Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Gabe on January 02, 2009, 11:43:54 PM
-
If a person plays Zeal for the Lord and chooses a 2 colored evil character as one of the targets can they choose a second evil character that shares a brigade with the first one?
Example: Can "Teal Priest" uses Zeal for the Lord to target Amalekite's Slave (brown/gold) and King Zed (brown).
Zeal for the Lord
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Teal • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Interrupt the battle and discard two Evil Characters of different brigades. Cannot be negated if used by Phinehas, son of Eleazar.
-
I don't think so. After you've discarded a "brown" character you can't discard another of the same color. The Amalekite's Slave is Brown AND Gold, not Brown OR Gold.
"A multi-colored character is ignored if any of its brigade colors are ignored." -REG (Ignore/Repel-Special Conditions)
I think this is a similar case, where if you discard one character, you discard all of it's brigades.
-
This (or at least other similar) situation has come up in a game or two with me, but I never really found it to be a problem. :-\ I guess I always assumed that if there were a multi-color EC, you could decide yourself which of the colors you will be using for the discard. (I'm sorry I couldn't put that in better terms.)
-
You can do that. Just as a red d/c can kill paul without targeting all his brigades.
-
You can do that. Just as a red d/c can kill paul without targeting all his brigades.
But this situation is the opposite of your example. In your example, something targetting small (reg) can target something big (multi).
In this example, something big is targeting something small. +1 with DaClock.
-
It is not the opposite.
it says discard two characters of two brigades.
1 is brown
The other is Brown AND Gold.
Just as I can select to kill paul cuz he is part red with sword of vengence I believe you can select the Gold half Am slave.
-
actually, you dont have a 'choice' here. TAS retains all the brigades that he has...brown AND gold. zeals restriction is that you must choose 2 evil characters of different brigades. TAS is both brown and gold, so you may not choose a brown or gold EC as your second target.
additionally, you can never use zeal on the self promo.
-
I agree with DaClock. If you have already discarded Amalekite's Slave, then you have discarded a brown character (and you have discarded a gold character). To now try to discard another brown character is not allowed.
additionally, you can never use zeal on the self promo.
I thought this was one of those "two if you can, one if that's all there is" scenarios. You can discard just one EC with Zeal can't you?
-
What if you first discard the brown character? Then you have to discard a character that isn't brown, which could be TAS, since it is also yellow. That's how I see it.
-
What if you first discard the brown character? Then you have to discard a character that isn't brown, which could be TAS, since it is also yellow. That's how I see it.
I disagree. TAS is also a brown character and you have already discarded one.
-
I agree with what everyone else is saying... its both colors, not just one or the other.
~TM
-
You can discard just one EC with Zeal can't you?
You can ONLY if there is only one evil brigade in play. Otherwise, you must kill two.
What if you first discard the brown character? Then you have to discard a character that isn't brown, which could be TAS, since it is also yellow. That's how I see it.
I disagree. TAS is also a brown character and you have already discarded one.
+1
-
You can ONLY if there is only one evil brigade in play. Otherwise, you must kill two.
I guess I don't understand the distinction. If you can't discard two, you either can discard one or you cannot. You have agreed that you can. Why would Self cause an exception?
-
i've always understood zeal to work as you MUST discard 2 evil characters or discard none at all, not a 'fulfill as much as you can' type of special ability. it distincty says you must discard 2 evil characters, not UP TO 2 evil characters.
self would be an exception because it shares a brigade with every evil brigade feasible, therefore it can never be discarded by zeal.
-
i've always understood zeal to work as you MUST discard 2 evil characters or discard none at all, not a 'fulfill as much as you can' type of special ability. it distincty says you must discard 2 evil characters, not UP TO 2 evil characters.
self would be an exception because it shares a brigade with every evil brigade feasible, therefore it can never be discarded by zeal.
A ruling was made that if there is ONLY 1 evil brigade in play, then Zeal can be used against 1 EC. www.redemptionreg.com still has Zeal under the newest ruling category, but the entry seems to not have been updated. Weird
-
hmm. i dont remember when that ruling was made...
however, if that is true, self could still not be discarded because there is not just 1 evil brigade in play but 7, correct?
-
i've always understood zeal to work as you MUST discard 2 evil characters or discard none at all, not a 'fulfill as much as you can' type of special ability. it distincty says you must discard 2 evil characters, not UP TO 2 evil characters.
I don't see how this is different than Jephthah, who also does not say "up to." From the REG:
When using Jephthahs special ability, the holder must have a draw pile and must discard two characters in the same territory unless only one character is available.
self would be an exception because it shares a brigade with every evil brigade feasible, therefore it can never be discarded by zeal.
I understand why Self would be an exception if cannot just discard one.
however, if that is true, self could still not be discarded because there is not just 1 evil brigade in play but 7, correct?
However, I do not understand why the exception for Self is based on this idea of "only one evil brigade in play" premise. I thought the basis of the Jephthah ruling was that if only one target is available then you can discard one. If Self is the only target for Zeal, why could I not choose him?
-
i think the way cameron is explaining it is that the only condition where you can actually discard one evil character is if only 1 evil brigade is in play.
if only self is in play, it cannot be discarded because technically there are 7 evil brigades in play.
-
I guess I am really questioning Cameron. Are you paraphrasing the ruling or was it really specified that there can "only be one evil brigade in play?"
-
Zeal can discard one evil character if there is only one in play or if all evil characters in play are of the same brigade. This was ruled to be the same as Jephthah (complete as much as possible) when Priests first came out but has been purged from the boards.
Because that's true Zeal can discard Self. Based on my original question I'm not clear if it could discard a second Character if I chose Self because they would share at least one brigade.
I haven't played teal much since RoA came out but the few times I ran into this situation I believe I just assumed you could discard both the dual brigade character and the single brigade character. Last night when playing Mike it came up and he raised this question. I could really see it go either way but DaClock's logic seems to make sense to me.
-
I guess to me it's a matter of asking this question:
I just discarded a brown character. Self (or Amalekite's Slave) is counted as a brown brigade character (as well as the other colors). Can I therefore discard another brown character?
-
i would say no because you already discarded 1 brown evil character (self or tas).
on another note, if this holds true, then self can never be discarded by zeal as long as there is at least one other evil character in play. sweet.
-
on another note, if this holds true, then self can never be discarded by zeal as long as there is at least one other evil character in play. sweet.
That logic is full of holes. It doesn't hold water. No matter which way the answer to my question goes you'll be able to choose Self for at least one of the targets.
-
how do you figure that? if its ruled you cannot choose 2 evil characters that share the same color, how can you POSSIBLY choose self as one of the evil characters since it shares a color with every evil brigade feasible?
edit: actually, i may see your point. what i meant to say was you can never choose self as a target of zeal if there is at least TWO other ec's in play with different brigade colors.
im used to CCG's (mtg, yugioh, ufs) where abilities are played out as cost (must be paid) to get an effect (as much as possible, following all restrictions imposed). the 2 evil characters seems like a restriction to me, and that was the basis behind my argument earlier. seems logical to me.
-
If a person plays Zeal for the Lord and chooses a 2 colored evil character as one of the targets can they choose a second evil character that shares a brigade with the first one?
Example: Can "Teal Priest" uses Zeal for the Lord to target Amalekite's Slave (brown/gold) and King Zed (brown).
Zeal for the Lord
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Teal • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Interrupt the battle and discard two Evil Characters of different brigades. Cannot be negated if used by Phinehas, son of Eleazar.
Once you target Amalekite's Slave you may then target a second EC of any brigade(s) that is not brown or evil gold.
You cannot target King Zed.
You cannot target Self.
You cannot target Bear (RoA).
You can target a single brigade EC from black, crimson, gray, pale green or orange.
You can target Antiochus Epiphanes.
-
John, if I play Zeal and choose to kill Self then I can't kill any other evil characters because there is no "second" evil brigade. If I choose any evil character that isn't Self, I won't be able to choose self because it is all the brigades.
TAS is less restrictive because it is 2 brigades, not 7. If I kill brown OR gold I cannot kill TAS because it is both. If I kill TAS I cannot kill brown or gold for my second EC because it is both.
-
John, if I play Zeal and choose to kill Self then I can't kill any other evil characters because there is no "second" evil brigade. If I choose any evil character that isn't Self, I won't be able to choose self because it is all the brigades.
right. but say there is a self, orange ec, and crimson ec in play. if i play zeal, i cannot choose to only discard self; i MUST choose to discard the orange and crimson ec because you must fulfill as much of the special ability of zeal as possible. which leads back to what i was saying...if there are at least 2 other ec's in play of different brigades, self can never be the target of zeal.
-
So if, when you target The Amalekites' Slave, you're targeting both the Gold and Brown brigades, then it stands to reason that once Zeal targets Self, it is targeting the Black, Brown, Pale Green, Gold, Crimson, Gray, and Orange brigades. Since the second discard has to be of a different brigade as the one you already discarded, it seems to me that there are no brigades left for Zeal to discard and thus it can only discard Self and no others (or one other and then not Self). Right?
-
So if, when you target The Amalekites' Slave, you're targeting both the Gold and Brown brigades, then it stands to reason that once Zeal targets Self, it is targeting the Black, Brown, Pale Green, Gold, Crimson, Gray, and Orange brigades. Since the second discard has to be of a different brigade as the one you already discarded, it seems to me that there are no brigades left for Zeal to discard and thus it can only discard Self and no others (or one other and then not Self). Right?
That is what I'm thinking. John is saying that because you're supposed to complete as much of the ability as possible, you would be forced to discard a brown and a crimson evil character because if you discard Self you don't complete as much of the ability as possible.
-
I am inclined to agree with the Master. I thought the main premise of the Jephthah ruling was availability of targets. In this case, there are other targets available. I would think that Self could only be targeted in it is the only EC or one of only two, after taking into account various protections.
-
This is how I see it, and would rule it.
It doesn't say that a character can't share a brigade. It just says that they have to have a different brigade. So, you can discard uzzah and the amelakite's slaves. Yes they share a brigade, but they are still characters of different brigades. Is Uzzah brown and gold? No. Therefore, they are different and both eligable.
-
Nicely put.
-
This is how I see it, and would rule it.
It doesn't say that a character can't share a brigade. It just says that they have to have a different brigade. So, you can discard uzzah and the amelakite's slaves. Yes they share a brigade, buy they are still characters of different brigades. Is Uzzah brown and gold? No. Therefore, they are different and both eligable.
im confused...
different =/= cannot share?
actually, im pretty sure it means the exact opposite...
-
Meaning... different = DO share? Zeal just became ten times more powerful!
-
I agree with the Master that "different" is more restrictive, not less. Amalekite's Slave is brown brigade. You cannot put that aside to just look at the gold brigade. If you have discarded a brown brigade character, then you cannot discard another one.
-
No, they can share, but they still have different brigades.
-
This is how I see it, and would rule it.
It doesn't say that a character can't share a brigade. It just says that they have to have a different brigade. So, you can discard uzzah and the amelakite's slaves. Yes they share a brigade, but they are still characters of different brigades. Is Uzzah brown and gold? No. Therefore, they are different and both eligable.
Uzzah is not gold, just brown. TAS is gold and brown.
Discard Uzzah, what color did you discard? Brown. That means you cannot discard another brown EC, even if it is part gold.
Discard TAS, what color did you discard? Gold AND Brown. That means you cannot discard another brown EC or another gold EC.
-
Interrupt the battle and discard two Evil Characters of different brigades.
Interpretation 1.
You select King Zed (which is brown) first. You then want to discard Amalekites Slave. Is TAS also brown? Yes. Therefore it is not a legitimate target.
Interpretation 2.
You select King Zed (which is brown) first. You then want to discard Amalekites Slave. Does TAS belong to a brigade that is different than brown. Yes. Therefore it is a legitimate target.
Those are both true. They have different answers because they ask different questions. They are different ways to look at what it means to be "different".
I think this can legitimately be interpreted either way. Obviously it needs to be decided which way it will be. If it said "discard two evil guys of ONLY different brigades" or "discard two evil guys with no brigades in common" then it could only be the first interpretation. Since it does not say that then I think it is possible to ignore the common brigade and only look to see if there is one that is different. So I am leaning towards the second interpretation. I think this also depends on the timing of the targeting.
If you choose TAS first then you cannot target King Zed (since he does not have a brigade that is different than gold or brown). So if targets are chosen simultaneously then I don't think you can pick those two since you'll be comparing both ways. Now the cards sounds like the targets are simultaneous but I thought the rules governing multiple targets indicate that one is chosen at a time (like in banding). So if this is true and TAS is chosen second then I think that leads to the 2nd interpretation.
-
I think that, based on the ruling that you must ignore both brigades of Antiochus to completely ignore him (essentially: dual-color characters are both colors, not whichever one you choose them to be at the moment), the first interpretation of TAS would be the correct one. TAS is both brigades at once, and so when you discard a character from one of those brigades with Zeal, then you can't discard TAS.
-
I agree with Tsavong's example, since the point here is that TAS is brown and gold simultaneously. You cannot choose to look at the gold brigade and disregard the brown brigade, IMO.
-
That is not correct. To target a character you only have to be able to target one of their brigades, so if you ignore black or gray then you ignore Antiochus. To be immune to a character then you have to be immune to all of their brigades. I don't think that affects the interpretation of this card. It doesn't say that once you discard a brown character then all other brown characters are protected. It says to discard different ones.
Again that depends on, is difference defined as being totally different so you check to sse if they have anything in common (that is, if they have something in common then they can't be different) or is difference defined as having something that is different regardless of what they have in common? Clearly Gold brigade is different than Brown brigade and clearly the characters have something in common AND something that is different.
You seem to be checking to see if they have something in common (so the brown brigade cannot be disregarded). Why is that the correct defintion of being "different"? Why not instead check to see if there is A difference to determine whether or not they are "different"? In that case I am not disregarding TAS's brown brigade, it just doesn't matter since it's gold brigade meets the qualification.
-
We obviously are not getting anywhere, since there are two distinctly logical answers. We need an executive decision, although Mods are scarce these days.
As of right now, any tournament that I or DaClock host will not allow Uzzah and TAS to be discarded with Zeal, but at any tournament hosted by Galad or the ninja you will. That is clearly a problem.
-
We obviously are not getting anywhere, since there are two distinctly logical answers. We need an executive decision, although Mods are scarce these days.
As of right now, any tournament that I or DaClock host will not allow Uzzah and TAS to be discarded with Zeal, but at any tournament hosted by Galad or the ninja you will. That is clearly a problem.
At least in this case, DaClock and I agree. ;)
-
I think that, based on the ruling that you must ignore both brigades of Antiochus to completely ignore him (essentially: dual-color characters are both colors, not whichever one you choose them to be at the moment), the first interpretation of TAS would be the correct one. TAS is both brigades at once, and so when you discard a character from one of those brigades with Zeal, then you can't discard TAS.
Where was that ruling made? Based on this thread, http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=12455.0 (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=12455.0), ignoring one brigade ignores the whole character. It seems like there was potential to make a ruling change to line up with the immunity rulings regarding multi-color characters, but neither Bryon or Schaef posted that a rule change happened. Therefore you point is moot.
Kirk
-
Where was that ruling made? Based on this thread, http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=12455.0, ignoring one brigade ignores the whole character. It seems like there was potential to make a ruling change to line up with the immunity rulings regarding multi-color characters, but neither Bryon or Schaef posted that a rule change happened. Therefore you point is moot.
I was referencing that thread when I made my point, but I could have sworn that the ruling went the opposite way. My bad. ;)
EDIT: Reading through that thread again, I must have been thinking of immunity earlier, not ignore.
-
Either way I need a ruling to this because I use Zeal in T2 and this affects me in alot of ways. So if there could be an official ruling on this I would be SUPER appreciative.
-
Well, if there is nothing on the books by the time the next tournament rolls around you'll know how I'll judge it. ;)
-
Wow Gabe. You were right about this causing quite the discussion from our game. :D I can see the logic behind both interpretations for targeting for discard and depending on if I'm using Zeal or having Zeal used against me depends on what interpretation I like the best. ::)
Going with the spirit of Redemption, Good will always prevail, hence a small justification for keeping Zeals targeting capabilities liberal. As there is no current ruling on this situation you can bash my statement all you want, but we won't get anywhere. I wouldn't mind it being ruled either way, just as long as it stays consistent and doesn't set off a chain reaction of unanticipated future rulings/change of rulings down the road.
Godspeed,
Mike
@ Gabe - kinda reminds me of I Am Salvation vs. the Hopper, Hormah, Female and Site Doubler. ;D
-
We obviously are not getting anywhere, since there are two distinctly logical answers. We need an executive decision, although Mods are scarce these days.
As of right now, any tournament that I or DaClock host will not allow Uzzah and TAS to be discarded with Zeal, but at any tournament hosted by Galad or the ninja you will. That is clearly a problem.
I also could see both ways, but until someone official makes a ruling, I will join Galad, Ninja, and Godspeed, and allow Zeal to discard Uzzah and TAS at my tournaments. TAS is a different brigade than Uzzah (as well as the same brigade), and therefore I will allow it to be targeted.
-
This is how I see it, and would rule it.
It doesn't say that a character can't share a brigade. It just says that they have to have a different brigade. So, you can discard uzzah and the amelakite's slaves. Yes they share a brigade, but they are still characters of different brigades. Is Uzzah brown and gold? No. Therefore, they are different and both eligable.
Discard Uzzah, what color did you discard? Brown. That means you cannot discard another brown EC, even if it is part gold.
Please show me where it says that a character cannot have the same brigade. Zeal only says that they have to be different. It doesn't say that they can't have a shared brigade. The brown on TAS doesn't matter at that point. All that matters is that you are discarding one character who has brown, and another character who has gold. They are different, therefore both eligable.
-
It really is not worth any more debate. At a guess, I don't think anyone really cares how it is ruled, as long as it is ruled consistently.
-
It really is not worth any more debate. At a guess, I don't think anyone really cares how it is ruled, as long as it is ruled consistently.
And here I was thinking I had made a good point... :-*
-
I'm not saying you didn't. I think several people have made excellent points, which is why an executive decision is the only feasible resolution.
-
Yeah great points have been made for both sides and honestly I'm not sure which one I'm leaning towards. I know which one helps my deck the most but not which ruling I think is the best or most consistent for the game. I honestly believe this ruling comes down to which choice is the most consistent with previous rulings on similar type of questions.
-
This came up in one of my games last night. Since there's no official ruling we thought we'd go with the side that has the most support on this thread but that turned out to be pretty even...
In the end I let the person discard my dual color character and another one that shared the same brigade because that's how I played it prior to this question coming up. That one play was very close to deciding the outcome in a game that ended 5-4.
-
Yeah great points have been made for both sides and honestly I'm not sure which one I'm leaning towards. I know which one helps my deck the most but not which ruling I think is the best or most consistent for the game. I honestly believe this ruling comes down to which choice is the most consistent with previous rulings on similar type of questions.
Lets take Paul for example. He is multi, so it was ruled he satisfies Hidden Treasure's requirements (lone green prophet). Characters that are 2+ colors are both at the same time. Otherwise, they couldn't use both brigades in battle. Therefore, if you discard A slave, you discard a EC that is both gold and brown. Therefore, it seems IMO to be definite that another brown character could NOT be discarded as a brown EC was already d/ced. Remember, A Slave is as much gold and he is brown. It would also seem that Self could not be discarded unless he was the only EC in play.
Just my opinion, but it seems to be consistent with the rules and previous rulings.
-
And that's why I think that it's like if you played RTC to ignore gray against antiochus, you still ignore his black, cause he's part black. So I think that you can target just one side.
But I agree with YMT. Let's have Bryon, Schaef, Mike, and the other big guys get an official ruling. Although how Bryon would rule it is the only one that really matters to me cause I go to his tournaments. ;D
-
And that's why I think that it's like if you played RTC to ignore gray against antiochus, you still ignore his black, cause he's part black. So I think that you can target just one side.
When playing RTC to Ignore Antiochus Gray Brigade you are only ignoring his Gray brigade and by ignoring the Gray brigade of Antiochus he cannot enter battle regardless of his Black brigade, but not because by default Black brigade was ignored also Antiochus is dual color Gray and Black, meaning he is all Gray and all Black brigade, not part of one and part of the other. The multi color brigade representation on the card is just that, a representation of which brigades a character is all of, not part of. Just a nitpick/clarification.
Godspeed,
Mike
-
Hey,
A multicolor character can be targeted as any of the brigades it has. Thus Sword of Vengeance can discard Soldier of God. Similarly Zeal for the Lord can target King Zedekiah and The Amalekites Slave (targeting King Zedekiah as brown and The Amalekites Slave as Gold).
Discarding King Zedekiah and The Amalekites Slave discards a Brown Evil Character and it discards a Gold Evil Character. That would be two evil characters of different brigades, thus the condition on Zeal is met.
At least that's how I understand it. I don't understand the management of multi-color things as well as I would like.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly, WildCard Secretary of Defense
www.freewebs.com/redemptionne (http://www.freewebs.com/redemptionne)
-
Tim, thanks for your input. It's great to have you back on the boards after your short absence. You're presence has been missed. :)
-
Discarding King Zedekiah and The Amalekites Slave discards a Brown Evil Character and it discards a Gold Evil Character. That would be two evil characters of different brigades, thus the condition on Zeal is met.
I guess that makes sense to me. Zeal doesn't say "d/c two ECs that aren't the same brigade" it says "d/c two ECs of different brigades."
I still could go either way, but Tim's explanation makes sense to me.
-
Hmm. After reading every word of every post in this thread, I was confidently ready to agree with YMT/Clock/Stamp. Then Tim posted. Now I just unconfidently agree with YMT/Clock/Stamp.
Does "of different brigades" mean:
a) have at least one different brigade than the other
OR
b) do not share a brigade
I always assumed a. But I don't know if that causes other card not to work properly. Does "of different brigades" appear elsewhere? Doesn't "of the same brigade" count each brigade? Does that effect how we interpret "of different brigades."?
As an aside, this card was based on the Bible story where Phinehas executes the Israelite man (think brown brigade) and the foreign woman (think some other brigade).
-
If you're targeting two cards of the same color, the fact that there is a second separate brigade is not considered. Similarly, I think as long as you're targeting two different colors, the fact that they have a brigade in common doesn't enter into the equation.
Discarding a gray and a black/gray would be discarding a black and a gray, just as discarding a black or a gray could each target the dual-color card.
-
That makes sense. I now unconfidently agree with Tim/Schaef.
-
I feel that someone who is a member of the group defined as math teachers who is also part of the group of official Redemption rule-makers should make the call. You see, I'm old and can't remember my rules about mutual exclusivity versus inclusivity, and independence versus dependence, etc. It would seem to make sense to me to use these common real-world rules in this case.
Anyone have some feedback?
(Of course, I also felt that we should use the rules for circuit analysis to define the rules for interrupts, so...)
-
I confidently agree with Tim/Schaef/Bryon.
-
Obviously that isn't how I thought this was going to be ruled but I'm glad that we have consensus.
-
Obviously that isn't how I thought this was going to be ruled but I'm glad that we have consensus.
I agree that it is most important that we have consensus. I also am glad that the ruling ended up going with what Godspeed, Ninja, Galad, and I all thought at the begining :)
And as for your signature there Ben, I have a picture for you :)
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi301.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fnn66%2FMark_Underwood%2FBenArpsBloodyPoptart.jpg&hash=618825468ab3d7fec67a10c31ed7c8b31d51dd4e)
-
HAHAHAHA, where did you find that? I'm going to make that my default image.
-
HAHAHAHA, where did you find that? I'm going to make that my default image.
I didn't find it. I took it :)
And you're welcome to use it in any way that you wish. That was a fun night of gaming and it brings back good memories :)
-
I think the bottom line question is this:
Interpreting Zeal, do we say
1. the player picks two brigades, then chooses ECs of those brigades to discard
or
2. the player picks two ECs to discard and based on the selection of the first, the second has additional brigade restrictions?
-
ugh! nosebleeds -_-
oh how i hate them so! >:(
-
ugh! nosebleeds -_-
oh how i hate them so! >:(
Yeah, and this one ruined my poptart!
-
I don't know about anyone else, but I would never have let my own blood ruin any poptart. ;)
-
Hmm. After reading every word of every post in this thread, I was confidently ready to agree with YMT/Clock/Stamp. Then Tim posted. Now I just unconfidently agree with YMT/Clock/Stamp.
Does "of different brigades" mean:
a) have at least one different brigade than the other
OR
b) do not share a brigade
I always assumed a. But I don't know if that causes other card not to work properly. Does "of different brigades" appear elsewhere? Doesn't "of the same brigade" count each brigade? Does that effect how we interpret "of different brigades."?
As an aside, this card was based on the Bible story where Phinehas executes the Israelite man (think brown brigade) and the foreign woman (think some other brigade).
I try my hardest to argue... and so does prof underwood and others... and then Bryon makes one post and everyone hops on board! It's... infuriating! Welcome back Bryon! ;)