Caltrops reads as follows:
Banish this card to defeat a monster whose highest difficulty to defeat is 9 or lower.
Rat Swarm reads as follows:
If you do not defeat the Rat Swarm by at least 4, shuffle it into the deck it came from; the Rat Swarm still counts as defeated.
If I used Caltrops to defeat Rat Swarm should I shuffle it back into the deck it came from?
I'd say yes. You did not defeat it by at least 4, since you did not generate a number to compare to the difficulty.
Well, I'd say the fact that Caltrops doesn't tell you what number is means you haven't defeated it by at least 4. Have you defeated it? Yes. Was it by at least 4? No, since there is no way to calculate how much it was defeated by.
Notice the text on the Rat Swarm doesn't change whether it is defeated or not.
|
To Hawkmoon's point, I would say that Caltrops DOES tell you what number you 'rolled' to defeat it.
My interpretation of cards like this has been that you treat caltrops as if you had rolled a 9 on the combat check (since that is the highest difficulty you would have defeated).
In the case of caltrops vs rat swarm you therefore would shuffle it, since the 9 is not enough to defeat the rat swarm by 4.
Hypothetically though if there were a card that said "Banish this card to defeat a monster whose highest difficulty to defeat is 15 or lower", I would say that the hypothetical card WOULD banish the rat swarm entirely.
A formal ruling would be appreciated though.
I'd probably go with Hawkmoon's thought process if it ever came up.
But afterwards I might ask why you wasted a card slot on caltrops. :D
I'd say yes. You did not defeat it by at least 4, since you did not generate a number to compare to the difficulty.
But banish does not equal defeat, it equals banish.
I think I disagree with this. If a card banishes, it banishes, not defeats.
Don't have the cards in front of me, but I'm almost certain caltrops use "evade" for difficulty 14 and "defeat" for difficulty 9. They banish themselves, not monsters.
I'd tend to agree with Hawk on this one; the rat swarm is specifying a very specific condition. You must defeat it by rolling more at least 4 more than its difficulty to prevent it from returning to the deck. As caltrops does not SPECIFICALLY do that, it would not stop it from returning to the deck.
Chief Technical Officer
|
Caltrops doesn't fake-roll imaginary dice, it just toggles the universal "defeated/undefeated" switch to the "defeated" position.
Did you defeat it by more than 4? There's nothing to suggest you did, so shuffle the rats.
(Turns out that caltrops are not the best way to stop a swarm of rats.)
I stand corrected! My apologies.
I think I'm gonna side with shuffling as well. But hinge the argument on the strength of the Caltrops. It defeats up to 9, which means it's strength is at most 9. In order to get rid of a swarm of rats you need to roll a combat of 8+4=12. Not possible with Caltrops.
If the rats were 5 to defeat/shuffle and 9 to defeat/banish then I would say the Caltrops could rid of the rats once and for all.
|
Even then MMC, it wouldn't. It doesn't have a strength, and it doesn't defeat it with a number. It just beats it, no specifics. You could find a monster that has a check of 1, but shuffles unless you get at least 2. A card that defeats any card of difficulty 5 million or less would still shuffle it back in. You didn't get a 2 or higher. you got a nothing. That nothing just came with a caveat that the monster was defeated, nothing more.
Even then MMC, it wouldn't. It doesn't have a strength, and it doesn't defeat it with a number. It just beats it, no specifics. You could find a monster that has a check of 1, but shuffles unless you get at least 2. A card that defeats any card of difficulty 5 million or less would still shuffle it back in. You didn't get a 2 or higher. you got a nothing. That nothing just came with a caveat that the monster was defeated, nothing more.
I hear you. But I'm not convinced you can concretely make the ascertainment that it doesn't defeat it with a number. The swarm of rats if hit with an 8 will be defeated, scatter, and possibly regroup. If hit with a 12 will be vaporized. If we had a card like Super Caltrops that could defeat a card with a combat of 12 or less, then I would argue that it has the strength to vaporize the rat swarm.
My argument isn't based on some sort of logical ordering of concrete rules (I think that's not available). My argument is based on spirit of the law.
Even then MMC, it wouldn't. It doesn't have a strength, and it doesn't defeat it with a number. It just beats it, no specifics. You could find a monster that has a check of 1, but shuffles unless you get at least 2. A card that defeats any card of difficulty 5 million or less would still shuffle it back in. You didn't get a 2 or higher. you got a nothing. That nothing just came with a caveat that the monster was defeated, nothing more.I hear you. But I'm not convinced you can concretely make the ascertainment that it doesn't defeat it with a number. The swarm of rats if hit with an 8 will be defeated, scatter, and possibly regroup. If hit with a 12 will be vaporized. If we had a card like Super Caltrops that could defeat a card with a combat of 12 or less, then I would argue that it has the strength to vaporize the rat swarm.
My argument isn't based on some sort of logical ordering of concrete rules (I think that's not available). My argument is based on spirit of the law.
There's already a card that overrules being undefeated normally, and if that card didn't exist with the wording it did, I think your argument might be somewhat valid.
That being said, if it was the intention that Caltrops or the like absolutely defeated something, it would be worded the same as Disintegrate, making a card get banished even if it would normally be undefeated.
The fact that that card already exists and has wording in the way it does, along with the fact that all of the adventures were initially printed at the same time, tells me that they intentionally chose not to use that wording on Caltrops, and thus, anything that relies on a specific thing happening does not happen if the specific thing doesn't happen.
The rats must be defeated with a certain roll of the dice, and since a certain roll of the dice didn't happen, then they're undefeated. It's impossible to defeat them without rolling the dice.
