Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Captain Cold-Leonard Wynters and Phoenix-Redd's Global

  1. #1

    Captain Cold-Leonard Wynters and Phoenix-Redd's Global

    So the other day I was playing/judging, and I had both:

    Captain Cold-Leonard Wynters, with this power (with a die on the board): While Captain Cold is active, your opponent must pay 1 to declare an attack.

    AND

    Phoenix - Redd, with the global: Global: Pay [1 Bolt] . Target character must attack.

    I wanted to make my opponent attack, and I had the bolt to pay, but I also had a Captain Cold active, and he had no energy. I was judging, so I leaned against whatever ruling would help me, even though I was the only person who brought up the interaction, as my opponent was new/didn't notice, but I did and was talking about it audibly (I was judging, and already had the prize card so I didn't really care if I won that much since I wasn't going to take a second copy, and knew I'd find out later; it also didn't matter that much in the long run of that game's outcome and I knew it), and decided that until I could figure it out further, since both say must, and he didn't have the energy to attack, he couldn't be made to.

    In my gut though, if I hadn't been also playing, I'd have ruled the other way, that using Phoenix's global would supersede anything holding it back.

    So my question comes in two very large parts:

    What significance does the word *must* have, if any? Are there other words, such as can, or may, that it supersedes, or is superseded by? What is the interaction between two cards that say must? Does the active player get to decide which one supersedes, the player controlling the card, or is there just some other reason that I haven't mentioned?

    AND

    In this case, what is the exact ruling, explained simply, without all the mumbo jumbo I asked for up there. Basically, can I use my Phoenix's global while I have Captain Cold active to make an opponent without energy attack? What about if the situation was something else similar, like a card where your opponent can't attack if you they don't have any villains, or if they have a fist character, etc...? Would use of the global supersede them?

    BASICALLY:

    What would be the ruling and why. I make things way more complicated than need be. Thanks

  2. #2
    http://www.wizkidseventsystem.com/bb...hp?f=10&t=1647

    You can't force a player to pay a cost to be able to accomplish an action. If the player doesn't want to pay the life to attack with the character, they do not have to and the character then is unable to attack so ignores the forced attack ability.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by pk2317 View Post
    http://www.wizkidseventsystem.com/bb...hp?f=10&t=1647

    You can't force a player to pay a cost to be able to accomplish an action. If the player doesn't want to pay the life to attack with the character, they do not have to and the character then is unable to attack so ignores the forced attack ability.
    That's incredible, just because even though I rules against my instincts, I still ended up making the right ruling.

    So far, when there's been any sort of grey area issue that I had to make an immediate ruling on, I've ended up being right when I went back to look it up... this time even by accident!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •