What do I do with these cards?

[Gabe]

Shortly after Priests came out TPTB made a ruling about ANB shuffling characters in KotW or Goshen.  The basis of the ruling (as I remember it) is that cards "held by" or "placed on" another card follow the "holder" or share the fate of the card they reside in/on.

I cannot find anything in the REG to support that ruling.  I looked under the "discard" and "placed" sections.

Last night a situation came up on a game where KotW was being discarded by The Lord Fights for You.  My opponent said that the characters held in KotW are returned to territory and found this quote from the REG to support it:

If Goshen or Kingdoms of the World are discarded, all characters held are returned to owner’s territory.

That quote comes from a page of "Special Conditions" in the REG that is not accessible (as far as I can tell) from the normal Index on the left.  It only turns up if you search the REG.

Directly above that quote is this one:

Although characters in Goshen or Kingdoms of the World are protected, the Fortress itself is not protected and can be shuffled into the draw pile by A New Beginning.  Any characters inside them are no longer protected and are shuffled into the draw pile as well.

So my questions are:

1)  Do cards that are placed/held on another card follow their holder (lost souls and weapons being the exceptions)?  Or did I make this up?

2)  What is the game rule that causes protected characters in a Fortress to be shuffled by ANB?

3)  Is there an exception to what happens to characters in KotW/Goshen when the Fort is discarded?  If so, why?

[SJSharks]

That quote comes from a page of "Special Conditions" in the REG that is not accessible (as far as I can tell) from the normal Index on the left.  It only turns up if you search the REG.

Actually it can be found under:

Ongoing Abilities -> Protect -> Special Conditions

[Gabe]

Ah, that helps.  Protect is missing the "special conditions" link in the index, which is why I couldn't find it.

[Gabe]

At least someone is willing to try to answer.

[Prof Underwood]

At least someone is willing to try to answer.

I hesitated to answer because I don't like this whole situation

KotW says that it protects the ECs inside.  Unless this is negated, then those ECs should not be able to be affected at all.  That means that they shouldn't be discarded or shuffled even if the KotW itself is discarded or shuffled.

The ruling in the past was that the ECs were protected from SAs on cards, but not from game rules, and that the "cards in a fortress follow the fortress" thing was a game rule.  So therefore, ANB shuffles KotW and the game rule shuffles the ECs, without them ever being targeted.  Similarly, the Lord Fights for You discards KotW and the game rule shuffles the ECs, without them ever being targeted.

But I never liked that ruling to begin with.  It goes against common sense about protection.  And SAs on cards supersede game rules all the time, so I still think KotW's protection should save the ECs.  I think that to discard or shuffle ECs in KotW, you must either negate, discard, or shuffle the fortress first, and then play a separate card that would then target the ECs that were now unprotected.  However, I'm going to guess that I will lose this argument just like I did the last time

[Bryon]

I am hiding in a bunker.  The bunker protects me from bombs.  If the bunker gets tossed into the ocean, where do I go?

I stay in the bunker.  So, I am in the ocean.

Nowhere on Kingdoms of the World does it say that "If this fortress is removed from play, return the contents to location X."

Returning them to territory just because you think that makes KotW "better" makes no more sense than discarding them, or shuffling them, or removing from the game, or tossing them out the window.  If a card doesn't say to do something to another card, you do the default.

The default is that cards follow their hosts.

[Cameron the Conqueror]

so the REG quote about discarding KotW is wrong?

[Gabe]

Similarly, the Lord Fights for You discards KotW and the game rule shuffles the ECs, without them ever being targeted.

Did you mean discard instead of shuffle?

The default is that cards follow their hosts.

Thank you for confirming what I thought to be the case.  Is that rule written in the REG or rulebook anywhere?

So the quote from the REG about characters in KotW or Goshen being returned to territory is obvioulsy wrong.  Is it left over from an era when that was the rule?

[ChristianSoldier]

I was wondering, if KotW or Goshen gets discarded, so the characters get discarded with it, could I play a heal to save (a) character(s)?

[Cameron the Conqueror]

Yes, you can always heal a character when being discarded.  Even if you discarded a hero from your hand to d/c pile, you could heal.

[SJSharks]

So the quote from the REG about characters in KotW or Goshen being returned to territory is obvioulsy wrong.  Is it left over from an era when that was the rule?

But the REG quote cannot be wrong:

All rulings in the REG are considered Official for tournament play. If there is a discrepancy with the latest edition of the rulebook, the REG overrules the rulebook.  - Rob Anderson

[Cameron the Conqueror]

We know the REG is official, and is the final source, but the REG sometimes has the incorrect ruling.  The REG is MASSIVE, and sometimes is not updated. 

[SJSharks]

So the REG is "obvioulsy wrong" just because Bryon says:

The default is that cards follow their hosts.

with out any backing?

[Red Dragon Thorn]

Yes and No,

Yes the REG is wrong, but No its not just because Byron says so, its because Byron is one of the lead playtesters, and Gabe agrees with him, and not that it matters but so do I.

[SJSharks]

Yes and No,

Yes the REG is wrong, but No its not just because Byron says so, its because Byron is one of the lead playtesters, and Gabe agrees with him, and not that it matters but so do I.

Ok so the REG is "obvioulsy wrong" just because Bryon says:

The default is that cards follow their hosts.

with out any backing, and Gabe and Red Dragon Thorn agree with him.

I would still like some backing to that statment.

[lightningninja]

You must not know who Bryon is... 

No, but joking aside, Bryon is THE card maker/playtester/head honcho in terms of testing, making and knowing about cards. Things are put into the REG BECAUSE Bryon makes the ruling. It would almost be like Rob saying so, since Rob basically wrote the REG, it must be wrong.

Think of it this way. If I wrote a book about redemption, and then you asked me, yes, the book would be wrong if I disagreed with it. Because I am the author. I must have made a mistake. So similarly, Bryon, Schaef and the other top people write the REG, so if they say it's wrong, it's wrong.

My last point is that Bryon designs over 50% of the cards. So since he is designing most of the cards, he knows what they are supposed to do and the purposes they are supposed to fulfill, even if he and the playtesters write something incorrect into the REG.

[SirNobody]

Hey,

So the REG is "obvioulsy wrong" just because Bryon says:

The default is that cards follow their hosts.

with out any backing?

Look at the first post in this thread.  There are two quotes in it, both from the REG and those two quotes pretty clearly contradict each other.  That is the reason the REG is "obviously wrong."

Bryon was just explaining which one of the two conflicting statements is correct.

An additional point to what Bryon said, Goshen and Kingdoms protect from "harm and effect" both harm and effect in the REG glossary only refer to the abilities of cards and not to game rules.  A New Beginning does not shuffle characters in Goshen or Kingdoms, but it does shuffle Goshen and Kingdoms themselves, which triggers the game rule that says "cards placed on other cards follow the cards they are placed on" and that game rule shuffles the characters inside the fortresses.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

[SJSharks]

IMO the two quotes do not contradict each other at all.  The quote about ANB seems to say that the fortress, which is not protected, is shuffled into the draw pile at which point the characters loose their protection and are able to be shuffled in by ANB. What am I missing?

[Gabe]

IMO the two quotes do not contradict each other at all.  The quote about ANB seems to say that the fortress, which is not protected, is shuffled into the draw pile at which point the characters loose their protection and are able to be shuffled in by ANB. What am I missing?

All targets are chosen at the same time.  When ANB targets "all cards" for shuffle the characters in KotW/Goshen are protected so they cannot be chosen.  The fact that they're still shuffled is an example that the characters in the fortress follow the fortress.

[Gabe]

In light of this ruling, is the errata on Vengeance of Eternal Fire wrong when it says "Evil Characters return to owner’s territory."?

Vengeance of Eternal Fire
Type: Hero Enh. • Brigade: Yellow • Ability: 1 / 1 • Class: None • Special Ability: Discard Kingdoms of this World and two Lost Soul sites from one player's territory and discard all Evil Characters placed on Lost Soul sites to "guard" them. • Errata: Discard Kingdoms of the World and two Lost Soul sites from one player’s territory and discard all Evil Characters placed on Lost Soul sites to “guard” them. Evil Characters return to owner’s territory. • Identifiers: NT, Based on Prophecy • Verse: Revelation 20:14-15

[SirNobody]

Hey,

In light of this ruling, is the errata on Vengeance of Eternal Fire wrong when it says "Evil Characters return to owner’s territory."?

If it was play as it would be wrong, since it's errata it can say whatever it wants.  But that errata is a bit suspicious.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

[lightningninja]

Okay... maybe don't post in ruling questions for a while. 

[Alex_Olijar]

If I was standing in my house, protected from outside influences, would that protection matter if the house was SET on FIRE?

Didn't think so.

[Alex_Olijar]

Fine. I am in vegatative state and can not control my actions.

Heroes don't just magically move around. They only can do what their caretaker, the player, directs.

[SJSharks]

The ruling in the past was that the ECs were protected from SAs on cards, but not from game rules, and that the "cards in a fortress follow the fortress" thing was a game rule.  So therefore, ANB shuffles KotW and the game rule shuffles the ECs, without them ever being targeted.  Similarly, the Lord Fights for You discards KotW and the game rule shuffles the ECs, without them ever being targeted.

If a character is "protected from discard" it is protected from discard both by special abilities and by game rules.  If a character is "protected from discard abilities" it is protected from discard by special abilities but not by game rules.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Which is true?