47 replies to this topic

[ktom]

I don't know why they didn't want deep striking to trigger "enters play" but that is the cleanest way in my mind to reconcile the rules.

 

My guess is that they want reserve cards to be "in play" so that they can interact with other card abilities and effects. If the character "enters play" when you Deep Strike, it makes it seem like the reserve card was not in play to begin with. Very confusing.

 

I really think the cleaner way to reconcile the rules will be to update the enslavement rules (i.e., "cards cannot enter play or be Deep Struck if they do not match your enslavement dial").

 

 

Deep strike effectively changes every rule in Initating Abilities/Deploying Cards section of the rule book.  Anrankyr's ability certainly CAN deploy a units with the deep Strike and when he does, he can then use the Deep strike ability of the card to place it face down and only pay 1R. 

 

 

I have to disagree with you on this one. The rules for Deep Strike are very clear that you can put cards into reserve "each round, during the deploy phase ... using a deployment turn." Even if this modifies the standard "deploy a card" use of the a player's deployment turn (instead of creating a 4th option), it does not follow that every use of the word "deploy" allows you to use the Deep Strike mechanic to put a card into reserve. If it is not during the deployment phase, and you are not using a deployment turn for the action, you are not meeting the requirements of the Deep Strike mechanic. Anrankyr can NEVER deploy a card into reserve because you are using his ability to deploy a unit, not a deployment turn -- as required by the rules for the mechanic.

[Kumquat]

I'm confused by all this.  I don't actually have any of these gameplay elements so I'm just interpreting based on the info in this thread.  But I don't see how necrons can even deploy cards into reserve the first place, necron and neutral cards included.  Based on the insert deep striking is still a form of deployment (uses the words deploy, deplying, etc.), and units in reserve have no characteristics, faction, etc.  The Necron restriction in the first post says that necrons can only deploy necron, neutral, or factions matching the enslaved faction.  A card with no faction does not meet any of those criterias.  Does the necron dial have a spot for "factionless", if not how could a card with no faction ever match the enslaved faction?  Or is it just that they dont lose their characteristics until after they are in reserve?

[palpster]

I'm confused by all this. I don't actually have any of these gameplay elements so I'm just interpreting based on the info in this thread. But I don't see how necrons can even deploy cards into reserve the first place, necron and neutral cards included. Based on the insert deep striking is still a form of deployment (uses the words deploy, deplying, etc.), and units in reserve have no characteristics, faction, etc. The Necron restriction in the first post says that necrons can only deploy necron, neutral, or factions matching the enslaved faction. A card with no faction does not meet any of those criterias. Does the necron dial have a spot for "factionless", if not how could a card with no faction ever match the enslaved faction? Or is it just that they dont lose their characteristics until after they are in reserve?

The card is not a unit though, so that particular Necron rule wouldn't apply. ( it not only has no faction, it also has no card type)...

Edit: upon closer inspection of what a Necrons player can deploy/play you may actually be right. Necrons can't Deep Strike?

"Following the standard deployment rules and any card text, the Necrons player is permitted to deploy or put into play unit cards from his enslaved faction in addition to the Necrons and neutral cards he can normally deploy and play."

Deploying a facedown card into reserve is neither an enslaved faction unit nor a necrons or neutral card.

The alternative is that psteiner was right and the card is a unit when deployed, but loses this type (and faction) once it is in reserve.

"Deploying a card facedown in this manner is referred to as putting a card "in reserve" and the card is then referred to as being "in reserve". Being in reserve is a game state that means that the card is in play but facedown. Cards in reserve do not have any characteristics, including title, cost, text, card type, and traits."

So either Necrons can't play Deep Strike units at all (non necron, non neutral ones that is) or they check enslavement upon putting in reserve depending on wether a unit that is being put in reserve is still a unit card at that time.

[ktom]

- How do you figure that deploying a card into reserve is deploying a "non neutral" card? When the card enters play face down, it has no faction symbol. That is the definition of a neutral card; a card without a faction symbol. Since Necrons can deploy neutral cards (i.e., cards without faction symbols), there is no conflict between being able to deploy cards into reserve and the Necron enslavement rules.

 

What is on the reverse face of a card has no interaction with game play unless a rule or card ability (like the Deep Strike action itself) specifically says it does. Look at it this way: if the flip side of a card could interact with game-play without specific reference, then all warlords would be Bloodied at all times.

 

- Deep Striking a unit is not putting the unit into play or deploying it. In fact, the rules tell us that when you Deep Strike a unit, it is not considered to enter play at all. Since Necrons are not permitted to deploy or put units into play unless they are from the enslaved faction, there is no actual interaction between Deep Strike (which doesn't deploy or put a unit into play) and enslavement - which is the real point of the thread; people generally think there should be.

[palpster]

agreed on the Deep Strike not being deploy, I meant to write they cannot put Deep Strike cards in reserve. If the card does indeed count as neutral that would change things, but I remain sceptical on that part. Would be nice to see a ruling/FAQ on this particular subject.

[ktom]

Why wouldn't cards in reserve be considered neutral? If they aren't neutral, what faction would they belong to?

[Kumquat]

That's a good point about all cards in reserve being neutral ktom, I hadn't thought about that and it seems correct as the Unit Card Anatomy from the rules reference says that "Neutral cards have no faction symbol."  So yeah it looks like necrons can ignore the enslavement dial when deep striking, unless there is a change to the enslavement dial rules like you proposed or they clarify deepstrike to say that they do not lose their faction characteristc.

 

As far as the deploy/not deploy discussion goes, I think we need to make a distinction between the 2 parts of the deep strike keyword, the first part of putting the card into reserve, and the second part of actual deep striking the unit to flip it over.  I really think they should have come up with better language as I think it causes confusion, maybe they could have called flipping the card ambushing or something.  When someone says deep strike is not a deploy are they talking about the first part of the process of putting the card into reserves, or the second part of flipping the card over.  Putting a card into reserve certainly looks like a deploy to me from the language, "Deploy a card with the Deep Strike keyword facedown", "Deploying a card in this manner is referred to putting the card into reserve", etc.  But I agree that the second part of flipping the card over is not a deploy as the insert specifies that this is not considered entering play, and it was already deployed when it was put into reserve.

[ktom]

The rules insert refers to deploying the card facedown as "deploying a card into reserve," and it refers to paying the extra resources to flip it over during the combat phase as "Deep Striking" the card.

 

So it looks like they were trying to make a distinction between the 2 parts of the overall mechanic.

[Serraph1133]

-
 
- Deep Striking a unit is not putting the unit into play or deploying it. In fact, the rules tell us that when you Deep Strike a unit, it is not considered to enter play at all. Since Necrons are not permitted to deploy or put units into play unless they are from the enslaved faction, there is no actual interaction between Deep Strike (which doesn't deploy or put a unit into play) and enslavement - which is the real point of the thread; people generally think there should be.

I am confused by the fact you say that the card doesn't enter play when the rules insert says that reserve cards are in play. Wouldn't cards have to enter play to be in play, or is this a new nebulous purgatory type rule that is going to cause my English loving brain to explode?

 

EDIT- so after re-reading the above and the clarification between deep strike and playing a unit in reserve I have realized that I was just confusing myself. The unit is entering play when you play it in reserve, and thus when deep striking is already in play... Neatly avoiding the whole faction dial limitation.

[Kumquat]

Yeah Ktom it's clear to me now, but I still think it has the potential to cause confusion.  I had initially thought of the entire process of deploying to reserves then flipping over as deep striking since that is the name of the keyword.  I probably won't be the last person to make that mistake, but it probably doesn't matter as I don't think this there is or is ever likely to be anything that triggers off a neutral card with no characteristics being deployed or entering play.

[steinerp]

I messaged Brad (full email in the post below this one).  For those of you that don't want to read the whole thing.  Here is the summary.  An upcoming FAQ will address this (Until then don't ask me the rules justification because I don't know it).  The short answer from Brad is placing a card into reserve can be done with any deploy action including the Traveler's ability or staging ground-like abilities (However I assume this is only the deploy phase  so I don't know why you use staging ground only but not sure) and ignores the enslavement dial however only cards matching the enslavement dial can be deep struck.

 

[steinerp]

So I am planning on having a section on this in the next FAQ updating the rules for the enslavement dial. But the short answers are as follows:

 

1. Yes you can

2  No you cannot.

3  Yes you can, putting a card into reserve is a choice made when deploying during step 2 of “Initiating abilities/Deploying cards” (RRG pg.8-9) when costs are determined.

 

Hope this helps!

 

On Jun 21, 2016, at 1:59 PM, Paul Steiner <paul.hans.steiner@gmail.com> wrote:

There has been extended discussion on the cardgame db rules forum regarding if Necrons can place cards from faction not on there enslavement dial into reserve.  Basically the question is the enslavement dial says you can't deploy cards of a faction not on your dial and placing cards in reserve lose their faction identity (but not until they are placed in reserve according to my reading, ktom argues otherwise primarily for game play sake I think).  I've largely stayed out of it as I want ktom to be right but I don't think he is as any other solution would either be unmanageable but minus an update to the enslavement dial rules it gets completely around the enslavement dial.  There is also discussion of if placing a card into reserve is a different type of action than deploying a card or if cards that allow you to deploy a card allow you to place a card into reserve.  You can read the discussion here if you want. 

http://www.cardgamed...eserve-deploys/

It that is too long to read here are the things I would like to get from you.

1) Can you place a card not matching your faction into reserve (suggested answer- yes)
2) Can you deep strike a card not matching your faction (suggested answer- No, the next FAQ will address this)

3) Can you place a card a card into reserve using an action that allows you to deploy (assuming all other conditions are met) such and the Traveler's warlord ability?
 .  
Thanks,

Paul

The information contained in this electronic message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the recipient named above. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.

[Veetek]

Interesting. While points 1 and 2 are self-explanatory, I'm curious what the process is to enable point 3, and how it differs from deploying a unit as an attachment.

 

I suppose I could see it as:

- the "can be deployed as" clause means we treat the card as an attachment from the beginning (when announcing our intent to play it), thus enabling Gun Drones and Ambush Platform, but preventing Anrakyr from deploying them as an attachment

- deploying into reserve still treats the unit as a unit when announcing our intent, enabling Anrakyr and Staging Ground. Buuut... that means we could use a unit discounter's interrupt to discount the overall cost...? Urgh, better to not think about this until the FAQ comes out.

[Khudzlin]

About Staging Ground, you'd have to reveal the card as part of declaring your intent (losing the element of surprise) to prove that it is indeed a unit of printed cost 2 or less (as indicated in its upper left corner). That wouldn't matter as much for Anrakyr, since the discard is already face up. But we do need the FAQ to specify what reducers can be used when deploying cards into reserve (the shadows mechanic in AGoT 1st ed makes me lean toward "only reducers specific to deploying cards into reserve").

[steinerp]

I probably shouldn't have added the staging ground and just stuck with Traveler as your right it just adds to the confusion.  Hopefully the FAQ will address all this

[steinerp]

Also FYI - I'm not marking this solved until the FAQ comes out as there are still a lot of unanswered questions and details that we need the FAQ for.

[TheNick]

 

This seems like a really convoluted piece of reasoning and I have a hard time believing it to be true. You are effectively saying that when you check play restrictions, your opponent has to rely on hidden information.

This isn't totally unheard of.

 

Consider the Y'varn situation. Opponents must put units into play if they have them should you choose to legally trigger the planet. You are not supposed to know if they have none, so any time somebody chooses to put zero units into play instead of one, you have to rely on the hidden information.

 

That might not necessarily be applicable here, but it certainly goes a long way towards assuaging anybody who feels worried about the enslavement principle bringing up "totally new issues".

[ktom]

The difference with the Y'varn situation is that you aren't relying on hidden information to check to see if it is legal to trigger the ability. You are merely relying that your opponent is playing honestly once the ability is triggered. I can think of no example where Player A utilizes hidden information to pass the "can the card be deployed/ability be triggered at this time" check, and Player B has to trust them.

[steinerp]

ktom-  Isn't every reserve deployment like this?  Where we are relying on the fact that the opposing card is in fact a deepstrike unit.  (Granted the post game confirmation is much easier and spelled out in the rules)

[Khudzlin]

That (the check could also occur earlier if the card is deep struck or discarded) and deploying a card is not triggering an ability.