Just a quick question that confused me in a game tonight. If Skydeck is out do all cards count as destroyed thus being put at the bottom of your deck or only cards that are sustained on the field and then later destroyed?
Thanks im rather new to the game so my apologies if its a really basic sounding question.
I'm guessing you're asking whether one-shots would go to the bottom of your deck. The card specifies "targets" get affected. Targets are cards with HP; these all remain in play until destroyed, and thus are "sustained on the field" in your terminology.
Welcome!
Ask anything you want. Thats what the forums are for.
Skydeck specifically says "targets". A "Target" is any card with HP. One-shots would not fall into that catagory
Since we are talking about skydeck, the choice of words in the text made me a little confused.
The end effect of the card is that any targedet destroyed is put on the bottom of the deck instead of in the trash right?
The confusing part was that it says "place underneath the appropiate deck" or something else that made me think instead of omni-cannon, savage mana, ect.
The "appropriate deck" wording, I think, is just to clear up its interaction with the V5, so that a villain target thats destroyed just doesnt go to the bottom of any old villain deck, but its correct one. Just my take on it.
It's probably also important to point out that just because a one-shot is played then immediately put in the trash, it's never "destroyed".
Thank you all for the help so I was playing that a tad wrong but not enough to totally screw up my game. That card really screws the Matriarch when all of her birds sit at the bottom of her deck instead of in the trash. ranted when she gets back to them she will have a swarm all coming out at once.
It gave my game last night just enough time to take her down before she could recoup. Thanks Skydeck!
Thats a really clever use of Skydeck!
It can really shut down Dawn as well.
it was certainlu the reason for Dawns defeat. even left return with the dawn out just to clear her trash so she wouldnt flip. burrying truth was nice too
I haven't read the card...is it like No Executions in that the target doesn't count as having been destroyed, or would a Sonic Mine still go off before going tot he bottom of Ambuscade's deck?
In that case, you can choose whether to resolve Sonic Mines before or after No Executions, as this falls under the Order of Operations ruling.
This card hasn't come up yet for me (so I'm guessing it's part of either the MDP or Freedom Tower), but it sounds like it could mess with Voss pretty well too :).
It wouldn't fall under operations, cards stay in play while they resolve on-destruct effects. No matter where they would go when destroyed.
Right…but if the card is removed from play by a seperate effect before it has a chance to resolve that destruction effect, then whats your point? Its the same principle that allows us to interupt damage sequences when the damage source leaves play
Does the Skydeck thingy say "When a target would be destroyed, put it to the bottom of its deck instead"? Because if so, that's a bit like Unforgiving Wasteland's "When a target would be destroyed (by the environment), remove it from the game instead" which lets you get around stuff like Lilian's Fowl-destruction damage. But I suppose if it says "when a target is destroyed…" (as opposed to "would be destroyed"), then it still does its normal destruction stuff, just goes to the bottom of the deck afterwards rather than the trash.
We also have an official ruling that you can't stop the on-destruct effect of Sonic Mine.
Actually! It has been confirmed that things killed by environment targets while Unforgiving Wasteland is played, that the "destruction" would not trigger, as they are removed from game instead of being destroyed.
Would be destroyed, remove instead (AKA not destroyed)
vs.
when it is destroyed, put on bottom (no instead)
I think it would wait.
But your point is correct, when something replaces the destruction it cancels the on destruct effect.
Bumping this thread a bit to mention an issue we had with the Skydeck today - it entered play while we were fighting a flipped Dreamer. This meant that regarding her targets, there were two different "When this target is destroyed, put it somewhere that isn't the trash" thingys in play. I decided that the "Order of operations" thingy would be in force here, thus when a Projection was destroyed both the Dreamer's card and the Skydeck would try to put it not-in-the-trash at the same time, therefore we could choose and put it under the Dreamer's card to further our progress toward a win.
Is there any reason why this might be wrong, or did we do it right on this one?
Since it is not start or end of turn effects, and the owrding is the same, it would be heroes choice as to which to do.
Unfortunately, now that I've read it, it provides no such clarification. It can't ever work on One-Shots, of course, since those aren't "destroyed" but simply "put into trash". But if we pretend that it could be in play at the same time as Imbued Vitality, then all other cards would be targets and thus would be Skydecked "when destroyed", which seems to imply that they are still indeed destroyed. But I still wish it had been written with "instead of into the trash" for clarity's sake, and for that matter that it had said "on the bottom of that deck" instead of "underneath that deck" (which implies that there's some Dreamer-esque limbo zone underneath the deck, which wouldn't count as part of the deck itself). Especially given that Parse and Writhe have cards which mess with the bottom cards of decks, and the use of different language on Skydeck seems to indicate a distinction, one that'd be meant to prevent Writhe from Extracting a Skydecked target, but probably doesn't actually exist.
Would it be possible for someone who playtested for Vengeance to shed some light on this weirdness?
sky deck says targets doesnt it?
and OoO is for things that seem loke they happen at the same time. so Sky Deck+the drram or la capitan with unity out, it doesnt really matter
either players choose (in which the dreamer has the same result but you get a slight advantage against la capitan) or it goes by which is out first… which will always be the villain card.
so… yeah. kinda moot question?
Yeah, that was what I thought, but the person I was playing with seemed to think there should be some other way it should work and that I should ask about it on here.
My ultimate motive for Sentinels
Don't over think it. What do you think would be the coolest?
People have different definitions of cool. It's better to have a definite right answer and avoid mid-game arguments.
I point to what i said in the other thread. What does your group think is best? This isnt copmetitive, this isnt a situation were one of you is going to win or loose based on the way the ruling goes. Either you win together or you loose together, and so a ruling on something you aren't sure how it will go... well it doesn't really matter does it? no one comes out ahead? If your group thinks it should be one way, do it!
Feel free to have fun with all the debating you want to, of course, but its a cooperative game. Just take a quick vote and don't stress it.
Or, err ont he side of the players.
See, I would say err against the side of the players; victory in a coop game means nothing if the game-loss condition (the villain in SOTM) doesn't pose a substantial threat. Arkham Horror is just about the ideal coop game because you almost always lose, so finally beating Cthulhu proves that you've really accomplished something. SOTM is much more enjoyable in the process than Arkham (not to mention quicker), but the outcome can be a bit of a foregone conclusion except against the very toughest villains (about a third or so). More than half the time, not even one hero goes down, which makes me think perhaps SOTM as a whole (again, with exceptions for the likes of Chairman and Capitan) is excessively easy, so its bragging rights aren't worth all that much. Ever being generous to players in rules calls would exacerbate that effect, though of course it might be worth it, if the stakes are whether a player is having fun. So if someone feels like Ra is useless, and then they get out Solar Flare and Flesh of the Sun God and now they think he's awesome, maybe it's acceptible not to point out Ruling 15 to them and have them go back to feeling lame. But it means that your victory in that game doesn't entirely "count" either, and likewise if you legitimately don't know what to do, but you rule in your own favor and that ends up giving you the win.