Quick question.

Since Abelia's Friendship says "Reveal and then" does that mean, if the top card of a players deck is already revealed, that the ability cannot resolve and hence no drawing?

Yup, good catch.

I am not so sure about this one. I think there are rules regarding commited card cannot be commited, readied card cannot be readied. But can revealed cards be revealed again? I think there aren't rules against it. I play Bitter Rivals, reveal my opponent's hand, and then I play another Bitter Rivals... I played Amy Assistance and then I played another Amy Assitance... these cards I usually use multiple times per turn... any solid reasoning against reveal a revealed card? Or did you find something in the rule book? Thanks

AwesomeDhalsim said:

He's referring to if the card were already revealed, it's much different than with bitter rivals because of the wording. The top card of your deck may already be revealed due to a recent ivy attack that came out, which leaves the top card of your deck revealed, not just reveal it once. With bitter, you reveal their hand once, then it goes back. Since Abelia's says "And then" it says you need to first reveal the card, AND THEN can you gain vitality, only if you've done part A can you achieve part B. If the top card is already face up due to Razor's Bite, then you cannot reveal it again.

I think I get what you say, but is there anything in the rule book that stop you from revealing a revealed card? To me: for the game purpose, I think reveal means let you opponent see what the card is, if the card is face down, you turn it upside down and let your opponent see it, if the card is already face up, you just let your opponent see it. I don't think there is any cost or presumption that the card has to be concealed, or has been kept a secret, in order for you to reveal it to your opponent.

AD's logic is sound to me.

The only card I can think of off hand where this would matter would be Razor's bite.

While in practice many people will leave a revealed card revealed, technically once both players are satisfied in having seen the card it is returned however it was to where ever it came from. Skullduggery for example, you reveal the top card of your deck, but it doesn't stay revealed.

However in the same way that you can't commit a committed card, or ready a ready card you can't reveal a card that is already revealed. Nor can you turn a face up card in your momentum face up, turn a face down card face down, etc.

would it work if someone uses the enhance on Nafarious Plans?

Do you mean Nefarious Deeds? And if so, could you restate the question?

if that is the case that your opponent cannot reveal an already revealed card, then From the hawk alertness, where you commit a foundation to REVEAL a random card from your opponent's hand, why was it ruled that the revealed card is still included the next time that you form with From the hawk?

Because there is no way for it to be "random" if the card is still revealed when the random selection occurs. They shuffle up the cards in their hand, etc, with that card not revealed for the purposes of fulfilling the "random" part of the effect.

If the card that has already been selected is picked again...well, the other player just wasted an effect =/

Actually, that ruling may need to be revisited.

i meant the box topper from Deadly ground where you reveal the top and bottom of the deck if the attack deals damage.

OK let's break this down a bit..

The case where Abelia's will fail is where a card says the top card is revealed for the rest of the turn, e.g. Razor's Bite. I don't have the wording of the Deadly Ground promo on hand so I can't comment on that but I *THINK* it says "for the rest of the turn", so the card remains revealed.

If it's just an effect like E.S.P. where you reveal the card for an effect but it's only revealed for the purpose of that effect, the card will be replaced facedown afterward and Abelia's will work fine.

Now, with regard to From the Hawk, Alertness. No re-ruling is necessary for this card.

The effect reads as follows: "F Commit 1 foundation: Choose a random card in your opponent's hand. Your opponent plays with the chosen card revealed for the rest of this turn."

Big distinction here is that the "targeting" part of the effect just says "Choose a random card in your opponent's hand." On subsequent uses of From the Hawk, Alertness, cards already previously selected are still present in your opponent's hand. They never leave the hand, they are merely revealed. There is absolutely no reason why a card selected previously cannot be selected again.

The rest of the effect just says what to do with the card once it's selected. If you select a card that is already in a revealed state, that part of the effect will, effectively, do nothing. Congratulations, you've just selected a random card for no reason. There is nothing in the text that suggests you have to select a random concealed card (or non-revealed card, I guess?).

However, if From the Hawk said, "Reveal 1 random card in your opponent's hand", then the "cannot reveal an already-revealed card" - similar to "cannot commit an already commited card" - would apply and only allow you to select a new card.

No, no, Waffle.

Randomness has nothing to do with revealed or not revealed.

You should be rolling dice (or similar) to determine which card is selected. If the revealed card is selected (even if the ability read "Reveal a random card from the opponent's hand), then the ability essentially fizzles.

----------------------------

My problem with your ruling, Tag, is that there is no definition of "reveal" in the AGR.

There is nothing to suggest that "revealed" is a state like ready/committed or face-up/face-down.

In common English usage, "reveal" means "show to someone". (While it especially applies to revealing something that was hidden, it doesn't exclusively have that meaning. The 1984 Random House College Dictionary's first definitions for the words are: "1. to make known; disclose; divulge. 2. to lay open to view; display; exhibit.") As Awesome Dhalsim commented above, there's nothing to prevent you from showing your opponent something they can already see.

This strikes me a similar to discarding your hand when your hand is empty. You can technically do it, even as a cost. Just because your hand is empty doesn't mean you can't discard it; just because a card is visible doesn't mean you can't show it to your opponent.