Defending When something says card with . . .

[gameplan.exe]

With #44, the Activator is played with the defensive special, so it violates the "can only be defended by a special card" clause.

I was wrong in my memory of what the BA-coded specials say.

I was under the (mistaken) impression that they had the words, "defended with" like the JW and JZ Specials, as opposed to the "defended by" words.

The difference between "with" and "by" here is vast; it makes all of the difference.

Having re-read the cards, I'm completely with Jack and the rules.

--- --- ---

Here's another, sub-question though. These BA Specials say, "defended by a defensive Special card." - singular...

Am I allowed to use more than one Special card in my defense, then?

Strictly based on the wording, the answer should be "no." If the use of the word "by" in this instance is considered to be difinitive to the point of exclusion, then using 2 Special cards would be a violation of the words, "a defensive special card." e.g., using an AC to shift the attack would be the end of your defensive options...

[BigBadHarve]

I was wrong in my memory of what the BA-coded specials say.

I was under the (mistaken) impression that they had the words, "defended with" like the JW and JZ Specials, as opposed to the "defended by" words.

The difference between "with" and "by" here is vast; it makes all of the difference.

Having re-read the cards, I'm completely with Jack and the rules.

It's an interesting debate. I bet no one plays that way, despite the clear interpretation of the meta rules... though I could be wrong. In my opinion, it should be that way... after all the cards in question are OPDs, and as such should be strong. But does it make them too strong? (Although - Rapture's BA is not OPD and has two icons... ouch)

But to not adhere to the meta rule opens yet another can of worms about arbitary rules. (Already more than enough with OverPower.)


Along the same lines - going by the meta rules, if I play Soul Gem - 'Only Adam Warlock and target character may attack, be attacked or defend for the remainder of battle' can teammates play non-attack and non-defensive cards on their turn. (IE: Add to venture, or draw 3 etc.)?

The answer, as most people will agree, is no.

So, here's the next thing for you to consider - X-babies: L'il Rogue states that the opponent may not attack or defend from a Battlesite for the remainder of the battle. Can the opponent use non-attack, and non-defense cards from the site on their turn?

Think carefully again!

-BBH

[Jack]

When I get the binder by next week (or the week after!), we might know the right answer!

[Oscorp]

I got the last one wrong but I'll take a crack at this one too.  I would say the answer is no.  Once little Rogue is in play then the battlesite is completely shut down.

[Jack]

Use the QNA!

Question: Ok here's a couple wuestions that have baffled my tournament friends and me. If X-Babies: Lil' Rogue is played against you, can you negate it with an activator and AO special from your battlesite, or can it only be one of your front line characters that can play an AO special to negate it? (1997-11-09)

Answer: If you play an activator from a battlesite, it is like your front line character played the special. Therefore, yes, it can be negated that way. In fact, it can be negated defensively (when Lil Rogue is played) or after the fact - Lil Rogue only prevents Activators from being played as attacks and as defense - you can still use activators for offensive actions that do not affect your opponent.

Question: I went to a tourney 2 weeks ago and someone there said that he got a few rulings from someone. I thought they were messed up. Here's what the guy said:

X-Babies: Li'l Rogue

can be used to avoid a attack from battlesite
when it is played it cannot be negated with a negate from the battlesite (1997-12-07)

Answer: It cannot be used defensively - the specials guide states that it is offensive only. If attacked with it, it has not yet landed, therefore battlesite cards can be used to negate it. Once it lands, you can still negate it from a battlesite since negating it on your turn is not an attack or a defensive action - it is an offensive action on your turn.

Question: if lil' rogue is played can you still play negates? (1997-12-14)

Answer: I assume that your question is referring to negates from under the battlesite, since lil Rogue does not affect your ability to play negates from your hand. Assuming the above, all lil Rogue does is prevent you from playing cards from under the Battlesite as attacks or as defensive actions. It does not prevent you from playing Specials from the battlesite for cards which are offensive, but do not affect your opponent. For example, you can take a special card as a hit, and then on your next turn, play an activator to retrieve a negate and negate the special card that landed. Of course, then it is your opponent's turn again. However, that does not mean that you can just play any negate you want - you cannot, for example, play a negate from the battlesite defensively (i.e., on your opponent's turn in response to one of his actions) regardless as to whether or not the opponent's action was an attack or merely an offensive action. Hope I didn't lose anyone on this thread. If I did, I'm sure I'll hear about it

[Oscorp]

Thanks Jack!

[CoS]

Jack- so I play evil super soldier for a KO and my opponent has no defensive specials in hand, but has an activator that can pull either a negate or and avoid (say Longshot) from under his battlesite. He is prohibited from doing so under this Meta rule? That does not seem right to me.

[Jack]

Yep...

[BigBadHarve]

Jack- so I play evil super soldier for a KO and my opponent has no defensive specials in hand, but has an activator that can pull either a negate or and avoid (say Longshot) from under his battlesite. He is prohibited from doing so under this Meta rule? That does not seem right to me.

That's the debate.

If you play according to the meta rules, it's very clear, even if no one really played that way anyway.

And that rule already applies to all other similar circumstances. I can't play a special to shift a JW attack and defend with a non special. I can't use an activator to beat an AP special. Why then would the rule be different for BA specials?

It does also enhance the power of these OPDs for those characters.

-BBH

[gameplan.exe]

well he is an Evil Super Soldier! 

[Nate Grey]

My goodness! This can all get so confusing.  After reading this thread many times I think I do understand now, but still shocked at the resolution of CoS's example.

[CoS]

So I played a match were BBHs take on this topic differs from mine. I use Soul Gem on Reavers and my opponents Iceman. He wanted to play snow blind and I said Bo that effects my team not just Reavers (but unlucky at love would have been ok) I also said that a telepathic coordination stand alone action (not as defense or attack) and a draw 3 were ok as well. He used the Ray's draw 3, again I saw no problem with it. (I locked down Reavers with pretty boy). Did Norman Barth address this Soul Gem/Cosmic Cube scenario? Were non defense non attack specials playable by the other teammates?

[BigBadHarve]

So I played a match were BBHs take on this topic differs from mine. I use Soul Gem on Reavers and my opponents Iceman. He wanted to play snow blind and I said Bo that effects my team not just Reavers (but unlucky at love would have been ok) I also said that a telepathic coordination stand alone action (not as defense or attack) and a draw 3 were ok as well. He used the Ray's draw 3, again I saw no problem with it. (I locked down Reavers with pretty boy). Did Norman Barth address this Soul Gem/Cosmic Cube scenario? Were non defense non attack specials playable by the other teammates?

I don't know Normal Barth's take on it, but as I remember from the tournament guide - Cosmic Cube/Soul gem doesn't allow anyone to play any cards other than the two who are in play from the Cosmic Cube. So, draw 3 from another character is not acceptable. Telepathic Co-ordination is not acceptable unless it's already in play.

Snow blind would have been allowed because Iceman is still allowed to attack. A lockdown/cosmic cube combo is, of course perfectly legal and very devastating.

-BBH

[CoS]

but the cosmic cube/soul gem says ONLY the two target heroes can attack be attacked or defend (snowblind effects my entire tire team targeting other heroes than just the one locked into the single combat)  - because of this i thought it was a no go. if it only effected the hero targeted by soul gem (say punisher vendetta) then i think it would have been ok.

[Demacus]

Snowblind reads "Opponent's heroes are -1 to all actions for remainder of battle."

Of the character(s) you have locked in the Soul Gem/Cosmic Cube one is still one of your "opponent's heroes."

Not that it came, up in the game, but I think this is better clarification.  It doesn't state oppenents team, just that all of his heroes that can be affected are.

BTW, could I have that deck breakdown?  I want to wreck a buddy of mine with that little trick.  Just once.  lol