target minion protection and out of turn action sequence
09 Jul 2012 10:40 - 09 Jul 2012 10:44 #32936
by Ankha
The ruling is also a little counter-intuitive in the following case:
A is the acting Methuselah. B has the Heidelberg and an Enkil Cog.
A passes the impulse (no action). B can use The Barrens, but go figure why B can't use the Heidelberg before performing his action with Enkil. He should have used it before A passes, which is not intuitive because we're not "during an action" yet so using the Heidelberg seems legal.
The intuitive thing would be that once you have the impulse, you can do all the legal stuff (including using the Heidelberg before starting an action).
Replied by Ankha on topic Re: target minion protection and out of turn action sequence
Considering this link, the current ruling clearly uses two imbricated sequences, which is not a great thing imho (see my reasons in my previous post).[LSJ 20090123]
The ruling is also a little counter-intuitive in the following case:
A is the acting Methuselah. B has the Heidelberg and an Enkil Cog.
A passes the impulse (no action). B can use The Barrens, but go figure why B can't use the Heidelberg before performing his action with Enkil. He should have used it before A passes, which is not intuitive because we're not "during an action" yet so using the Heidelberg seems legal.
The intuitive thing would be that once you have the impulse, you can do all the legal stuff (including using the Heidelberg before starting an action).
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
09 Jul 2012 11:23 #32938
by Ankha
Which leads to:
A: "I pass."
B: "Before I act with X under Enkil Cog, I tap Heidelberg to..."
A: "No, it's too late, I've passed."
B: "Yes, now I have the impulse, so I use Heidelberg"
A: "No you can't, it's too late. But you may tap Barrens if you wish."
Replied by Ankha on topic Re: target minion protection and out of turn action sequence
Considering this link, the current ruling clearly uses two imbricated sequences, which is not a great thing imho (see my reasons in my previous post).[LSJ 20090123]
It's pretty much exactly how everyone I've ever seen plays it.
"Are you tapping Heidelberg? [pass] Okay, I declare..."
Preserving the completely non-troublesome status quo? Great, great thing.
Which leads to:
A: "I pass."
B: "Before I act with X under Enkil Cog, I tap Heidelberg to..."
A: "No, it's too late, I've passed."
B: "Yes, now I have the impulse, so I use Heidelberg"
A: "No you can't, it's too late. But you may tap Barrens if you wish."
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
09 Jul 2012 14:02 #32943
by Ankha
A: "I pass in-between actions".
All pass
A: "I pass [my opportunity to declare an action]"
then the rest of the previous scenario.
I don't find it very intuitive.
Replied by Ankha on topic Re: target minion protection and out of turn action sequence
I meant that A was passing his opportunity to declare an action. So the full sequence is
Which leads to:
A: "I pass."
B: "Before I act with X under Enkil Cog, I tap Heidelberg to..."
A: "No, it's too late, I've passed."
B: "Yes, now I have the impulse, so I use Heidelberg"
A: "No you can't, it's too late. But you may tap Barrens if you wish."
Huh? A passing in the 'between actions' phase passes the impulse to B to tap Heidelberg. There is no way for A to pass in the between actions phase without the others getting the chance to use it! (Including C, D and E.)
A: "I pass in-between actions".
All pass
A: "I pass [my opportunity to declare an action]"
then the rest of the previous scenario.
No, A must pass if A has the impulse to declare actions but no action to declare. How is it redundant or erroneous?If A and B (and the others) have already passed in the between actions phase, A's extra pass at the top of your dialog is redundant (and erroneous, but not harmfully so).
Sure, but you have to go back to the previous impulse sequence, which can lead to complicated mess because another whole impulse sequence has already taken place.A cannot unilaterally close a timing window. Just like A cannot rush ahead to maneuvers when B wants to play pre-range, or A wants to rush ahead to polling when B wants to play something before votes are cast.
Indeed, but having two impulse sequences can lead to some mess, such as not being able to use Heidelberg while there's no action going on.If what you mean is "B already said "I'm not using Heidelberg before the next action"" and now you want B to be able to reverse that decision, that's... not how sequencing works. Sequencing doesn't allow you to voluntarily reverse decisions.
I don't find it very intuitive.
That's exactly what is currently happening when you declare an action and create a sub-impulse sequence to determine if anyone plays a DI or not. If noone does, B "keeps" the (first) impulse and goes on.Letting B use an effect and keep the impulse is not 'intuitive', it's putting the sequencing rules through an industrial shredder.
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.117 seconds
- You are here:
-
Home
-
Forum
-
V:TES Discussion
-
Rules Questions
- target minion protection and out of turn action sequence