Sequence of Play - Updated on 06/09/08
|
Post by dbaker on Jun 18, 2008 21:01:27 GMT -5
I see your point. I can understand playing the Reconn to counter the affects of the battlefeild. But, playing Lean and Mean before discarding for the battlefield dose not make any sense to me. I think this ruling will add a lot of time consuming ruling issues to the game because just about any edge card / action you play or do can be argued to support playing or doing these things.
|
|
|
Post by zogfhyr on Jun 19, 2008 0:32:45 GMT -5
Why not just reverse the order. Have the May Do phase first and then the Must Do phase. That way you could play all the May Do affects because nearly anything you do has the potencial to change the outcome of later effects. This would also stop people from losing thier weapon due to a disarm from a Must Do effect and then thinking they can get it back in the same turn (soft/hard exertion) as a May Do effect. Having the Mays before the Musts might solve a lot of problems before they start.
|
|
|
Post by forimthehighlander on Jun 19, 2008 1:01:43 GMT -5
This might be true for Type 2, but according to headswillroll and prowler it will leave a lot of things to be exploited in Type One. I have know idea how true that is but it should still be considered.
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 19, 2008 5:09:27 GMT -5
This might be true for Type 2, but according to headswillroll and prowler it will leave a lot of things to be exploited in Type One. I have know idea how true that is but it should still be considered. I see you guys are starting to see a little of what we are talking about.
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 19, 2008 5:14:26 GMT -5
If your strategy is so weak it can't win once people know about it, you wouldn't survive the second round around here. Stuff like this reminds me of growing up in the cold war, but with more geekiness and less fear. Fear not though, we all fear and respect your awe inspiring deck building might. So let me get this straight, James. You actively tell your opponents well in advance of playing them what your deck strategy is? The fact you still win doesnt say so much about YOU as the quality of your opponents in that they were still unable to form a strategy AGAINST yours in the given timeframe. I guess here in KC we are used to people who CAN alter decks or deck strategies based on knowledge of what thier opponents are doing. We all have to deal with our own areas metagames, afterall.
|
|
|
Post by scottr on Jun 19, 2008 6:51:58 GMT -5
Another example: I am playing Annie Devlin and I have a Master Strat in play. I have one defense in my hand. I want to rid myself of this defense so my opponent's battlefield will do one damage to me. Because I am altering the effects of Battlefield, I can play this. This affects the outcome. Why would fishing be any different then this example to look for something to discard? You are looking for a direct way to affect the out come of the card in play. Strating, drawing and discarding your cards can and will have this affect and some will not. But, it has the potential to alter the outcome. I want to throw it out there that this logic is pretty flawed from the start. This will lead to a lot of rulings made simply on opinion of how something "affects" something rather than the actual interaction of the cards. In the Lean and Mean vs. Battlefield example, Lean and Mean does absolutely nothing to affect/alter the Battlefield, all it affects/alters is your ability to ditch or not ditch. Just of the top of my head, this would allow me to play a Lean and Mean during my Must Do before I exert for a Disarm Check. You may not see it as affecting the Disarm Check, but I could argue that the top card is not the Attribute I want for the Disarm Check so getting rid of it "affects/alters" the Must Do. Anyone besides me see the problem with the ambiguity of the situation? Yes - but the way I see it (which seems consistent with Tim's posts) is that ambiguity was the current situation. That is how it was being played already. That is the main reason I like the change - it eliminates having to argue about whether something is affected, and greatly simplifies the phase. As a secondary argument, the old state did leave it wide enough that any scenario that someone finds abusive may already have been technically legal.
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcmurray on Jun 19, 2008 9:00:18 GMT -5
So let me get this straight, James. You actively tell your opponents well in advance of playing them what your deck strategy is? The fact you still win doesnt say so much about YOU as the quality of your opponents in that they were still unable to form a strategy AGAINST yours in the given timeframe. I guess here in KC we are used to people who CAN alter decks or deck strategies based on knowledge of what thier opponents are doing. We all have to deal with our own areas metagames, afterall. In Magic I played the exact same deck in every Type I tournament for at least a year and won 90% of them (with minor tweaks if a new set had something interesting). In Highlander everyone knew my decks after round 1 because there were 8 - 10 of us in a small room, and I won repeatedly. It's possible that the 50+ people I played against all sucked. Or it's possible that a solid deck doesn't need secrecy to win. In any case though, when I find something broken I point it out, because fixing the game is more important to me than hoping I can squeak by a victory on an exploit. YMMV. "There's WMDs in the rulebook" is not likely to make the game better without providing facts to back it up.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Jun 19, 2008 9:22:03 GMT -5
There are a couple of thigs that should be kept in mind when considering Prowler's or my postings.
1- Even though we don't lay everything on the table in the forum doesn't mean we are not PMing the design team and explaining what we have found. They are the ones making the rules, not the forum.
2- We have been arguing this subject with the Design Team every since Tim put it up so, kudos to those that are seeing what we have seen without us having to " S-P-E-L-L " it out.
3- Both versions of Lean and Mean in Type Two are not May Dos. They specifically say "Draw a card." or "Discard a card." So the L/M scenarios are not viable in Type Two and should not be considered examples. This is obviously different for Type One format, since it is different text.
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcmurray on Jun 19, 2008 10:47:18 GMT -5
The impression I've always gotten is that no PMs are happening, and it's "change this rule or we'll abuse this loophole we found." If they are and it's not, that's cool with me. I don't even play Highlander any more, so knowing what the actual cards are is wholly curiosity.
|
|
|
Post by scottr on Jun 19, 2008 13:07:18 GMT -5
3- Both versions of Lean and Mean in Type Two are not May Dos. They specifically say "Draw a card." or "Discard a card." So the L/M scenarios are not viable in Type Two and should not be considered examples. This is obviously different for Type One format, since it is different text. This doesn't appear to be correct. "However, if you have an Edge card which will counter or effect any 'Must Do' or 'May Do' effects directly, then you may play them while resolving these effects. Think of Edge cards as May Dos." From the 2E rulebook, current at www.highlandertcg.com/id70.html. Don't try to use the busted links on that page, scroll down the page or search for the header "'Must Do' and 'May Do' Effects")
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 19, 2008 16:02:44 GMT -5
The impression I've always gotten is that no PMs are happening, and it's "change this rule or we'll abuse this loophole we found." If they are and it's not, that's cool with me. I don't even play Highlander any more, so knowing what the actual cards are is wholly curiosity. I pointed out several times in my posts that I was in contact with the Design Team about my concerns and was withholding releasing those concerns publicly until I had fully discussed things.
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 19, 2008 16:04:41 GMT -5
In Magic I played the exact same deck in every Type I tournament for at least a year and won 90% of them (with minor tweaks if a new set had something interesting). In Highlander everyone knew my decks after round 1 because there were 8 - 10 of us in a small room, and I won repeatedly. It's possible that the 50+ people I played against all sucked. Or it's possible that a solid deck doesn't need secrecy to win. My only reply to this is : you live in Texas, that explains everything.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Jun 20, 2008 7:25:23 GMT -5
3- Both versions of Lean and Mean in Type Two are not May Dos. They specifically say "Draw a card." or "Discard a card." So the L/M scenarios are not viable in Type Two and should not be considered examples. This is obviously different for Type One format, since it is different text. This doesn't appear to be correct. "However, if you have an Edge card which will counter or effect any 'Must Do' or 'May Do' effects directly, then you may play them while resolving these effects. Think of Edge cards as May Dos." From the 2E rulebook, current at www.highlandertcg.com/id70.html. Don't try to use the busted links on that page, scroll down the page or search for the header "'Must Do' and 'May Do' Effects") Well, if you wish to argue what is right and what is wrong, keep two things in mind. 1- The ruling that Tim has given for Type Two is that you may play or use an effect/affect of any May Dos or Must Dos in any order during the MD/MD phase. Nowhere in that statement does it say that any edge is a "May Do". There is specific text on most edges stating whether or not they are a May Do or not. This also applies to many special and pregame cards. If edges were supposed to be considered "May Dos", then why waste the ink on text? It may not be the way you would like it, but at this time it is the way it is. 2- Now to throw the monkey wrench into everything. The text below is from the new web site copied from the "Rulebook". By this text, try to explain to me how you plan on playing any cards in your MD/MD phase in Type Two format. Just for ease of reference, I bolded the appropriate text. In my opinion, this needs some work. 1. Sweep Phase When you play cards during your turn, you leave them in play as a reminder during your opponent's turn of what you played. At the beginning of your next turn, you use your Sweep Phase to discard any of these cards still in play that normally do not remain in play. Cards awaiting your next Sweep Phase are considered to be 'in play'. This is important for card effects that can target cards 'in play' or their effects. 'Discard to use' cards, explained later, immediately go to your discard pile when they are discarded to be used. Cards that are discarded from your hand, removed from play (discarded), or from the game are done so immediately. Also, cards drawn from your Endurance when making a Hard Exertion will immediately go to your discard pile if not used. If you are forced by your opponent or your own actions to discard certain cards directly from your hand, these go immediately to your discard pile and do not wait for your next Sweep Phase. Ordinarily you only play cards or discard cards during your turn. If there are things your opponent is forcing you to do you “Must Do” them at this time. If there are multiple items that you “Must Do” them in the order you choose. If you are required to discard cards or remove cards from play you do that now. You may not play a card during this phase.
After you do all your “Must Do” items you may now do any “May Do” items in the order you chose. Remember you may not play a card during this phase.If you are the player going first in the game, then you will have no cards in play that need to be discarded and nothing that you “Must Do” so move on to the next phase.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Jun 20, 2008 7:34:38 GMT -5
Also, to add fuel to the fire, here is another copied section from the new web site out of the "Rulebook". The way it looks, in Type Two format, you will not be playing any cards at all during the May Do/Must Do phase.
'Must Do' and 'May Do' Effects
A golden rule you must remember is that you may not do anything if it is not your turn. This rule not only keeps you from effecting your opponent during his turn, but it also means that nothing can happen to you until your turn. If your opponent plays a card, or there is a card in play, which informs you to do a certain action, you must wait until the beginning of your turn to perform that action. These effects fall into two categories; "Must Do" and "May Do" effects.
When your turn begins you discard all your old cards during your Sweep Phase. Now you must take care of all 'Must Do' and 'May Do' effects before you can continue with your turn.
First you begin with any 'Must Do' effects. These effects are identifiable by the text of their instructions. The instructions will most likely have the word 'must' in the description of the action you must take.
It may occur that you have multiple 'Must Do' effects during your turn. If this is the case, you may take care of them in any order you wish as long as you take care of all 'Must Do' effects before you continue with your turn.
After you've taken care of any 'Must Do' effects, you then process any 'May Do' effects. 'May Do' effects are identified as simply as 'Must Do' effects as the text describing the action will most likely have the word 'may' in it. Unlike 'Must Do' effects, you may opt not to do 'May Do' effects at all.
It may occur that you have multiple 'May Do' effects during your turn. Again, you may do these in any order. Be sure all 'May Do' effects are resolved before you continue with your turn.
Now, essentially, you have yet to start your Defense Phase which is the first phase in which you may play a Special card. However, if you have an Edge card which will counter or effect any 'Must Do' or 'May Do' effects directly, then you may play them while resolving these effects. Think of Edge cards as May Dos.
If your opponent plays a card, or uses an effect in play, which removes a card from play, then this is done during your Must Do phase.
You Must Do all of your Must Dos before you May Do any of your May Dos unless you have a May Do that will allow you to not do a Must Do, then you May Do that May Do before you finish your Must Dos. This sentence is in the book not entirely but greatly do to the fact it was just fun to write.
Note there may be special cards in play that force you to do a Must Do before you have a chance to play a counter card in your Defense phase. These cards may not be countered with the cards you have. They may however be countered with discard to use cards that you would have to already have in play. In which case you would discard them in your May Do phase to allow you to not have to do a Must Do in the Must do phase.
|
|
|
Post by scottr on Jun 20, 2008 9:55:32 GMT -5
Well, if you wish to argue what is right and what is wrong, keep two things in mind. 1- The ruling that Tim has given for Type Two is that you may play or use an effect/affect of any May Dos or Must Dos in any order during the MD/MD phase. Nowhere in that statement does it say that any edge is a "May Do". There is specific text on most edges stating whether or not they are a May Do or not. This also applies to many special and pregame cards. If edges were supposed to be considered "May Dos", then why waste the ink on text? It may not be the way you would like it, but at this time it is the way it is. 2- Now to throw the monkey wrench into everything. The text below is from the new web site copied from the "Rulebook". By this text, try to explain to me how you plan on playing any cards in your MD/MD phase in Type Two format. Just for ease of reference, I bolded the appropriate text. In my opinion, this needs some work. I'll point you to my quote again, adding bold: "However, if you have an Edge card which will counter or effect any 'Must Do' or 'May Do' effects directly, then you may play them while resolving these effects. Think of Edge cards as May Dos." Denial vs. specific permission. But they should fix the other portion to clarify that no special cards may be played. Regardless, this entry covers Lean and Mean for the scenarios that have been presented.
|
|
|
|