Check out our Event Calendar! View birthdays, holidays and upcoming tournaments!
Gates isn't even necessary to do it in T1.
The only brokenness that I fear is an inconsistent, do-what-we-want interpretation process that makes being a judge nearly impossible, especially for newcomers to the game.
I must be missing something. What is the "it" that people refer to you trying?
QuoteI must be missing something. What is the "it" that people refer to you trying?I think there is some broken combo that isn't being revealed, that those "in" the know are aware of, but so far have not shared.
I ask that those who do know (Gabe, Prof, Sean etc) don't either, simply that it likes Gates to be discarded.
I have no plans of sharing your dastardly plan with anyone (unless Rob asks me).
Quote from: BrianGabe on November 25, 2009, 02:28:36 PMGates isn't even necessary to do it in T1.Nope, but it might be necessary to do it in T1 after an errata to another card (which I hear is in the works).
I've shown it to enough people 'In the know' and I happen to know there is a discussion on it over on the playtesters side of the board.
Quote from: Sean on November 25, 2009, 12:00:42 PMSeems 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.I see how you could interpret it that way, but since that violates a game rule (heroes make RAs, ECs block) that wouldn't work. Game rules > an individual card wording
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.
Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on November 25, 2009, 12:03:07 PMQuote from: Sean on November 25, 2009, 12:00:42 PMSeems 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.I see how you could interpret it that way, but since that violates a game rule (heroes make RAs, ECs block) that wouldn't work. Game rules > an individual card wordingThat is absolutely wrong. The whole point of special abilities are to allow us to do things that the game typically can't allow. You can't discard cards from your deck, but Jepthah "disobeys" this game rule because he has a special ability.
When I see the word "to" in an ability I view that as splitting the sentence in half, everything before it is the cost, everything after it is the benefit.
Quote from: SirNobody on November 25, 2009, 04:42:35 PMWhen I see the word "to" in an ability I view that as splitting the sentence in half, everything before it is the cost, everything after it is the benefit. So is this just "the way Tim does it" or this officially how judges are supposed to rule all cards with the word "to" in the SA? Again, I am looking for consistency.
I have to humbly ask this, can someone pm and tell me what this "it" is? I am concerned that since I am not "in the know" that at any of my next tournaments I will rule this incorrectly, especially given the fact I have no clue what any one is talking about.
I have to humbly ask this, can someone pm and tell me what this "it" is? I am concerned that since I am not "in the know" that at any of my next tournaments I will rule this incorrectly, especially given the fact I have no clue what any one is talking about. I know how protective people are about their "secret" combo's. But it is really easy for me to make a "wrong" ruling because how I see redemption working does not always line up with what is posted on these forum's. I understand if no one wants to clue me in, but I had to ask before I cost some the game by not ruling it their way. I have no intentions of blabbing this secret around, I host far more than I play.