Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Type: Fortress • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: At any time, you may discard the bottom card of deck. If it is an orange demon or a Lost Soul, place it in your territory instead. You may discard this card to add your demon to the battle.

My question is about the bolded part of this ability.  It's a cost/effect ability and it doesn't appear that there are any restrictions as to when I can pay this cost.  If I was crazy enough to want to discard my own Gates outside of battle, I could pay the cost (discard Gates) to gain no benefit (add your demon to battle), coudn't I?

w/ YMT. It makes it sound like if you aren't in battle phase then you could not discard card gates to add to something that bascially isn't existing yet.

Seems like that sentence is dependent on the one before it.  I think we should be able to use Gates to create a battle challenge that starts with an Evil Character.

That seems like it would be a cool idea but it would be pointless for the fact that you wouldn't be getting anything in return.

Seems like that sentence is dependent on the one before it.  

How is it dependent? It doesn't say "that demon."

Jephtha can still be used because it doesn't specify who's evil characters are being discarded. So even if they don't and you do, you can still do it, which would be kind of pointless to discard your own ec. Unless it's mannaseh lol XD

By that logic would you say I that couldn't discard my top card for Jephthah unless my opponent has an Evil Character in play too?

What does that have to do with the words "the battle?" It would appear that you are trying to tie my logic to a completely different scenario.

It doesn't have anything to do with "the battle" just as "two Evil Characters in a territory or set-aside area" doesn't limit by ability to discard my top card with Jephthah.

I'm only pointing this out because Gates and Jeph are the same type of ability.  Pay X to gain benefit Y.

They are not the same because Jeph is a character and Gates is a fortress. Character abilities are already limited to battle (minus obvious exceptions). Fortress abilities are not, unless the SA says otherwise. I would argue that this ability says otherwise.

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on November 25, 2009, 12:09:48 PM

What does that have to do with the words "the battle?" It would appear that you are trying to tie my logic to a completely different scenario.

It doesn't have anything to do with "the battle" just as "two Evil Characters in a territory or set-aside area" doesn't limit by ability to discard my top card with Jephthah.

I'm only pointing this out because Gates and Jeph are the same type of ability.  Pay X to gain benefit Y.

However, territories and set-asides exist continually throughout the game.  Battles do not.  The rulebook governs battle initiation. 

Seems like that sentence is dependent on the one before it.  I think we should be able to use Gates to create a battle challenge that starts with an Evil Character.

Therefore, a battle cannot be initiated by an EC by discarding Gates.

It is not legal without "the battle," IMO.

Good Question from Gabe as always - I think in the past when these situations have come up, its been fairly consistent that you can always pay the cost, even if you don't recieve the benefit - In this case using it outside of battle is akin to paying the cost, and then you cannot recieve the benefit, because EC's do not start battle challenges (Anymore, but pre-prophets they could.... Oh, for the good old days...) So in conclusion - I agree with Gabe, And he should shoot me a PM to confirm something for me

#1 - I see both sides on this discussion and could see this going either way.

#2 - If it said "discard this card to add your demon to A battle", then I would lean toward Gabe's interpretation.  But since it says "discard this card to add your demon to THE battle", it does seem to imply that there is a battle already happening.  Therefore, I lean toward YMT's interpretation.

#3 - Since I think I know why Gabe is really asking this question, I think it is highly in the best interest of Redemption as a game to rule this in YMT's favor.  Breaking the game is a possibility.  But I'm curious how it will turn out.

Breaking the game is a possibility.

False, the game is already broken.  There will be changes made.

Discarding Gates has very little to do with the brokeness.  Gates isn't even necessary to do it in T1.

I must be missing something. What is the "it" that people refer to you trying?