|
Post by redshirt on Dec 15, 2006 12:51:25 GMT -5
Without the rulebook to consult, I am just taking a guess. But I would say that there's not a chance to check for the state of the terrain having 0 integrity until the Leech effect completely resolves. By that time, there is a 2/2 Zombie token there, giving the terrain an integrity of 2.
|
|
spiller
MEGA Judge
Vice-President
Posts: 467
|
Post by spiller on Dec 18, 2006 15:38:56 GMT -5
Is there anything in the rulebook which states a structure with an integrity of zero is destroyed? I couldn't find it.
|
|
|
Post by redshirt on Dec 18, 2006 16:54:53 GMT -5
"If at any Time the Damage Tokens are equal to or are greater than the Integrity of the Structure, it is destroyed and the Structure card is placed into the Discard Pile." - Rulebook, page 13.
If there are 0 damage tokens on a 0 Integrity structure, that would mean it is destroyed.
|
|
Keith Katsikas
Administrator
This is about as normal as I feel these days...
Posts: 1,623
|
Post by Keith Katsikas on Dec 18, 2006 20:28:07 GMT -5
I would agree with that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2006 0:43:11 GMT -5
Do you agree also with Red's answer to my last question? About a single creature on a Terrain getting Cranial-ed?
|
|
Keith Katsikas
Administrator
This is about as normal as I feel these days...
Posts: 1,623
|
Post by Keith Katsikas on Dec 19, 2006 13:01:52 GMT -5
Yes, I agree with Red's answer regarding the token creature being on the terrain prior to the leech being destroyed.
|
|
|
Post by redshirt on Dec 19, 2006 14:32:29 GMT -5
Keith, I think Q was talking about the question of who controls where the Zombie token goes.
There's an argument to be made that if I leech Q's sole creature on a terrain, that I as the controller of the effect that gives him a zombie token could place the zombie token off the terrain. That would leave the terrain in question with an integrity of 0 and force its discard after the event resolves.
There's an argument to be made that Q gets the new creature and so gets to put it in play where he wants to, which would presumably be on the terrain. That would leave it with an integrity of 2.
There's an argument to be made that regardless of what either player might want, the zombie comes into play where the creature it replaced once was.
I don't see a place in the rulebook establishing which would happen.
Another question occured to me. Let's say I have a terrain out with one creature on it. I announce my intent to hire a second creature on it at a speed of, say, 4. In response, Q destroys the creature on the terrain with a Lightning Bolt or something similar with a greater speed. Am I correct in thinking that the creature I intended to hire just stays in abeyance and never enters play?
If the creature is already in play and is about to use an action to go onto the terrain at speed 1 and Q destroys the only creature on the terrain, does the creature that I intended to move remain in play, or does it die with the terrain it was trying to move onto?
|
|
Keith Katsikas
Administrator
This is about as normal as I feel these days...
Posts: 1,623
|
Post by Keith Katsikas on Dec 19, 2006 16:20:32 GMT -5
I say, we need to add a rule to the rulebook regarding this. I vote the Token Creature enters play in place of the original creature (where applicable, meaning, if there was no creature, but the token creature was instead created by a staff or whatnot, then the creature would enter play according to the wishes of the controller of the effect causing the creation of the token creature.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2006 21:28:21 GMT -5
This might be an entire R&D issue. Either way, I think that this type of convo may be inappropiate here and should just be held behind doors. You know, like in chambers, where they used to reside?
|
|
WildfireCEO
Moderator
President
Wildfire Entertainment Inc...We care about our clients, and making their products move.
Posts: 621
|
Post by WildfireCEO on Dec 21, 2006 16:20:40 GMT -5
why is this an announcement?
|
|
Keith Katsikas
Administrator
This is about as normal as I feel these days...
Posts: 1,623
|
Post by Keith Katsikas on Dec 21, 2006 17:52:43 GMT -5
I have no idea. I think it was a mistake.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2006 19:19:05 GMT -5
Is anyone going to take it off?
|
|