Dust & Ashes targets Job wherever he is.

[Prof Underwood]

I think it is best said with a rule that cards that respond to certain events don't care whether their targets are in play.

If X happens to a card, do Y to it instead.

When you read "If X happens to a card," you complete the ability regardless of its location.

[Minister Polarius]

rofl worst ruling ever. Commence game breakage! Unless you want to quick correct that statement to say "'Instead' abilities default target to anywhere in relation to the initial ability's target." Or something less complicated that means the same thing, although I couldn't think of an easier way to say that.

If not, you're going to need to have a lot more publicity and be ready to face almost universal resistance if this is, as it sounds like, a no-good-reason overturn of the decade-old "defaults to play" rule.

[crustpope]

even if he has been removed from the game before dust and ashes shows up?  so are we Yu-gi-oh where remove from the game means remove from the game....UNLESS you do this ...then he can come back...

I gotta go with Pol on this one and say this is not smart.

[Minister Polarius]

Furthermore, this isn't even close to the right place for this to be posted.

[Prof Underwood]

even if he has been removed from the game

I'm sure that "removed from the game" would NOT be covered.

Furthermore, this isn't even close to the right place for this to be posted.

Since the OFFICIAL thread has been locked, this is the only place I can announce this.  Hopefully Guardian will incorporate this into the other thread and then delete this one.

[Minister Polarius]

Actually, hopefully this ruling will be fixed, then added. And hopefully in that order.

Furthermore, as written that's not even a rule. "Cards that respond to certain events don't care whether their targets are in play?" What on earth is that supposed to mean? Even satire aside I'm still not entirely sure what that sentence is getting at, and it's certainly not written in any sort of ruling language.

[crustpope]

even if he has been removed from the game

I'm sure that "removed from the game" would NOT be covered.

OK fine but your first post..a quote of bryon says that ..."that cards that respond to certain events don't care whether their targets are in play."...removed from the game is decidedly NOT in play so perhaps a little more clarity needs to be incorporated in these decisions because from my first reading, that is what the elders are saying

[Gabe]

Help me understand why you think that a Job that has already been removed from the game could be targeted by Dust and Ashes?

[crustpope]

I thought I was clear in my post that as I read what Mark had quoted from Bryon that it seemed to say that no matter where the card is, when DNA comes in play, Jobe goes there.

"that cards that respond to certain events don't care whether their targets are in play."

If DNA does not care whether Job is in play, is it a stretch to think that DNA would pull him back in the game?  it is a dynamic used in other games (such as Yu-gi-oh) and I was hoping that this wasn't going to start that type of precedent in Redemption.

[Gabe]

I thought I was clear in my post that as I read what Mark had quoted from Bryon that it seemed to say that no matter where the card is, when DNA comes in play, Jobe goes there.

"that cards that respond to certain events don't care whether their targets are in play."

I understand what you've said.  I'm just not sure why you've come to that conclusion.  Help me understand.

Type: Fortress • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: When you play this card, search discard pile for Job. If your Job is harmed or defeated by an opponent, you may place him here instead. Each upkeep, return contents to hand. Cannot be negated.

It says to search your discard pile.  Do you think this ruling somehow changes that to "removed from the game also"?

Or when it says "If your Job is harmed or defeated by an opponent" are you interpreting that to say "if your Job was harmed or defeated..."?  Meaning that because Job was removed in the past somehow D&A will reach back in time to save him?

Or is there something else I'm missing?

[crustpope]

No it was more the second one that was where I was going.

Ex. I get job before DNA. i attack with job and he is removed from the game.  I draw DNA and while the 1st part doesn't apply, (search d/c pile) the other part was where I was focusing on.  becuase Job was harmed and if DNA does not care whether he is in play or not, then its a logical step to say that it can drag him back.

Now that you have pointed out the difference I see that is would not undo a remove form the game done on a previous turn.

But it is easy to see how this could be confusing because if DNA is undoing other things done on a previous turn (such as setting aside), why not a remove from the game done on a previous turn?  Basically, if DNA can reach into the realm of out of play, how far back can it reach and how much can it undo to drag Job back into the game?

[Lamborghini_diablo]

Job would have to be harmed while removed from the game, nothing can harm him when hes out of the game.

[Gabe]

But it is easy to see how this could be confusing because if DNA is undoing other things done on a previous turn (such as setting aside), why not a remove from the game done on a previous turn?  Basically, if DNA can reach into the realm of out of play, how far back can it reach and how much can it undo to drag Job back into the game?

Help me see how this ruling says that D&A undoes anything done on a previous turn.

This was the intention of the quote posted by Bryon:

"cards that respond to certain events" - in the case of D&A the event is "If your Job is harmed or defeated by an opponent".  That's an event that is presently happening.  Right now you're doing something bad to my Job.

"don't care whether their targets are in play" - this is just saying that my Job that you're harming could be in my hand, set-aside, deck, or anywhere, D&A can still "you may place him here instead."

Hopefully that makes sense now.  Clearly something we've said isn't that clear though.  What part of what was said is causing confusion?

[RTSmaniac]

Why does the ability on DnA not default to in play? aka harm done to my job in play

[Minister Polarius]

At first I was assuming this was a new ruling for a mechanic specific to "instead," and I was ripping on the poor wording of the "ruling." But the more I read this thread the more it seems that my facetious comments may actually be accurate and some elders seem to be confirming that "default to play unless otherwise specified" is being reversed.

[Prof Underwood]

some elders seem to be confirming that "default to play unless otherwise specified" is being reversed.

The traditional ruling that cards default to play unless otherwise specified is still true.  This new rule is just stating what one of those "specified" situations is.  The idea is that if a card refers to a specific card (ie. D&A targeting Job, or Prince of the Air targeting Chamber of Angels), then it targets that card even if it is NOT in play (ie. set aside).

[BubbleBoy]

This makes enough sense when you look at Prince of the Air.

[Minister Polarius]

Well why isn't that the new ruling, then? "When a card targets another card by name, the default location is anywhere?" Why the jibber-jabber about whether or not cards have feelings and hints at "certain situations?" Took me like three seconds to come up with that wording, and it's not perfect (probably because it took three seconds) but at least it's clear and sounds like a real ruling. Would that have been so difficult?

And be fair now. The ruling before that made PoA work was "when a card can only exist in one area, cards targeting that card are assumed to be targeting it in that area (though more poorly worded)." This is in fact a new ruling. Probably a good ruling if worded like a ruling and not just some random mind sick.

[Red]

[Professoralstad]

This ruleing doesn't work seeing as you can't harm something that isn't alive(In play by Redemption standards) Sorry elders ruling is not logical. Logic is a gift most of the Playtesters/elders don't have it seems.

This comment is not only wrong on many levels, it is also somewhat derogatory.

FWIW, the ruling is the way Chamber has been played for years, which is why the I am Holy/Chamber was even considered legal (since discarding Angels from hand caused them to go to Chamber). So it's not even really a change to how things were, it's just a clarification in the rules necessitated by other cards triggered by "If your X is Y'd, do Z". All the ruling really says is that in these situations, "your X" is "your X" regardless of where it happens to be at the time.

[Red]

Sorry but seeing as I may soon be judging tournaments It's hard to keep up with these rules and then have to explain them to players it's harder than people think and I personlly wish there was five players who weren't elders given acesses to the elder board and give Judges and Hosts a heads up to discussions.

[Minister Polarius]

Hey, three elders posting in this thread, can we get a ruling here that's worded properly?

[Prof Underwood]

give Judges and Hosts a heads up to discussions.

We already give you a heads up to discussions.  The new OFFICIAL NEW RULINGS thread and OFFICIAL REG UPDATE thread are both great initiatives that Guardian has organized to give judges and hosts just a couple places to look in order to stay up to date with the game.  And this thread itself is a result of me taking a ruling question to the other side (which I stated on this side that I was doing) and then coming back with an answer.

I know that there are still some problems with the system.  But I'm getting a bit tired of people ignoring the progress that has been made in the last 6 months and insulting the very people who have been working hard to try to fix some things.

[3-Liner And Bags Of Chips]

Type: Fortress • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: When you play this card, search discard pile for Job. If your Job is harmed or defeated by an opponent, you may place him here instead. Each upkeep, return contents to hand. Cannot be negated.

While we are on this card, what is supposed to happen to Job when you search the discard pile for him? It doesn't say anything about putting him in DNA or to your hand or deck or anything...just need clarification.

[Warrior_Monk]

Type: Fortress • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: When you play this card, search discard pile for Job. If your Job is harmed or defeated by an opponent, you may place him here instead. Each upkeep, return contents to hand. Cannot be negated.

While we are on this card, what is supposed to happen to Job when you search the discard pile for him? It doesn't say anything about putting him in DNA or to your hand or deck or anything...just need clarification.

He goes to hand by default.

Of course, cards are supposed to only target cards in play by default too...