand, because my hand is zero. But I am at the same time satisfying PO because x=number of cards in my hand. It says to discard zero cards, I discarded zero cards by not discarding any cards or placing anything in the discard pile.

Situation

billy- How many cards do you have in your hand ralph?
Bob- 8, I put down 2 characters and one artifact, I didn't discard any cards (= discarded zero cards)

By your logic bob could not have discarded zero cards because he didn't discard any. But, you see, the two terms are congruent. Simply use substitution.

Quote from: RTSmaniac on January 20, 2011, 05:33:21 PM

u mean they cant have a hand ever again stamp?

Not until a game rule or special ability re-establishes your hand.

Seriously.  If something's being discarded to satisfy a condition for a special ability, and it's not cards but rather the location, then it's the location that is being discarded.  And if you no longer have a location to put cards that go in hand, then you no longer have a hand.

Quote from: RTSmaniac on January 20, 2011, 05:33:21 PM

u mean they cant have a hand ever again stamp?

Not until a game rule or special ability re-establishes your hand.

Seriously.  If something's being discarded to satisfy a condition for a special ability, and it's not cards but rather the location, then it's the location that is being discarded.  And if you no longer have a location to put cards that go in hand, then you no longer have a hand.

You are not discarding the location. You are discarding your cards, which in this case is zero.