FT question

[BigBadHarve]

I always assumed that if you negated a special, it negates the entire special, where as, if you let the Super Scream hit, then on your next offensive action you played the EE that removes special card hits, the hit would leave, but the negative effect on Banshee would stay.  Negating offensively after the fact SHOULD still removed the second effect that the card created, as a negate essentially makes it as if the card in question was never played.

I am not opposed to this, and it makes more sense to me, but it's not how I was told it works. I'm more in favor of the Negate being a ret-con. i.e. Banshee never Super-Screamed.

If anyone else wants to weigh in to support that, I'll get behind it. It's just not what I was told (don't remember by whom).

That is the way it's played. If you let Super Scream hit, and then negate it, the limitation on Banshee is still removed. If you remove Super Scream with a non-negate (IE Run from Slaughter) then the limitation remains.

You cannot, however, undo an instant effect such as a discard or draw. If I'm hit with an HY, and pitch two cards negating after the fact doesn't restore my cards. But lasting effects are removed even if you negate after the fact.

Bear in mind, also, that in the case of something like X-man's Ultimate potential where the opponent may not attack for remainder of battle - If the opponent has already passed his turn, and you negate the special, it does NOT undo the pass.

[gameplan.exe]

Thanks BBH.

It had been awhile since I wrote this reply, and certainly further back since the issue happened to me. When I was re-reading this today, it didn't seem right  So, clearly, I got my wires crossed in there somewhere. When you mentioned the Run From Slaughter, it stood out, and I think that must be what I was remembering.

Good to note on the Pass being irrevocable.

[breadmaster]

i'm a fan of 'where the card is, the effect is'

what about KLs and dow? Opponent must immediately discard all Special cards in play that affect the "remainder of the battle" or the "remainder of the game."

[gameplan.exe]

i'm a fan of 'where the card is, the effect is'

what about KLs and dow? Opponent must immediately discard all Special cards in play that affect the "remainder of the battle" or the "remainder of the game."

since they aren't actually negating the hit (in the literal sense of the verb), but instead only removing the hit (like an AL), I'd say that any secondary effects remain.

[breadmaster]

that's exactly my thought

if the effect doesn't go when the card goes, then KL is actually a BAD card to use against dow. 

'Play during battle.  Opponent cannot use Activator cards for remainder of game or until this Special has been attacked with 4 Activator card attacks.  This special may not be negated.'

if the card is removed, but the effect stays, then the KL means the battlesite team can't use activators for the remainder of game, since there is no longer anything to target.

[gameplan.exe]

that's exactly my thought

if the effect doesn't go when the card goes, then KL is actually a BAD card to use against dow. 

'Play during battle.  Opponent cannot use Activator cards for remainder of game or until this Special has been attacked with 4 Activator card attacks.  This special may not be negated.'

if the card is removed, but the effect stays, then the KL means the battlesite team can't use activators for the remainder of game, since there is no longer anything to target.

that's an interesting note. the only problem is that this particular scenario (KL vs DoW) was common in tournament days, and the ruling was always the same. I don't know if there was ever a documentation for that, but everyone knew it and played it that way 

[BigBadHarve]

i'm a fan of 'where the card is, the effect is'

what about KLs and dow? Opponent must immediately discard all Special cards in play that affect the "remainder of the battle" or the "remainder of the game."

since they aren't actually negating the hit (in the literal sense of the verb), but instead only removing the hit (like an AL), I'd say that any secondary effects remain.

No, when you play a KL you remove the effect as well as the card itself. To play otherwise makes this card absolutely without purpose.

I play KL against an opponent with a front line blocked off - Gambit: Charm, Beast: Acrobatics etc... and remove the cards in play, but the effect remains and I still can't attack? WTF?

I play KL against someone with EB cards still in play - I remove your Stars and Garters, but you can still shift any attack to a now non-existent card? WTF?

I could keep going, but it's quite clear how KL cards work.

[breadmaster]

that's exactly my point

i'm not saying KLs shouldn't remove the effects.  they should (and do). 

what i'm saying is that removing ANY card should remove all effects.  i couldn't find anything in the rules to suggest otherwise.  why would effects go by removing the special with one card (an KL) but not another (an AL)

[thetrooper27]

Maybe it has something to do with it being a hit (Sonic Scream) versus it just being a card in play (DoW)??  Maybe secondary effects are different than effects solely generated by the card in play?

[Onslaught]

Removing a hit doesn't remove the effects of something like Super Scream because that's how it was ruled in tournaments and it is the most intuitive interpretation, even if the poorly worded guides out there fail to reinforce this. That's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes when you're playing a game that has been dead for almost 15 years and had shoddy official support even when the game was still active.

[Demacus]

I think the ultimate issue here is that we have players who are looking for blanket effects, when rules were based on specific cards back when the game was live.  Bread's example of KL vs AL is a prime example.  The rulings on the AL would have be made WAY back before the KL was even a thought for the game, and when the KL came out, the AL rule would not have been revised, as it had already been established with a set method of play.

You almost have to look at the cards set by set instead of "This is worded like so, and this is worded like so, so they must have a similar effect". 

[breadmaster]

judges ruled incorrectly before on BA/CD/A-Next...etc , directly contradicting the meta rules

just because something was ruled incorrectly in the past, is no reason to keep adhering to the bad ruling

EDIT:

i should also add, this isn't solely a case of an old card (AL) vs new (KL).  it's about two different rulings on the same card (the newer KL).  with dow, i play KL and remove the card AND its effect.  with a card like vision's BM (Acts as a level 7 Fighting attack. If successful, target hero may not attack for remainder of battle.) , i remove the card with the KL (the 7), but NOT the effect (cannot attack).  there's nothing in the rules i can find to support this interpretation.  not to mention it doesn't make a whole lot of sense

...heh...i said 'BM'

[thetrooper27]

I know it isn't worded this way on any version of the card, but does a KL effectively "negate" the effects of cards in play for remainder of battle or remainder of game?

If the KL removes the Sonic Scream hit, it removes the secondary effect, doesn't it?  Just wanna be sure.

[breadmaster]

no

the way most people seem to play it, is that the KL will remove the 11, but banshee still can't attack

i'm proposing when a player removes a card, they remove all effects. i couldn't find any rules against this interpretation, and it's not like this exactly breaks game either.  there's not much justification for removing the effects of DoW with a KL, but not the effects of other cards, other than 'that's the way it's always been done'

[BigBadHarve]

no

the way most people seem to play it, is that the KL will remove the 11, but banshee still can't attack

i'm proposing when a player removes a card, they remove all effects. i couldn't find any rules against this interpretation, and it's not like this exactly breaks game either.  there's not much justification for removing the effects of DoW with a KL, but not the effects of other cards, other than 'that's the way it's always been done'

You're creating an unnecessarily complex scenario.  KL cards remove ALL effects, period.

If I play KL to remove Sonic Scream, or Vision's Intangible strike, then the card is removed from play as is the secondary effect.

The KL specials specifically state 'Discard all cards in play...' which would imply they are removed from play. It makes no sense that the card is removed from play but the effect of it remains. I don't know how this whole train of thought came about...



Of course they must contain the words - 'Remainder of battle/remainder of game.'  They don't have any effect on cards without those phrases, even if it's a lasting effect.