Arcane Wonders Forum

Mage Wars => Rules Discussion => Topic started by: jacksmack on July 23, 2014, 10:03:20 AM

Title: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: jacksmack on July 23, 2014, 10:03:20 AM
Can somebody explain me how these 2 works together?

I believe there could be a difference on wether akiros is revealed or not depending on what the ruling is.


Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ACG on July 23, 2014, 10:18:49 AM
These two cards have completely different functions. Akiro's Favor lets you reroll when attacking, whereas Temple of the Dawnbreaker lets you reroll when defending or escaping. Combine the two, and you just have both effects - I don't think the two cards interact with each other at all.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Wildhorn on July 23, 2014, 10:21:15 AM
ACG is right. None of the effect interact with each others. One is when you attack, the other is when you defend.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: jacksmack on July 23, 2014, 10:29:58 AM
Erhhh.

The priestess has the temple.

The warlord has akiros favor.

The warlord attacks the priestess. And rolls really good or really bad. Who decides first if there should be a reroll?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Wildhorn on July 23, 2014, 10:33:13 AM
Like everytime both players want to do something at sametime.... Initiative.

And just to add, because you talked about Akiro revealed or not, that once in the rolling dice step, you can't reveal it. You can only reveal inbetween steps.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: jacksmack on July 23, 2014, 10:55:56 AM
Akiro can use its effect outside of the roll dice step.
Why? because if Akiro is face down, then you can reveal it between the roll dice step and apply damage step and actually use it straight away.

Can temple be used outside of the roll dice step?


I have a feeling that it's not as simple as you suggest.

Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Wildhorn on July 23, 2014, 11:28:07 AM
Ooo, interesting. Indeed with the wording of both spells, you could reroll the attack dice outside the rolling dice step. Only the Defense/Escape part of the temple require to do it right after you rolled.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: BoomFrog on July 23, 2014, 12:57:59 PM
So player with initiative decides the order that players have the opportunity to reroll, and once you pass the opportunity then you don't get a new one?

Let's say warlord has initiative and rolled crappy. He decides priestess chooses first and she is course doesn't reroll. Warlord now rerolls and rolls high. Priestess can not use temple, its too late, correct?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Wildhorn on July 23, 2014, 02:24:59 PM
No. If warlord has initiative, he decide if he want to reroll. Then priestesse decide if she want to.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: jacksmack on July 23, 2014, 02:27:25 PM
Any argument for:
temple must reroll during the dice roll step, while akiro can do it until damage has been applied?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Wildhorn on July 23, 2014, 02:39:23 PM
The way they are worded, both spell effect for attack roll can be rerolled between Roll Dice and Apply Damage steps.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Shad0w on July 23, 2014, 06:42:13 PM
Ooo, interesting. Indeed with the wording of both spells, you could reroll the attack dice outside the rolling dice step. Only the Defense/Escape part of the temple require to do it right after you rolled.


I would need to review the card wording




BTW ACG got a sticker
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Shad0w on July 23, 2014, 06:43:26 PM
Any argument for:
temple must reroll during the dice roll step, while akiro can do it until damage has been applied?


Sound correct but as above need to review cards
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on November 24, 2015, 11:29:46 AM
I understand if it's decided by initiative, but I don't think that's always enough. What if my opponent rolls 5 damage, i reroll with the dawnbreaker and it goes to 3, then they decide they want to reveal akiro's favor and have the attack rerolled a second time?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: FrostByte on November 24, 2015, 11:56:18 AM
Akiro's Favor Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Neither spell specifies a step during which to roll. 

My initial claim during that game may have been wrong.   If Akiro's favor can reroll during the Damages and Effects step then he could have activated it and used it in your particular case Vulcan.

However if it already had been revealed whoever had the initiative could have chose whether or not to reroll first. and if it's not limited to the roll dice step then the person with the initiative would get to decide first whether they want to act in either step.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 24, 2015, 12:03:22 PM
Though it does not say what step, logic tells us that it has to be before the Damage and Effects Step, and you typically will typically decide if you want to use the power of either card after the initial Dice Roll of the Dice Roll step. So this all has to be done between those two.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: FrostByte on November 24, 2015, 12:08:03 PM
Though it does not say what step, logic tells us that it has to be before the Damage and Effects Step, and you typically will typically decide if you want to use the power of either card after the initial Dice Roll of the Dice Roll step. So this all has to be done between those two.

In this case the Akiros Favor had not yet been revealed.  Could have been revealed and used between the roll dice and the damage steps?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 24, 2015, 01:24:19 PM
i think all dices must be rolled and re-rolled and re-re-re-re-rolled during the roll step.
and no enchantement can be revealed during the step.

if both the favor and the temple are in playe and revealed during the roll step, the initiative player can re-roll, then the non-initiative player can re-roll... and if the initiative player didn't re-roll and the non-initiative did, the initiative player can re-roll afterwards.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on November 24, 2015, 03:52:16 PM
Both sIKE and Exid have plausible interpretations. On the one hand, you will logically choose whether or not to reroll in between the initial roll and the application of the roll, which means it makes sense for these effects to occur between the Roll Dice Step and the Apply Damage and Effects Step. On the other hand, it makes sense for all dice rolling to occur during the Roll Dice Step. Without any limitations listed on the cards or in the rules though, I personally prefer sIKE's interpretation and would play it that these effects occur between Steps.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: jacksmack on November 24, 2015, 04:24:37 PM
If akiro is revealed there is nothing preventing you from rolling during a step.

Just like you can reroll the Daze during a step and like wise reroll a defense with Dawnbreaker during a step.

Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: jacksmack on November 24, 2015, 04:28:35 PM
Heh... now after reading quicksand again and dawnbreaker i believe by strictly reading the cards that if you choose to reroll the escape roll and fail both rolls than 2 counters will be added.

And if the first rolls fail and that brings it to 4 counters then the creature dies despite that you wish to reroll.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 24, 2015, 04:55:38 PM
Both sIKE and Exid have plausible interpretations. On the one hand, you will logically choose whether or not to reroll in between the initial roll and the application of the roll, which means it makes sense for these effects to occur between the Roll Dice Step and the Apply Damage and Effects Step. On the other hand, it makes sense for all dice rolling to occur during the Roll Dice Step. Without any limitations listed on the cards or in the rules though, I personally prefer sIKE's interpretation and would play it that these effects occur between Steps.
Well that is very interesting, think about it a bit deeper. If you are talking about the conjuration the I guess you could still use it in the "Roll Dice Step" and if Akiro is already revealed before the Dice Roll step, then I guess the same would apply. However if you choose to reveal Akiro after you Rolled the Dice then the roll that you make at that point would be in-between the two steps.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: wtcannonjr on November 24, 2015, 05:36:01 PM
I don't have the rules in front of me but I thought there was a general rule description in the enchantment reveal rules that new enchantments don't impact steps, actions or phases that have already taken place. This interpretation would then require Akiros's Favor to be revealed before the Roll Dice step in order for the reroll effect to impact a dice roll during the Roll Dice step. If we waited until the end of the step to reveal it, then I think you would need to wait for a future roll to use the reroll effect.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on November 24, 2015, 07:42:25 PM
These two cards have completely different functions. Akiro's Favor lets you reroll when attacking, whereas Temple of the Dawnbreaker lets you reroll when defending or escaping. Combine the two, and you just have both effects - I don't think the two cards interact with each other at all.

The do and they don't,  Dawnbreaker does allow you to reroll the attack (or effect) dice affecting a friendly creature.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on November 24, 2015, 08:51:03 PM
I don't have the rules in front of me but I thought there was a general rule description in the enchantment reveal rules that new enchantments don't impact steps, actions or phases that have already taken place. This interpretation would then require Akiros's Favor to be revealed before the Roll Dice step in order for the reroll effect to impact a dice roll during the Roll Dice step. If we waited until the end of the step to reveal it, then I think you would need to wait for a future roll to use the reroll effect.

Hmm, that is actually completely correct. I failed to think of that because rerolling seems like something that naturally affects an event that already occurred, but that doesn't allow an enchantment to do so. You are right, I think the enchant would need to be revealed before the roll took place in order to affect it.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 24, 2015, 11:29:03 PM
yes, p 18: Enchantments cannot affect...

so, akiro's favor can't be revealled aferwards, and the initiative rulles if it is allready reveald .
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 25, 2015, 12:24:16 AM
In this new world I am not sure, but in the old world I agreed with this:

Re: How long can i/ should i wait to reveal enchantments?  (http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=Kgpaz83P9xtQdoK7rY0wN1&topic=14733.msg43165#msg43165)

But I don't know any more. There was a nice flow and logic to all of this in the older rule set, but it was too loose and left a lot of overhang, and was updated to be much more rigid to help solve many issues, in many ways it was worked and in some it hasn't, it has just torn off the bandage and we have to go through the whole process again.

Sadness
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: theasaris on November 25, 2015, 12:46:32 AM
Ok, it still seems as if the issue is unclear. :(

Here's the precise situation that had us confused:

Forcemaster has Initiative.

Forcemaster has a ready Temple of the Dawnbreaker in play.

Beastmaster's Dire Wolf with face-down Akiro's Favor attacks Forcemaster and rolls 5 damage.

Questions:

1.) Who may/must decide first whether to reroll?

2.) If the answer to 1.) is Forcemaster due to having Initiative, can Dire Wolf reveal Akiro's Favor to reroll in response to Forcemasters decision?

3.) Would the answer to 2.) be different if Beastmaster had the Initiative?

4.) Would the answer to 1.) be different if Akiro's Favor were already revealed?

5.) Would the answer to 2.) be different if Akiro's Favor were already revealed?

Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 25, 2015, 01:14:13 AM
Ok, it still seems as if the issue is unclear. :(

Here's the precise situation that had us confused:

Forcemaster has Initiative.

Forcemaster has a ready Temple of the Dawnbreaker in play.

Beastmaster's Dire Wolf with face-down Akiro's Favor attacks Forcemaster and rolls 5 damage.

Questions:

1.) Who may/must decide first whether to reroll?

2.) If the answer to 1.) is Forcemaster due to having Initiative, can Dire Wolf reveal Akiro's Favor to reroll in response to Forcemasters decision?

3.) Would the answer to 2.) be different if Beastmaster had the Initiative?

4.) Would the answer to 1.) be different if Akiro's Favor were already revealed?

5.) Would the answer to 2.) be different if Akiro's Favor were already revealed?

i see it this way:

1) only the FM CAN reroll

2)3) questions eliminated

4) if A'sF were allready revealed:
FM can reroll, then BM can reroll, and then FM can reroll (if she didn't yet and BM did)

5) question eliminated
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on November 25, 2015, 01:33:57 AM
To expand further; if Akiro's Favor isn't revealed, then it can't be used to reroll. So only the Forcemaster would be able to reroll.

If Akiros Favor was already revealed, then the person with initiative (the Forcemaster) decides first whether they want to reroll or not. Regardless of their decision, the Beastmaster could then decide to reroll. If the Forcemaster passed initially but the Beastmaster rerolled, the Forcemaster could then decide to reroll the new result.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: jacksmack on November 25, 2015, 05:06:58 AM
To expand further; if Akiro's Favor isn't revealed, then it can't be used to reroll. So only the Forcemaster would be able to reroll.

Where do you have this from?

Akiros favour is not worded somehting like this:
'During the roll dice step you may reroll bla bla bla'

It just says once per round.

Its just perception that dice can only be rolled / rerolled / looked at / modified during the roll dice step.
Right now - unless im missing the obvious - there is no rule supporting that it must be done alone within this step.
I understand that there is a step called 'roll dice' in the attack sequence - but that is not enough to exclude re-rolling from being done at other times.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 25, 2015, 07:08:00 AM
To expand further; if Akiro's Favor isn't revealed, then it can't be used to reroll. So only the Forcemaster would be able to reroll.

Where do you have this from?

Akiros favour is not worded somehting like this:
'During the roll dice step you may reroll bla bla bla'

It just says once per round.

Its just perception that dice can only be rolled / rerolled / looked at / modified during the roll dice step.
Right now - unless im missing the obvious - there is no rule supporting that it must be done alone within this step.
I understand that there is a step called 'roll dice' in the attack sequence - but that is not enough to exclude re-rolling from being done at other times.

4th edition, p18: Enchantments cannot affect an event that occured before it was  revealed.
and since it can't be revealed during the step...
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: FrostByte on November 25, 2015, 07:56:24 AM
4th edition, p18: Enchantments cannot affect an event that occured before it was  revealed.
and since it can't be revealed during the step...

Ah missed that bit, that makes sense.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on November 25, 2015, 10:39:57 AM
@jacksmack:
Exid provided the answer. I agree that the enchantment doesn't necessarily restrict you to rerolling during the roll dice step, but it is restricted from affecting anything that occurred before it was revealed. Thus, it must be revealed before the Roll Dice Step in order to have any effect on it.

Besides that, it is still unclear whether the actual reroll happens during the Roll Dice Step or if it occurs immediately after the step. It is a very fine distinction, and shouldn't usually matter, but it is still somewhat unresolved.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 25, 2015, 10:45:51 AM
@jacksmack:
Exid provided the answer. I agree that the enchantment doesn't necessarily restrict you to rerolling during the roll dice step, but it is restricted from affecting anything that occurred before it was revealed. Thus, it must be revealed before the Roll Dice Step in order to have any effect on it.

Besides that, it is still unclear whether the actual reroll happens during the Roll Dice Step or if it occurs immediately after the step. It is a very fine distinction, and shouldn't usually matter, but it is still somewhat unresolved.
The event that it would affect is the Apply Damages and Effects step. As long as that hasn't happened Akiro's Favor the way it is worded, would let you re-roll the Dice even though you are no longer in the Dice Rolling Step, as it is worded "Once per Round", this includes the time(s) between Steps.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on November 25, 2015, 10:50:26 AM
The event that it would affect is the Apply Damages and Effects step. As long as that hasn't happened Akiro's Favor the way it is worded, would let you re-roll the Dice even though you are no longer in the Dice Rolling Step, as it is worded "Once per Round", this includes the time(s) between Steps.

Hmm, that is an interesting interpretation. You don't think that rerolling dice is somehow affecting the dice roll? I suppose it could be argued that you are doing a brand new replacement roll rather than changing the previous roll. This whole discussion has got me a bit turned around honestly. The fact that I only got 3 hours sleep last night may have something to do with that though, lol.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Coshade on November 25, 2015, 11:32:33 AM
@jacksmack:
Exid provided the answer. I agree that the enchantment doesn't necessarily restrict you to rerolling during the roll dice step, but it is restricted from affecting anything that occurred before it was revealed. Thus, it must be revealed before the Roll Dice Step in order to have any effect on it.

Besides that, it is still unclear whether the actual reroll happens during the Roll Dice Step or if it occurs immediately after the step. It is a very fine distinction, and shouldn't usually matter, but it is still somewhat unresolved.
The event that it would affect is the Apply Damages and Effects step. As long as that hasn't happened Akiro's Favor the way it is worded, would let you re-roll the Dice even though you are no longer in the Dice Rolling Step, as it is worded "Once per Round", this includes the time(s) between Steps.

This is how I always viewed it.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on November 25, 2015, 12:16:48 PM
@jacksmack:
Exid provided the answer. I agree that the enchantment doesn't necessarily restrict you to rerolling during the roll dice step, but it is restricted from affecting anything that occurred before it was revealed. Thus, it must be revealed before the Roll Dice Step in order to have any effect on it.

Besides that, it is still unclear whether the actual reroll happens during the Roll Dice Step or if it occurs immediately after the step. It is a very fine distinction, and shouldn't usually matter, but it is still somewhat unresolved.
The event that it would affect is the Apply Damages and Effects step. As long as that hasn't happened Akiro's Favor the way it is worded, would let you re-roll the Dice even though you are no longer in the Dice Rolling Step, as it is worded "Once per Round", this includes the time(s) between Steps.

This is how I always viewed it.
me too
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 25, 2015, 11:57:21 PM
The event that it would affect is the Apply Damages and Effects step. As long as that hasn't happened Akiro's Favor the way it is worded, would let you re-roll the Dice even though you are no longer in the Dice Rolling Step, as it is worded "Once per Round", this includes the time(s) between Steps.

the event it would affect is the winning of the game, so till the game isn't finished, you can reveal akiro's favor and reroll!!!
...
about the importance of a good definition...
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Schwenkgott on November 26, 2015, 02:21:08 AM
I don't see the problem here. Who ever does not like the outcome of the roll dice step can say: I want to reroll. After that the other one can do the same.
Who ever come first, rolls first.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 26, 2015, 02:33:42 AM
I don't see the problem here. Who ever does not like the outcome of the roll dice step can say: I want to reroll. After that the other one can do the same.
Who ever come first, rolls first.
the problem is if Akira's favor isn't revealed before the roll step.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on November 26, 2015, 03:07:03 AM
I don't see the problem here. Who ever does not like the outcome of the roll dice step can say: I want to reroll. After that the other one can do the same.
Who ever come first, rolls first.
the problem is if Akira's favor isn't revealed before the roll step.

Schwenkgott says the exact thing I was thinking.

If it is possible to reveal brace yourself/ rhino hide AFTER the dice have been rolled it should also be possible to reveal akiro's favor afterwards. Don't make it harder by making differences between enchantments for some kind of different interpretation. I see why you would not allow it, but it is just as easy to advocate the opposite. The game is hard enough as it is.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on November 26, 2015, 03:47:34 AM
They are different though, neither brace  yourself or rhino hide are trying to alter the dice roll that has already happened, they are influencing the application of the damage, which is a clear next step.


I don't see the problem here. Who ever does not like the outcome of the roll dice step can say: I want to reroll. After that the other one can do the same.
Who ever come first, rolls first.
the problem is if Akira's favor isn't revealed before the roll step.

Schwenkgott says the exact thing I was thinking.

If it is possible to reveal brace yourself/ rhino hide AFTER the dice have been rolled it should also be possible to reveal akiro's favor afterwards. Don't make it harder by making differences between enchantments for some kind of different interpretation. I see why you would not allow it, but it is just as easy to advocate the opposite. The game is hard enough as it is.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 26, 2015, 04:13:37 AM
i agree with moonglow.

and i agree with Halewijn: it's more complicate.
but in a game i need to have precise rulles to make it fluent!
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on November 26, 2015, 06:15:54 AM
In my opinion revealing brace yourself/rhino hide after the dice were rolled is also ridiculous. "Oh, the opponent has just hit me with a hard hit, let's brace myself ". The point of armor/defensive stance is to get it BEFORE it hits you. It's very illogical to say there is a finite time to react between "getting hit" and "getting damage". Before I was active on this forum we didn't play it like that. Revealing enchantments was only possible before rolling the dice.

For a while now I also play it like everybody else. But differentiating between enchantments seems like a horrible idea. Keep it one way or another:

- for the sake of realism: do not allow it.
- for the sake of the mechanics: allow it.

The interpretation difference of Moonglow/Exid & Schwenkgott/myself. Neither of us is wrong or right. It's really just how you view the effect/description.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: wtcannonjr on November 26, 2015, 09:15:59 AM
They are different though, neither brace  yourself or rhino hide are trying to alter the dice roll that has already happened, they are influencing the application of the damage, which is a clear next step.


I don't see the problem here. Who ever does not like the outcome of the roll dice step can say: I want to reroll. After that the other one can do the same.
Who ever come first, rolls first.
the problem is if Akira's favor isn't revealed before the roll step.

Schwenkgott says the exact thing I was thinking.

If it is possible to reveal brace yourself/ rhino hide AFTER the dice have been rolled it should also be possible to reveal akiro's favor afterwards. Don't make it harder by making differences between enchantments for some kind of different interpretation. I see why you would not allow it, but it is just as easy to advocate the opposite. The game is hard enough as it is.
I think moonglows point is key.

It is the relationship between the enchantment's effect and the sequence of play that determines when to reveal. Effects don't influence past events. That simplifies the timing for players IMO. In some cases like Rhino Hide or Brace Yourself the player will know the potential result and change the actual result using a reveal based on the sequence of play. I.e. Roll Dice Step only determines potential damage. The Apply Damage and Effects Step determines actual damage. In other situations the result will not yet be known before you need to reveal if you want the opportunity to influence the result. This is the case as I see it with Akiro's Favor. You are revealing to gain the opportunity to influence a result in the next step.

This is the way we have been playing from the start. It feels much easier to just remember the phases and steps of a round and remember that effects must be revealed in order to influence the next step about to take place. So it is always forward thinking.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on November 26, 2015, 12:13:48 PM
I was commenting more from a rules perspective.  In a realism sense I'd note that the spell is already cast, just not revealed.  In that moment of impact, where its like holy $hit this is going to hurt! the mage winks in the final step for rhino hide to be revealed.

Now akiros favour could do the same as the other mage picks up the huge handful of dice, but if they didn't, its too late to say ooohhh shite I've going to die, please god pretend I'd asked your favour 0.3 seconds ago!


In my opinion revealing brace yourself/rhino hide after the dice were rolled is also ridiculous. "Oh, the opponent has just hit me with a hard hit, let's brace myself ". The point of armor/defensive stance is to get it BEFORE it hits you. It's very illogical to say there is a finite time to react between "getting hit" and "getting damage". Before I was active on this forum we didn't play it like that. Revealing enchantments was only possible before rolling the dice.

For a while now I also play it like everybody else. But differentiating between enchantments seems like a horrible idea. Keep it one way or another:

- for the sake of realism: do not allow it.
- for the sake of the mechanics: allow it.

The interpretation difference of Moonglow/Exid & Schwenkgott/myself. Neither of us is wrong or right. It's really just how you view the effect/description.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on November 26, 2015, 01:23:03 PM
so, how do you see 0.3 seconds before it hits you if it's piercing damage or not?  ??? I don't bother revealing brace yourself if it's all piercing.

And how can you determine how hard something hits before it hits you? And what do you base yourself on that akiro (a god) cannot help you, but for some reason you are able to change your entire stance or grow another hide in 0.3 seconds.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on November 26, 2015, 05:27:26 PM
Its magic man, its magic! :) 

I guess the main point here is that the game is designed to minimise take backs/unwinds.  Once something has happened, you can't reverse it.  If the dice are rolled, you can't change your ability to reroll them - if you have the ability to reroll them, then when they're rolled you can.  If the damage is allocated, you can't suddenly change your mind and reveal rhino hide to make it less (although in most games I'd probably let you as the line there seems pretty arbitrary, but its a house rule/gentleman's agreement).

Mage wars gets tense enough as it is with the revealing your plan to see if they can counter it, revealing stuff after I've landed a good hit would drive me nuts :) 

I think the steps in rules v4 are pretty clear (and not that different to previous steps).  Reveals applying to future steps, not previous steps seems a fair and consistent application.  Its not as fickle as you seem to feel if you are clear about the attack resolution steps.

Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: wtcannonjr on November 26, 2015, 09:17:26 PM

I think the steps in rules v4 are pretty clear (and not that different to previous steps).  Reveals applying to future steps, not previous steps seems a fair and consistent application.  Its not as fickle as you seem to feel if you are clear about the attack resolution steps.

Plus, this logic seems much easier to program in an app. :)
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: jacksmack on November 27, 2015, 06:01:20 AM
I see the entry that has been quoted from 4th edition rulebook as its to prevent instances like agony being revealed after the dice roll step.
Flipping up a poisened blood after the opponenet used Hand of Bim to heal cant cancel the healing, etc etc.

We can all agree that revealling agony, marked for death or bearstrength after the dice roll step will not change the amount of dice already rolled. This is excately what the rule already quoted rule entry covers.

About Akiros:
Does if 're-rolling' count as 'affecting' as such? in my very (subjective) opinion it does not.
To me: It's changing something a previous step in the same way that 'reverse magic' does.

For Reverse Magic:
Step 1: Declare Spell
Announce that you are casting a spell and what the target will be.
Reverse magic is revealled during step 3 (4th edition rulebook) - the counter spell step.
Here its actually 'affecting' something in step 1.

Perhaps declaring spells and target is not comparable to re-rolling?


Its bad for the enchantment aspect of the game when you have to reveal something in advance before you know if you actually want to make use of the effect. (IE both the dice and effect dice rolls good).
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: wtcannonjr on November 27, 2015, 07:37:19 AM
I see the entry that has been quoted from 4th edition rulebook as its to prevent instances like agony being revealed after the dice roll step.
Flipping up a poisened blood after the opponenet used Hand of Bim to heal cant cancel the healing, etc etc.

We can all agree that revealling agony, marked for death or bearstrength after the dice roll step will not change the amount of dice already rolled. This is excately what the rule already quoted rule entry covers.

About Akiros:
Does if 're-rolling' count as 'affecting' as such? in my very (subjective) opinion it does not.
To me: It's changing something a previous step in the same way that 'reverse magic' does.

For Reverse Magic:
Step 1: Declare Spell
Announce that you are casting a spell and what the target will be.
Reverse magic is revealled during step 3 (4th edition rulebook) - the counter spell step.
Here its actually 'affecting' something in step 1.

Perhaps declaring spells and target is not comparable to re-rolling?


Its bad for the enchantment aspect of the game when you have to reveal something in advance before you know if you actually want to make use of the effect. (IE both the dice and effect dice rolls good).

If you read the text on Reverse Magic it is revealed differently than most enchantments. It specifically states that it must be revealed DURING the Counter Spell Step. Not before or after. So in this case the change in targets is an effect that happens during the Counter Spell Step and the Magic Rule would apply. Specific text on a card overrides the general rules and in this case allows a targeting decision to be changed before the spell is resolved. At this point in the Cast Spell action the spell and it's effects are not yet in play since it has not resolved.

Akiro's Favor does not specify that the reroll of attack dice takes place outside of the Roll Dice Step whereas Reverse Magic specifically does state that the spell target is changed during the Counter Spell Step. That is the key difference I see.

We play that attack dice are rolled and rerolled in the Roll Dice Step. This prevents us from revealing Akiro's Favor later in the round and rerolling the creatures attack dice after say 3 other creatures have activated. We assume that the sequence of play is defined for the purpose of limiting when players can take actions and apply effects. If the designers wanted to allow rerolls of attack dice outside of the step in the attack action that specifies when you roll dice, then that would be stated specifically on the card like the example you found on Reverse Magic.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 27, 2015, 09:02:04 AM
I see the entry that has been quoted from 4th edition rulebook as its to prevent instances like agony being revealed after the dice roll step.
Flipping up a poisened blood after the opponenet used Hand of Bim to heal cant cancel the healing, etc etc.

We can all agree that revealling agony, marked for death or bearstrength after the dice roll step will not change the amount of dice already rolled. This is excately what the rule already quoted rule entry covers.

About Akiros:
Does if 're-rolling' count as 'affecting' as such? in my very (subjective) opinion it does not.
To me: It's changing something a previous step in the same way that 'reverse magic' does.

For Reverse Magic:
Step 1: Declare Spell
Announce that you are casting a spell and what the target will be.
Reverse magic is revealled during step 3 (4th edition rulebook) - the counter spell step.
Here its actually 'affecting' something in step 1.

Perhaps declaring spells and target is not comparable to re-rolling?


Its bad for the enchantment aspect of the game when you have to reveal something in advance before you know if you actually want to make use of the effect. (IE both the dice and effect dice rolls good).

If you read the text on Reverse Magic it is revealed differently than most enchantments. It specifically states that it must be revealed DURING the Counter Spell Step. Not before or after. So in this case the change in targets is an effect that happens during the Counter Spell Step and the Magic Rule would apply. Specific text on a card overrides the general rules and in this case allows a targeting decision to be changed before the spell is resolved. At this point in the Cast Spell action the spell and it's effects are not yet in play since it has not resolved.

Akiro's Favor does not specify that the reroll of attack dice takes place outside of the Roll Dice Step whereas Reverse Magic specifically does state that the spell target is changed during the Counter Spell Step. That is the key difference I see.

We play that attack dice are rolled and rerolled in the Roll Dice Step. This prevents us from revealing Akiro's Favor later in the round and rerolling the creatures attack dice after say 3 other creatures have activated. We assume that the sequence of play is defined for the purpose of limiting when players can take actions and apply effects. If the designers wanted to allow rerolls of attack dice outside of the step in the attack action that specifies when you roll dice, then that would be stated specifically on the card like the example you found on Reverse Magic.
Wow I just see the fun draining out of the game. So mechanical and chess like. However much I dislike it, I think the new and revised designers intent, is as WT has written. The openness that was the original intent of Enchantments (what truly made the game different from the likes of Magic) has proven to much for the game and left so many corner-cases that everything about Enchantments has been changed to make it "simple". One of the things I will work on as playtester is to make sure that , for upcoming releases, the card text and intent (i.e. if it is supposed to override the standard rules) it clearly included on the cards.

As for my favorite game I think that I am drifting away from it as it changes to something less joyful.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on November 27, 2015, 11:41:26 AM
Wow I just see the fun draining out of the game. So mechanical and chess like. However much I dislike it, I think the new and revised designers intent, is as WT has written. The openness that was the original intent of Enchantments (what truly made the game different from the likes of Magic) has proven to much for the game and left so many cases that everything about Enchantments has been changed to make it "simple". Once of the things I will work on as playtester is to make sure that the card text and intent (i.e. if it is supposed to override the standard rules) it clearly included on the cards.

As for my favorite game I think that I am drifting away from it as it changes to something less joyful.

Couldn't agree more with Sike... Frankly, I don't even care what the actual outcome of this discussion is. Do we allow changing it? fine. Is it too late? also fine.

But, It would really be a shame if enchantments have a completely different interpretation because it is worded slightly different. 99% of the players will not know these small differences. And you will just have players saying "you cannot do this particular move: read page 7 on the tread x", thus fucking up the opponents turn.

Mage wars presents itself with rules being natural. "if you have doubts about a certain rules, just use the ones that feel correct. You will probably be correct and afterwards you can look it up"

There are already A LOT of small rules, and even experienced players make some mistakes during a game. I really don't see any advantage in nazi ruling/nitpicking every single card and making it almost impossible for a casual player to know them.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 27, 2015, 12:06:03 PM
"if you have doubts about a certain rules, just use the ones that feel correct. You will probably be correct and afterwards you can look it up"

this is a beautifull dream but no rull!
there are games with very natural rulles, but MW is not. a so complicate game, with so many possibilties, must have a clear frame or you can do whatever you want, and nobody can see it come, there's no game anymore!
with good clear rulles you don't become a "nazi", rulles make the game lighter, when the players don't "feel corrrect" in the same way they know what is right and go on!
Title: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on November 27, 2015, 12:55:35 PM
Wow I just see the fun draining out of the game. So mechanical and chess like. However much I dislike it, I think the new and revised designers intent, is as WT has written. The openness that was the original intent of Enchantments (what truly made the game different from the likes of Magic) has proven to much for the game and left so many cases that everything about Enchantments has been changed to make it "simple". Once of the things I will work on as playtester is to make sure that the card text and intent (i.e. if it is supposed to override the standard rules) it clearly included on the cards.

As for my favorite game I think that I am drifting away from it as it changes to something less joyful.

Couldn't agree more with Sike... Frankly, I don't even care what the actual outcome of this discussion is. Do we allow changing it? fine. Is it too late? also fine.

But, It would really be a shame if enchantments have a completely different interpretation because it is worded slightly different. 99% of the players will not know these small differences. And you will just have players saying "you cannot do this particular move: read page 7 on the tread x", thus fucking up the opponents turn.

Mage wars presents itself with rules being natural. "if you have doubts about a certain rules, just use the ones that feel correct. You will probably be correct and afterwards you can look it up"

There are already a LOT of small rules, and even experienced players make some mistakes during a game. I really don't see any advantage in nazi ruling/nitpicking every single card and making it almost impossible for a casual player to know them.

To me it looks like there are two separate problems with different causes: the increase in the learning curve and the decrease in fun.

I suspect the increase in the learning curve is caused  by the increase in the number of edge cases and cards that override the rules. The latter could be fixed with errata to cards to change their wording, like having reanimate target the zone rather than the target discard pile, and then choose the creature from the discard pile.

As for the decrease in fun, that's probably more because of insufficient diversity in the global metagame and the lack of local interest in some places caused by the delays in new products and long play time, and the balance issues caused by wizard tower for the past year or two. From what I recall, the largest ever turn-out for a Mage Wars tournament was 30 people at Gen Con, right? 30 people doesn't seem like many. However, considering that Seasons, a similar looking game published in the same year has only 73 likes on Facebook while Mage wars has over 4000, I'm hoping that this is just growing pains for the game. Mage Wars is only 3 years old after all.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on November 27, 2015, 01:06:56 PM
I'm not against rules by the way. Rules are needed and, apart from some small ones, I really like the mechanics of most of the rules. (And I do feel most of them are natural) The deepness/complexity of this game is one of the reasons the game is as brilliant as it is! And maybe that game out wrong in my previous post. (sorry  :P )

I'm just not a fan of digging even deeper. It takes a long time before people know all the small things and we don't need more of them. Saying akiro's favor cannot be revealed after the roll but brace yourself can.. That's just one step too far for me.  :) making it unnecessarily complex.

ps: meant "rules nazi" as in "grammar nazi" but with rules. Did not want to offend with the literal meaning.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 28, 2015, 12:57:54 AM
I'm not against rules by the way. Rules are needed and, apart from some small ones, I really like the mechanics of most of the rules. (And I do feel most of them are natural) The deepness/complexity of this game is one of the reasons the game is as brilliant as it is! And maybe that game out wrong in my previous post. (sorry  :P )

I'm just not a fan of digging even deeper. It takes a long time before people know all the small things and we don't need more of them. Saying akiro's favor cannot be revealed after the roll but brace yourself can.. That's just one step too far for me.  :) making it unnecessarily complex.

ps: meant "rules nazi" as in "grammar nazi" but with rules. Did not want to offend with the literal meaning.

 ;D
no ofence!
i know i can be excessive in my love of precise mechanisme!
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: DaveW on November 28, 2015, 10:27:40 AM
Effects don't influence past events.

I do not see how the roll is set in stone once you move past the roll dice step. I also don't know where what I have quoted, above, is in the rules (except as specific exceptions / clarifications for other spells).

FWIW, the way I look at it: Akiro's Favor can be revealed between Roll Dice and Damage and Effects, since it is an enchantment. Since AF allows a reroll if 1) you are making a melee or ranged attack, and 2) rerolling is allowed once per round; you can reroll, even if you are beyond the roll dice step (and the effects of the dice have not yet been determined)... just like you can reveal a Brace Yourself, Fortified Position, or Rhino Hide prior to determining the actual effects.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ringkichard on November 28, 2015, 12:30:41 PM
Am I right that the question seems to hinge on what a re-roll is and when you can do it?

If that's the case the answer would seem to be undefined.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 28, 2015, 12:51:06 PM
Am I right that the question seems to hinge on what a re-roll is and when you can do it?

If that's the case the answer would seem to be undefined.
That sums it up. The issue in question can only happen once, if the card is revealed after the Roll Dice Step. Then the question becomes, does one a round mean only during the Dice Roll Step or can it be in between that step and the Damage and Effects step.

It is undefined as you stated, and I am afraid that we are going to revisit a lot of rulings around issues such as this.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on November 28, 2015, 01:35:25 PM
Am I right that the question seems to hinge on what a re-roll is and when you can do it?

If that's the case the answer would seem to be undefined.

The question does indeed hinge on what a re-roll is and when you can do it. I personally see a reroll as changing the dice roll, and fail to see how it could be defined differently though it seems apparent that others do see it differently. I invite them to share their personal definitions so that we may discuss this further.

With my definition, because you can't change the past, I see the effect as a kind of triggered effect and the course of events would be as follows. The dice are rolled during the Roll Dice Step. This triggers any potential reroll effects currently present. Once all rerolls have been made, the dice results have been determined.

Now, if a new potential reroll effect is put into play after the initial roll has been made, it does not get triggered and can not change the past. This is different from Brace Yourself or Rhino Hide, because those affect how the dice are applied, in the future. They don't affect the results of the dice themselves, in the past. A Rhino Hide doesn't change the fact that you rolled 2 normal damage, it just prevents that damage from going through. This would be more similar to trying to reveal a Bear Strength after rolling your dice in order to add two more dice to it. That is what we're talking about after all, changing the dice roll, and after a result has been determined it is too late for you to change it.

Again, I invite others to share their definitions of a "reroll" that don't include changing the dice roll.

That sums it up. The issue in question can only happen once, if the card is revealed after the Roll Dice Step. Then the question becomes, does one a round mean only during the Dice Roll Step or can it be in between that step and the Damage and Effects step.

It is undefined as you stated, and I am afraid that we are going to revisit a lot of rulings around issues such as this.

That is not the question at all. The question is, when the card is revealed, can it change the past? The rules say specifically that it can not. Thus, it can affect a roll in progress, but not one that has already been determined.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 28, 2015, 01:51:53 PM
What is not the question at all. The question is, when the card is revealed, can it change the past? The rules say specifically that it can not. Thus, it can affect a roll in progress, but not one that has already been determined.
Well that is one view, I do not see this as changing the past, I see it as effect of now. Damage has not been applied (the future) I can re-roll once a round. The card does not say you may re-roll the dice during the dice roll step. This is typical of cards that change the standard rule set. It seems to me everyone is wanting to shove everything in to the steps now which I despise the thought of, unfun, but it is what it is.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on November 28, 2015, 02:43:49 PM
Zuberi, I think the issue around defining the roll is around when the card can be revealed.  Thats kind of what started some of this debate - if Akiro's Favour isn't revealed, and the dice roll sucks, can the owner reveal AF and re-roll. 

With your definition, the dice roll (and re-rolls) is a step - which seems clear in V4 rules.  This would mean you can only reveal AF either before the dice rolling starts, or after the step when all re-roll efforts have completed.  I say this seems clear in the V4 rules as you have to have completed one step before starting another step - the steps are mutually exclusive.  Since step 6 (applying the damage) needs the damage amount clear, then the dice rolling had to be complete in step 5.  With a couple of exceptions, spells don't change what occurred in a previous step (perhaps another question then is whether AF is meant to be one of these).

As it stands, and maybe I'm just an advocate for the opposite, but I can't see that its what the rules/or card intended for AF to be revealed after step 5 and apply to step 5.  It doesn't seem a game changer either way - I lean in favour of what I see as the cleanest, most consistent rule application.  However, if the reverse was true and AF could be played after to affect one dice roll, it wouldn't break anything. At the same time, AF isn't a one shot either, making someone reveal it before they knew they had to doesn't make it useless either.

Sike - without putting words in your mouth, your reply seems more about if AF is already revealed?  The card revealed before the step affecting the current step/roll and allowing rerolls - is that what you meant? 

I don't see the steps changing things that much - they've always been there really, they're just helping us tidy up a few anomalies that perhaps weren't as clear as they could have been.  To be honest the steps seem closer to how we play than not.





What is not the question at all. The question is, when the card is revealed, can it change the past? The rules say specifically that it can not. Thus, it can affect a roll in progress, but not one that has already been determined.
Well that is one view, I do not see this as changing the past, I see it as effect of now. Damage has not been applied (the future) I can re-roll once a round. The card does not say you may re-roll the dice during the dice roll step. This is typical of cards that change the standard rule set. It seems to me everyone is wanting to shove everything in to the steps now which I despise the thought of, unfun, but it is what it is.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ringkichard on November 28, 2015, 03:37:09 PM
I want to stress that I don't know what a re-roll is.


Possibilities
1. A re-roll could be an adjustment of a roll. There is only ever one roll, and a re-roll effect is used before the roll is finalized. A re-roll is a physical procedure of picking up and dropping the dice again, but it is still part of the roll-dice game-procedure. Once the roll dice step is over the dice have been rolled and the window of time to physically manipulate the dice is over.

2. A re-roll could be a replacement effect. First, dice are rolled as a discrete event which cannot be interrupted. After dice are rolled, barring further input, the Roll Dice step ends. However, either immediately after the roll, or after the Roll Dice step ends and before the Apply Damage and Effects step begins, a re-roll may occur. This re-roll is a completely new roll that may-or-may-not happen outside the roll dice step. The results of the new roll replace the results of the old roll.

These two different possibilities have some important differences. #1 would not let you reveal a re-roll enchantment after the roll dice step with any hope of changing the rolled result. It would mean that the result of the die roll never changed, there was just a complicated procedure to roll the dice that involved tossing them twice.

#2 would mean that you could re-roll after the roll dice step, and therefore could reveal a non-mandatory re-roll enchantment after the dice had been rolled but before the results were applied. It might (or might not) also mean that two rolls occurred and the roll had one value after the first toss of the dice, and then the dice were re-rolled and a new value of the roll determined. Of course, only the 2nd result would be applied in the Apply Damage and Effects Step, since the second roll completely replaces the first one once the re-roll occurs.

I'm sure there are other possible interpretations, but it's the end of my lunch break, and frankly I'm glad I'm not being paid to revisit every enchantment ruling to check for compatibility with the new rules. Good luck guys. ;/
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: jacksmack on November 28, 2015, 03:48:54 PM
Its worth noting that this thread was born before the release of 4th edition rules.

Also this card was (atleast the almost identical promo version) released before the 4th edition. This means that the perception of this card - atleast for me - was made before the quoted entry about changing past events / steps.

With the rule entry in mind, i see can arguments for both allowing reroll outside the dice roll step and arguments for only allowing it inside the step.

Personally for me i dont feel this card is affecting a past step/event as such - even with the 4th edition rule entry. It could just as well be 'once per round make a new roll. the result will be used in the next step'.
Thats my interpetation of reroll.

Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: DaveW on November 28, 2015, 03:55:14 PM
I personally see a reroll as changing the dice roll...

... because you can't change the past...

... I invite others to share their definitions of a "reroll" that don't include changing the dice roll.

The original dice roll doesn't change. It is, and always will be, what it was originally. What a reroll does, in my opinion, is creates an additional dice roll result that possibly will be used instead of the original dice roll when determining damage and effects. It is a future selection of the two rolls, not a changing of a past roll.

The same is true for the ToD... it creates a second result that will be used instead of the original. The only difference is that AF needs to be revealed in order to be used. My opinion is that, since there is a place in the sequence of play for it to be revealed prior to damage and effects to be determined, that it may be revealed after the original dice are rolled.

There is no place on either card (or anywhere in the rules that I am aware of) that states that these dice have to be rolled within the Roll Dice step. In fact, I could suppose that the ToD's reroll of an escape roll proves the point... the reroll there happens outside of a Roll Dice step.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on November 29, 2015, 12:46:00 AM
I'm sure there are other possible interpretations, but it's the end of my lunch break, and frankly I'm glad I'm not being paid to revisit every enchantment ruling to check for compatibility with the new rules. Good luck guys. ;/

Im really not sure what you and sike are talking about. This issue has nothing to do with  any new rulings. In fact, we can ignore the existence of steps completely. It is simply a matter of whether of not you can reveal an enchantment to change a roll that has already happened. If you can reveal it after a roll and it still have an effect, then you can. If you can't, you can't. The steps don't matter at all in answering this question.

Ringkichard is right that the problem is knowing exactly how a reroll works.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 29, 2015, 01:42:10 AM
What is not the question at all. The question is, when the card is revealed, can it change the past? The rules say specifically that it can not. Thus, it can affect a roll in progress, but not one that has already been determined.
Well that is one view, I do not see this as changing the past, I see it as effect of now. Damage has not been applied (the future) I can re-roll once a round. The card does not say you may re-roll the dice during the dice roll step. This is typical of cards that change the standard rule set. It seems to me everyone is wanting to shove everything in to the steps now which I despise the thought of, unfun, but it is what it is.
this has no end!
when the damages are applied and the creature not dead yet, would you say we can still change the roll because the effect is not applied yet?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: DaveW on November 29, 2015, 06:43:06 AM
when the damages are applied and the creature not dead yet, would you say we can still change the roll because the effect is not applied yet?

The damage is applied at the same time the effects are determined, so no.

All of the dice can be (and should be, in my mind) rolled together... damage and effect dice both... and then both apply simultaneously. If the object is destroyed, then the effect die result is moot. The main point is that there is no opportunity to do anything else until both of these things are done.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ringkichard on November 29, 2015, 09:17:35 AM
I'm sure there are other possible interpretations, but it's the end of my lunch break, and frankly I'm glad I'm not being paid to revisit every enchantment ruling to check for compatibility with the new rules. Good luck guys. ;/

Im really not sure what you and sike are talking about. This issue has nothing to do with  any new rulings. In fact, we can ignore the existence of steps completely. It is simply a matter of whether of not you can reveal an enchantment to change a roll that has already happened. If you can reveal it after a roll and it still have an effect, then you can. If you can't, you can't. The steps don't matter at all in answering this question.

Ringkichard is right that the problem is knowing exactly how a reroll works.

Used to be that you could reveal after an event, and no one had disputed that a roll was an event. So you could reveal after the roll but before the end of the roll dice step, which was assumed to be sufficient.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 29, 2015, 09:53:25 AM
I'm sure there are other possible interpretations, but it's the end of my lunch break, and frankly I'm glad I'm not being paid to revisit every enchantment ruling to check for compatibility with the new rules. Good luck guys. ;/

Im really not sure what you and sike are talking about. This issue has nothing to do with  any new rulings. In fact, we can ignore the existence of steps completely. It is simply a matter of whether of not you can reveal an enchantment to change a roll that has already happened. If you can reveal it after a roll and it still have an effect, then you can. If you can't, you can't. The steps don't matter at all in answering this question.

Ringkichard is right that the problem is knowing exactly how a reroll works.

Used to be that you could reveal after an event, and no one had disputed that a roll was an event. So you could reveal after the roll but before the end of the roll dice step, which was assumed to be sufficient.
Not for me, once again the question to me, is does this card allow you to roll dice after the Roll Dice Step. Yes or No.

Before the ruling even Zuberi thought yes.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 29, 2015, 10:27:51 AM
Not for me, once again the question to me, is does this card allow you to roll dice after the Roll Dice Step. Yes or No.

the question is far deeper: does A's favor allow you to come back in time? (which is very rare in MW, reserved to spells like reverse magic, that have very precise wording and rulle's structure)
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Laddinfance on November 29, 2015, 10:36:26 AM
Actually sIKE has hit the nail on the head there. That is the crux of this entire thread. But I'm going to save the rest of my thoughts until I can put the question in front of Bryan.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 29, 2015, 10:42:23 AM
Ninja'ed
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on November 29, 2015, 11:38:41 AM
Indeed! :)

I guess I'd never thought of the dice re-roll as part of the spell effect, so kind of its own step.  So step 5 has ended, you reveal AF, and that allows you to do something.  In this case re-roll the dice. 

Ninja'ed
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ringkichard on November 29, 2015, 12:06:18 PM
Not for me, once again the question to me, is does this card allow you to roll dice after the Roll Dice Step. Yes or No.

I agree that this is definitely the current question.

If there were a surplus of resources and designer time I think the long term solution would be to define things like "roll" and "re-roll" with steps, similar to what has been done for movement and other game procedures.

--

I got to thinking the other day about boardgame rules and the different approaches people take to interpreting them. I'm coming to the conclusion that what matters most is how the rules are played, not what exactly is written. Those two things interact, of course, and only logic (or designer fiat) may guide us in the interpretation of the rules as written, but more and more, Oliver Wendel Holmes seems correct:

Quote
The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience... The law embodies the story of a nation's development through many centuries, and it cannot be dealt with as if it contained only the axioms and corollaries of a book of mathematics.

Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on November 29, 2015, 12:59:43 PM
I still don't think that's important. Let's say the new ruling didn't exist. We'd still have the same issue. You reveal after the dice have been rolled, can you change the roll? If it was yes before, then it's still yes. If no, then no. As stated before, there's nothing in the rules or on the card that says the dice are limited to being rolled in the roll dice step. The only issue is whether a roll that has already occurred can be affected by a future reveal.

The ruling actually had no influence on me sike. My mistake was that because a reroll seems to kind of naturally want to change the past, I forgot temporarily that enchantments can't do that. It is possible for the card to break the normal rules, and kich has stated a way in which that could make sense, but I don't feel like it's really written that way and the fact that there exists an equally valid interpretation that doesn't break the normal rules makes me lean towards that. it also seems to me like it would be cleaner and clearer when determining exactly when it's too late to reveal. In the end though, this is what needs a ruling. Can it work after the roll? Yes or no?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 29, 2015, 01:16:03 PM
I am not sure if that is needed. I think concise wording on the cards like this would go a long way to preventing these questions in the first place.

So here's Akiro's Favor
Once per round during the Dice Roll Step,

or

Once per round after the Dice Roll Step,

Would make this card crystal clear both in execution and intent....


I still don't think that's important. Let's say the new ruling didn't exist. We'd still have the same issue. You reveal after the dice have been rolled, can you change the roll? If it was yes before, then it's still yes. If no, then no. As stated before, there's nothing in the rules or on the card that says the dice are limited to being rolled in the roll dice step. The only issue is whether a roll that has already occurred can be affected by a future reveal.

The ruling actually had no influence on me sike. My mistake was that because a reroll seems to kind of naturally want to change the past, I forgot temporarily that enchantments can't do that. It is possible for the card to break the normal rules, and kich has stated a way in which that could make sense, but I don't feel like it's really written that way and the fact that there exists an equally valid interpretation that doesn't break the normal rules makes me lean towards that. it also seems to me like it would be cleaner and clearer when determining exactly when it's too late to reveal. In the end though, this is what needs a ruling. Can it work after the roll? Yes or no?
What I find interesting all of this is that we are talking about Enchantments in a general sense. I always have thought of them as a tool that can be cast now and used later to change/modify events. So it made logical sense to me that something like Akiro's Favor would work in-between the steps as they are now defined, as how could the card be a "surprise" or "change the results" if you always had to reveal the card before the step that it was needed? How can I have that surprise mechanic with Enchantments in the way you have described things?
Title: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on November 29, 2015, 03:08:30 PM
I am not sure if that is needed. I think concise wording on the cards like this would go a long way to preventing these questions in the first place.

So here's Akiro's Favor
Once per round during the Dice Roll Step,

or

Once per round after the Dice Roll Step,

Would make this card crystal clear both in execution and intent....


I still don't think that's important. Let's say the new ruling didn't exist. We'd still have the same issue. You reveal after the dice have been rolled, can you change the roll? If it was yes before, then it's still yes. If no, then no. As stated before, there's nothing in the rules or on the card that says the dice are limited to being rolled in the roll dice step. The only issue is whether a roll that has already occurred can be affected by a future reveal.

The ruling actually had no influence on me sike. My mistake was that because a reroll seems to kind of naturally want to change the past, I forgot temporarily that enchantments can't do that. It is possible for the card to break the normal rules, and kich has stated a way in which that could make sense, but I don't feel like it's really written that way and the fact that there exists an equally valid interpretation that doesn't break the normal rules makes me lean towards that. it also seems to me like it would be cleaner and clearer when determining exactly when it's too late to reveal. In the end though, this is what needs a ruling. Can it work after the roll? Yes or no?
What I find interesting all of this is that we are talking about Enchantments in a general sense. I always have thought of them as a tool that can be cast now and used later to change/modify events. So it made logical sense to me that something like Akiro's Favor would work in-between the steps as they are now defined, as how could the card be a "surprise" or "change the results" if you always had to reveal the card before the step that it was needed? How can I have that surprise mechanic with Enchantments in the way you have described things?

How? By revealing directly before the step that it was needed, but not a moment sooner. It's not like you can arbitrarily just choose to cancel an attack step once the attack sequence has started. It's still a surprise.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: jacksmack on November 29, 2015, 03:29:02 PM
Enchantments are suppost to be revealled and benefit you immediatly.

There are very few exceptions to this, and to be honost they are probaly bad design and should have been reworded unless for balance issues its decided that they should be revealed in advance to only potentially give a benefit based on a currently unknown result.

Falcon Prescision fall both inside and outside of this category. If the opponent flips up a defense enchantment after the declare attackstep then you can counter it with falcon prescision. If its block or reverse attack then you cannot.

Besides that its only Adramelechs touch and potentially Akiros Favor that must be revealed before you know if you need their effect.

Apparently there are now time to reveal during a move which fixes chain of agony, and magebane has already been confirmed that you can reveal after cast spell and still trigger the 1 damage.

So we are left with Akiro and Adramelachs
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ringkichard on November 29, 2015, 04:37:07 PM
The "obvious" solution is to make everything a step.  :o Only half kidding.

If you want to keep the "Surprise!" effect of enchantments (and of course you do, that's the whole point) but you also want enchantments to be revealed only after a Step, Phase, or Action (to get away from the "event" language) you have to add Steps where previously there were none.

Roll dice, for example, could get 4 steps.
1. Chose Dice
2. Pay Costs
2. Toss dice
3. End (Re-roll)

Some of the effects of a change like this would be good: it's always bothered me that Poison Blood can be revealed after the die roll for the Vampiric trait, but not after the die roll for Asyran Cleric's healing ability. Or, why shouldn't you be able to reveal Adremelech's Touch after a burn is rolled but before the damage is applied? It seems weird that you can use Astral Anchor to counter a Grey Wraith's Teleport movement, but not to counter a Teleport Trap.

Some of the effects of a change like this wouldn't be so good, mostly because the imprecision of the old rules let some things work more by fiat than logic. E.g. the rules specifically used to say that rolling dice was an event, and that you could reveal after any event. This was incompatible with the ruling that you couldn't reveal Poison Blood to stop Gray Angel's healing ability. We just kinda skimmed over this and went on with our lives.

But now it seems that we've clarified ourselves into a corner. And it looks to me like the only way out is through: if you want to be able to reactively use a hidden enchantment, in many cases it needs to be revealed at a Step after your opponent has declared intent, but before its effects have been resolved. For abilities and procedures that lack steps, if we want to allow surprise enchantments, we need to add steps or loosen the restriction.

Likewise, if you ever want to be able to reveal enchantments during the Upkeep phase, we'd need to insert Steps in there.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Kharhaz on November 29, 2015, 04:41:00 PM
But now it seems that we've clarified ourselves into a corner.

Well done gentlemen
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on November 29, 2015, 05:51:13 PM
Yes, you need to reveal after a phase, step, or action. Yes, some enchantments must be revealed before they can be used rather than as a surprise. This is how I had thought it had always been, and I think a lot of this thread is just about people being upset about these facts. However they are not what's being questioned here. They were already answered.

Perhaps it would help to approach this question from a different angle. Akiros favor also allows you to reroll daze rolls. If an attack skips the declare attack step, you roll the daze rolls as soon as the attack starts, I.e. before entering any other steps. This eliminates the whole step issue all together.

So we are rolling a die between steps, and we can reveal the enchantment between steps. If we reveal after the die has been rolled, can we use it to reroll the die? Whatever the answer is for this, would then also apply to attack rolls, because in both cases we are talking about the roll being completely finished and then revealing an enchant to allow a reroll.

I can honestly see this going either way and we simply need an official answer on it. I personally think requiring it to be revealed beforehand would be the easiest way and make the most sense, but won't be upset if it goes the other way. What I am annoyed with is that people keep trying to drag other issues into this. It's not a matter of limiting rerolls to a step. It's a matter of can they be triggered by a roll that already happened. That is the only thing that needs answered, but it does need an official answer. Once that's answered, we'll be fine.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ringkichard on November 29, 2015, 06:56:16 PM
Yes, you need to reveal after a phase, step, or action. Yes, some enchantments must be revealed before they can be used rather than as a surprise. This is how I had thought it had always been, and I think a lot of this thread is just about people being upset about these facts.

Well, to some degree, yes. This *is* a change, and it was written in accidentally. Version three rules specifically say that a roll is an event, and that you can reveal after any event. Now, as I pointed out, the consiquenses of this rule weren't pursued aggressively at the time, but by removing opportunities to reveal enchantments some cards just don't work the same as they used to, and this is potentially one. We didn't need a definition of re-roll that specified if it could re-roll an attack after the Roll Dice Phase, because you could just reveal Akiro's Favor after the roll while still in the Phase.

I really am thinking of going through every card in the game and making a list of every card this change affected. Or maybe I'll just take a break for a bit and calm down. Something about this really seems to have my goat.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 29, 2015, 07:37:06 PM
I am still baffled. What part of re-roll the dice needs it own special set of rules? Why does it have to be done within a step? I keep reading once a round in the card text and scratch my head at 6 pages.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ringkichard on November 29, 2015, 11:16:43 PM
Why does it have to be done within a step?

Maybe it doesn't. I don't know, because we don't have many rules for re-rolling. It's totally possible that you can re-roll any time before the roll is applied.

The old rules called rolling an event, so it was more clear that you *couldn't* re-roll during a roll, so you had to re-roll afterwards. Now? Donno.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on November 29, 2015, 11:54:50 PM
That might be my fault - I guess the step thing was about when AF can be revealed - although that also depends on whether it can affect past events (the roll happening in this attack action. 

Which is an alternate question/resolution to the same problem/issue under discussion.  I think we're all coming up with different explanations/solutions to the same problem, most all seem viable and choosing between them comes back to design intent.

Why does it have to be done within a step?

Maybe it doesn't. I don't know, because we don't have many rules for re-rolling. It's totally possible that you can re-roll any time before the roll is applied.

The old rules called rolling an event, so it was more clear that you *couldn't* re-roll during a roll, so you had to re-roll afterwards. Now? Donno.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on November 30, 2015, 01:54:58 AM
Enchantments are suppost to be revealled and benefit you immediatly.

I thought this was an interesting point, but wasn't sure of its umm integration with the MW design ethos/intent.  The end of this 'benefit you immediately' seems more a true statement for incantations.  I mean if you cast and incantation and it did nothing, itd be a dumb card (or really poor play).  But an enchantment is played face down for tempo, bluff, hedging your bets, mana conservation etc.  Knowing/deciding when to reveal it is a big part of the ebb and flow of the game, too soon you reveal your hand (sic), too late and you miss the optimum timing. 

Like someone (Sike I think) said, AF seems like it could go either way and I can see merits to both. But it doesn't seem that big a deal for the card to get revealed before the dice roll.  You've got something you really need to make sure you kill, you reveal it then.  Having it revealed doesn't negate the card or make it useless.  In some ways saving it up until you know it must be used seems a bit stronger, for 2 mana you can guarantee one timely re-roll (still doesnt guarantee a good roll, but its a statistical improvement). 

I guess one of the problems is that the dice roll is the primary point of uncertainty.  So almost everything else you can better estimate when you should reveal for best initial/immediate benefit.  AF revealed before a dice roll doesnt give you that certainty, you might reveal it, then roll awesomely.  Does that mean it wasn't worth having revealed it?  If your creature gets killed that round, probably annoying.... otherwise its an emerging threat to be considered.

I can't think of another decision with the same uncertainty - the other main uncertainty is around opponent face down enchantments, or what they will do with their actions.  But all of these would give you opportunity to reveal your own enchantments before resolution i.e. if a creature with a large stack of hidden enchantments declared an attack on your imp with face down rhino hide or similar, you can wait right through to the end of step 5 before you reveal it, so you'll have seen whatever they've rolled and what effects they're using before you decide.  I have been caught out by surprise teleports or rouse the beast moves which have meant I thought I'd picked the right moment to reveal my protection/use my defense and something nastier came along, but that's good play (or bad on my part).

I guess Jack's comment seems as good a question of intent as any, just how good an in the pocket card was AF meant to be?

PS I don't mean to be rule lawyering the fun out of the game, I was just enjoying the curves of the discussion. There are plenty of other threads that just seem meh, this one seems interesting and has people bouncing some interesting design/intent/solution thoughts around.


 
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 30, 2015, 02:22:26 AM
As often, i globally agree with Zuberi!

Yes, you need to reveal after a phase, step, or action. Yes, some enchantments must be revealed before they can be used rather than as a surprise. This is how I had thought it had always been, and I think a lot of this thread is just about people being upset about these facts. However they are not what's being questioned here. They were already answered.

Perhaps it would help to approach this question from a different angle. Akiros favor also allows you to reroll daze rolls. If an attack skips the declare attack step, you roll the daze rolls as soon as the attack starts, I.e. before entering any other steps. This eliminates the whole step issue all together.

So we are rolling a die between steps, and we can reveal the enchantment between steps. If we reveal after the die has been rolled, can we use it to reroll the die? Whatever the answer is for this, would then also apply to attack rolls, because in both cases we are talking about the roll being completely finished and then revealing an enchant to allow a reroll.
here i see it diferently:
there is a roll to miss step, so for me it's the same problem: A'sFavor must be revealed before the roll to miss step.

I can honestly see this going either way and we simply need an official answer on it. I personally think requiring it to be revealed beforehand would be the easiest way and make the most sense, but won't be upset if it goes the other way. What I am annoyed with is that people keep trying to drag other issues into this. It's not a matter of limiting rerolls to a step. It's a matter of can they be triggered by a roll that already happened. That is the only thing that needs answered, but it does need an official answer. Once that's answered, we'll be fine.
here i would prefer if the official answer would treat the global problem (how far in the past an enchantment can have effect when it's revealed) and not only the A's favor problem. i prefere a unique global rull than 30 exceptions.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on November 30, 2015, 03:49:40 AM
Even though it was never specified in the rules, I always play as if it's like the following:

1) declare
2) dodge
3) Assemble dice
4) Roll dice
5) re-roll dice
6) reveal enchantments edit: apply damage

Step 5 is not defined in the rules. But this is how I defined it intuitively without even thinking about it. Giving you the opportunity to reveal AF between 4&5 and rhino hide between 5&6.

Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: bigfatchef on November 30, 2015, 03:59:05 AM
That is how we also play it. Feels clean.

Even though it was never specified in the rules, I always play as if it's like the following:

1) declare
2) dodge
3) Assemble dice
4) Roll dice
5) re-roll dice
6) reveal enchantments

Step 5 is not defined in the rules. But this is how I defined it intuitively without even thinking about it. Giving you the opportunity to reveal AF between 4&5 and rhino hide between 5&6.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ringkichard on November 30, 2015, 05:14:18 AM
here i would prefer if the official answer would treat the global problem (how far in the past an enchantment can have effect when it's revealed) and not only the A's favor problem. i prefere a unique global rull than 30 exceptions.

There is already an official answer to this question in the rulebook: time is never rewound. Temple doesn't "effect the past" either. A re-roll is never an undo, it's always a re-do.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 30, 2015, 05:28:03 AM
here i would prefer if the official answer would treat the global problem (how far in the past an enchantment can have effect when it's revealed) and not only the A's favor problem. i prefere a unique global rull than 30 exceptions.

There is already an official answer to this question in the rulebook: time is never rewound. Temple doesn't "effect the past" either. A re-roll is never an undo, it's always a re-do.
if you re-do, you have to un-do (or you will have 2 dice rolls!).

i meant: there are a lot of situations where the enchantement have to waite until the end of the step it wants to influence to be revealed. it would be better if all these enchantements would / all these enchantements would'nt influence the ended step. 
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ringkichard on November 30, 2015, 08:56:48 AM
if you re-do, you have to un-do (or you will have 2 dice rolls!).

Maybe. It's possible that re-rolls count as additional Quicksand escape attempts, for example. It's also possible that it's similar to revealing Bear Strength Rhino Hide after the dice are rolled but before they're applied. Only instead of changing the applied armor value you change the applied dice.

Do you have to re-roll before the roll step is over, or before the roll is applied?

I would tend to favor "before applied" because not all rolls happen in a step, but that fact may cause other problems, too, so may have to change. I donno.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Laddinfance on November 30, 2015, 09:09:42 AM
You mean Rhino Hide?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 30, 2015, 09:37:16 AM
that's an interessant new question:
i agree that rhino hide can be revealed after the roll step: it doesn't affect it (but it must be revealed befor the damage step).
but i think bear strenght must be revealed befor the roll step: after it's to late to interfer with the rolling
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 30, 2015, 09:38:27 AM
that's an interessant new question:
i agree that rhino hide can be revealed after the roll step: it doesn't affect it (but it must be revealed befor the damage step).
but i think bear strenght must be revealed befor the roll step: after it's to late to interfer with the rolling
I agree with both of these statements...
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 30, 2015, 09:43:44 AM
that's an interessant new question:
i agree that rhino hide can be revealed after the roll step: it doesn't affect it (but it must be revealed befor the damage step).
but i think bear strenght must be revealed befor the roll step: after it's to late to interfer with the rolling
I agree with both of these statements...

if i understand well, for you A's favor can interfere with the rolling after the roll step, but bear strength cannot.
it means that A's favor would follow a different rull than bear strength. something like: a rull for "normal effects" and a rull for "counter&modifiing effects".
am i right?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on November 30, 2015, 09:52:56 AM
that's an interessant new question:
i agree that rhino hide can be revealed after the roll step: it doesn't affect it (but it must be revealed befor the damage step).
but i think bear strenght must be revealed befor the roll step: after it's to late to interfer with the rolling
I agree with both of these statements...

if i understand well, for you A's favor can interfere with the rolling after the roll step, but bear strength cannot.
it means that A's favor would follow a different rull than bear strength. something like: a rull for "normal effects" and a rull for "counter&modifiing effects".
am i right?

This is also the way I see it.

In my "imaginary" view I posted before, assembling dice is step 3, showing the potential strength of the blow. Giving yourself more muscles with bear strength can give you more dice. Giving yourself the muscles after you roll it doesn't count.

1) declare
2) dodge (dodge/block/reverse attack, fumble ... during this step)
3) Assemble dice (bear strength, ... before this step)
4) Roll dice
5) re-roll dice (AF before this one)
6) apply damage (Rhino hide before this one)

Akiro is not really affecting your blow, but more or less protecting you for bad luck. Favoring you in battle.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 30, 2015, 10:02:13 AM
i understand now your point of view!

well... i think it's easier to have only one rull for all enchantments.
if there are two, it's necessary to be very clear separating the enchantments between them (the story about muscles and luck isn't playable).
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on November 30, 2015, 10:21:38 AM
glad you see what I mean  ;)

anyway, the story about muscles was more the "way" I see it. The extra re-roll step is how I do it mechanically. (It's really not hard to remember)

I also don't want a separation between enchantments. But we see things differently. I didn't get your point in the beginning and that's why I said to keep everything simple. I always thought this step existed because many other games have this step. It's only because of this tread that I realize there is no re-roll step in mage wars. (and frankly no definition at all for re-rolling dice)

- You don't want to separate the attacker's enchantments (bear strength, AF)
- I on the other hand don't want to separate the "before you need it" (Rhino hide, AF)

So, basically, we want the same thing, but have another point of view about the re-roll.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 30, 2015, 10:26:23 AM
I also don't want a separation between enchantments. But we see things differently. I didn't get your point in the beginning and that's why I said to keep everything simple.

- You don't want to separate the attacker's enchantments (bear strength, AF)
- I on the other hand don't want to separate the "before you need it" (Rhino hide, AF)

So, basically, we want the same thing, but have another point of view about the re-roll.

i don't understand the link you see between rhino hide and A's favor...
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on November 30, 2015, 10:39:11 AM
- If you roll the dice and see that the damage, you can decide to (not) reveal rhino hide. If you don't need it or the damage is all piercing you simply don't reveal it.
- In the same manner I inspect the dice as an attacker and decide to reveal if I want a better roll. If it's already decent I won't reveal it and save the mana/surprise.

For me personally I don't think either of those rules make sense. I would say you need to reveal everything during the assemble dice step. RHINO and AKIRO. The rules are clear about rhino hide so I find it strange to allow rhino hide after the roll but won't allow AF after the roll. (my view of separating between enchantments)

I hope I made myself clear.  :) Technical discussions like this are hard over the internet in a different language. :P
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on November 30, 2015, 11:33:59 AM
- If you roll the dice and see that the damage, you can decide to (not) reveal rhino hide. If you don't need it or the damage is all piercing you simply don't reveal it.
- In the same manner I inspect the dice as an attacker and decide to reveal if I want a better roll. If it's already decent I won't reveal it and save the mana/surprise.

For me personally I don't think either of those rules make sense. I would say you need to reveal everything during the assemble dice step. RHINO and AKIRO. The rules are clear about rhino hide so I find it strange to allow rhino hide after the roll but won't allow AF after the roll. (my view of separating between enchantments)

I hope I made myself clear.  :) Technical discussions like this are hard over the internet in a different language. :P
I always imagine Conan taking a swipe at the enemy (bad dice roll), scoring no damage, and then (in my mind, Schwarzenegger's voice of course) a quick prayer: Crom let my sword split my enemies skull open! (reveal Akiro's Favor and re-roll dice).

Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on November 30, 2015, 11:40:03 AM
If there are likely to be more 'reroll' effect cards that benefit from this step, I'd vote for adding it.  But if AF is likely the only one - keeping in mind Dawnbreaker has to be already in play to function - I'd vote for a simple clarification or wording tweak.

I do agree that if we nerf it to have to be revealed to be used, and revealed prior to the step then it seems out of step with the decisions that can be made for nearly all other cards.  However, ...... (blah blah I think we've all written enough on the variations possible, I won't repeat it/myself/others).
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Schwenkgott on November 30, 2015, 12:44:34 PM
And because nobody would risk arguing with Conan, it is proven now! Akiro's Favor can be revealed in the Roll Dice step to reroll!
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on November 30, 2015, 12:52:36 PM
- If you roll the dice and see that the damage, you can decide to (not) reveal rhino hide. If you don't need it or the damage is all piercing you simply don't reveal it.
- In the same manner I inspect the dice as an attacker and decide to reveal if I want a better roll. If it's already decent I won't reveal it and save the mana/surprise.

For me personally I don't think either of those rules make sense. I would say you need to reveal everything during the assemble dice step. RHINO and AKIRO. The rules are clear about rhino hide so I find it strange to allow rhino hide after the roll but won't allow AF after the roll. (my view of separating between enchantments)

I hope I made myself clear.  :) Technical discussions like this are hard over the internet in a different language. :P

yes, i understand.
my point is that these enchantements make effect during two different steps (and so it's one rull to reveal one before the rolling and one after).
your point is that you will know if you are interested in there effect during the same rolling step (and so it would be two rulles to have to reveal them in two differnent moments).

my point is clearly the best... 8)... but i don't have many arguments to defend it.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ringkichard on November 30, 2015, 01:01:48 PM
You mean Rhino Hide?
Ayep. That'll teach me to write on my 10min break.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on December 05, 2015, 03:21:28 AM
Yes, you need to reveal after a phase, step, or action. Yes, some enchantments must be revealed before they can be used rather than as a surprise. This is how I had thought it had always been, and I think a lot of this thread is just about people being upset about these facts.

Well, to some degree, yes. This *is* a change, and it was written in accidentally. Version three rules specifically say that a roll is an event, and that you can reveal after any event. Now, as I pointed out, the consiquenses of this rule weren't pursued aggressively at the time, but by removing opportunities to reveal enchantments some cards just don't work the same as they used to, and this is potentially one. We didn't need a definition of re-roll that specified if it could re-roll an attack after the Roll Dice Phase, because you could just reveal Akiro's Favor after the roll while still in the Phase.

I really am thinking of going through every card in the game and making a list of every card this change affected. Or maybe I'll just take a break for a bit and calm down. Something about this really seems to have my goat.

I don't see what's changed. Whether you reveal within the step, after the roll, or you reveal after the step, either way you are revealing after the roll. Meaning both ways we would have the same problem and I'd be making the same arguments. Can it affect a roll that has already occurred? If it was yes, it is still yes. If it was no, it is still no. You say it was yes, but I can find no support for that answer. I would be perfectly fine with that answer if we had an official source on it, but we don't seem to and saying no to it seems easier and cleaner to me.

I really don't see what the steps have to do with it at all. It's merely a question of what a reroll is and is it changing the past? If a reroll is changing the roll, then it has to happen when the roll happens because the game doesn't allow you to change the past. If it's not changing the past, and rather is a brand new occurrence, then it doesn't matter when it happens or when the enchantment is revealed as long as you can still make use of the dice somehow.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on December 05, 2015, 11:01:02 AM
I repeat there is no changing the past, it has been stated clearly multiple there is no going back. The way I see it, is the re-roll "supersedes" the previous roll. Thus can happen outside of a step at any period in a round.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: wtcannonjr on December 05, 2015, 11:55:26 AM
I repeat there is no changing the past, it has been stated clearly multiple there is no going back. The way I see it, is the re-roll "supersedes" the previous roll. Thus can happen outside of a step at any period in a round.

First, I think adding a separate re-roll step is not necessary.

Second, here is why and it relates to the "any period in a round" comment.

The RAW clearly identifies when dice are rolled. For example, in the Upkeep Phase for Burn markers or attack dice are rolled during the Roll Dice step of an Attack Action, etc. I think we all agree that if no other spells and effects are in play we would not say that a creature can roll their attack dice outside of a step at any period of the round. However, if we disagree about this than perhaps we need to discuss our interpretations of what is meant by a Sequence of Play.

So now we have a spell, Akiro's Favor that ADDS an effect into the game that allows a player to Re-roll Attack Dice. So the wording on the card only specifies attack dice or special effect die can be re-rolled for THAT attack. Without further wording on the card we use the standard sequence of play rules to determine when the effect on the card can be applied. We see the term on the card "for that attack" as key to deciding that the re-roll must happen during the current attack's Roll Dice Step. The spell effect would need expanded wording to circumvent the Sequence of Play rules and provide an ability to re-roll attack dice at any period of the round.

As I see it each spell effect on a card needs specific wording in order to change the sequence of play. Case in point was an example given earlier around Reverse Magic. This is why the Magic Rule exists. It allows cards to alter the standard sequence of play, but only based on specific wording on the card itself. If Akiro's Favor replaced the clause "for that attack" with "for that attack at any period of the round", then I would agree with your interpretation.

My two cents ...
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on December 05, 2015, 12:19:10 PM
I repeat there is no changing the past, it has been stated clearly multiple there is no going back. The way I see it, is the re-roll "supersedes" the previous roll. Thus can happen outside of a step at any period in a round.

That is a valid answer, and is not at all influenced by when enchantments can be revealed. It's merely a matter of whether the reroll changes the previous roll, or is it a new roll that supersedes the previous roll. That is what's at question here, and as soon as we have an official answer it can be laid to rest.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on December 05, 2015, 12:23:53 PM
I repeat there is no changing the past, it has been stated clearly multiple there is no going back. The way I see it, is the re-roll "supersedes" the previous roll. Thus can happen outside of a step at any period in a round.

First, I think adding a separate re-roll step is not necessary.

Second, here is why and it relates to the "any period in a round" comment.

The RAW clearly identifies when dice are rolled. For example, in the Upkeep Phase for Burn markers or attack dice are rolled during the Roll Dice step of an Attack Action, etc. I think we all agree that if no other spells and effects are in play we would not say that a creature can roll their attack dice outside of a step at any period of the round. However, if we disagree about this than perhaps we need to discuss our interpretations of what is meant by a Sequence of Play.

So now we have a spell, Akiro's Favor that ADDS an effect into the game that allows a player to Re-roll Attack Dice. So the wording on the card only specifies attack dice or special effect die can be re-rolled for THAT attack. Without further wording on the card we use the standard sequence of play rules to determine when the effect on the card can be applied. We see the term on the card "for that attack" as key to deciding that the re-roll must happen during the current attack's Roll Dice Step. The spell effect would need expanded wording to circumvent the Sequence of Play rules and provide an ability to re-roll attack dice at any period of the round.

As I see it each spell effect on a card needs specific wording in order to change the sequence of play. Case in point was an example given earlier around Reverse Magic. This is why the Magic Rule exists. It allows cards to alter the standard sequence of play, but only based on specific wording on the card itself. If Akiro's Favor replaced the clause "for that attack" with "for that attack at any period of the round", then I would agree with your interpretation.

My two cents ...
One more and final time and I will stop:

Page 2 v4 Manual:
Quote
The Magic Rule
Mage Wars is a game of magic and magic spells. Often, these spells will violate the normal rules in some way. In all cases, if there is a conflict between the text on a spell card and these rules, the spell card always takes precedence.

The card: Akiro's Favor
The whole card text from OCTGN:
Quote
Akiro's Favor   
Promo
Enchantment
2+1   
Quick   
0-2
Living Creature
War
1
Magebind +2

Once per round, if this creature makes a melee or ranged attack, you may re-roll all of the attack dice, or the effect die, for that attack. Or, if the attack has to roll to hit (such as with a Daze condition), you may re-roll that die roll instead. Use a ready marker to keep track of this ability.
[ReadyMarker]

MWPROMO1
         

The very first three words of this card state: "Once per round"

Magic Rule kicks in.

I do not like being a contrarian in my arguments, but:

The RAW for the Dice Roll Step only allow for the Dice to be rolled (not re-rolled). You "roll the Dice" you now have the "event" completed and the results of the dice roll are the "effect" and the step now ends, next you reveal Akiro's Favor's and it's effect is defined as "Once per round" and therefore it allows for a re-roll, i.e. replace the "effect" of the "event" in the Dice Roll Step with a new roll of the Dice, all of this is done before the Apply Damage Step.

No time travel, all within the rules, and "magic" just happens.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on December 05, 2015, 01:12:35 PM
Thank you sIKE. Again, I agree that you have a valid interpretation there, assuming that a reroll is a new roll that supersedes the previous one. However, it is an equally valid interpretation to consider a reroll to be a way to change a roll, which means it has to be done while the roll is in progress since you can't change the past. The "once per round" statement is very likely a limiting statement preventing you from using it multiple times per round and doesn't really answer our question regarding the nature of rerolling dice. This requires an official ruling.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on December 05, 2015, 01:42:12 PM
Agreed it needs a ruling. And agreed "Once per round" is also a limiter.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: wtcannonjr on December 05, 2015, 02:18:40 PM
Agreed it needs a ruling. And agreed "Once per round" is also a limiter.

I see what you are saying now. Thanks for clarifying further.

I have always interpreted the wording "Once per round" to be a frequency limit. The effect wording itself defines what point in the Sequence of Play it can take place. i.e. if this statement was not included, then a creature with a Doublestrike or Triplestrike attack could re-roll each of them. This wording prevents continued re-rolls that might otherwise have been possible in situations like multiple counterstrikes in a round due to the Vigilant trait or Defend spell.

If the wording "Once per round" actually means any point in the round, then we have many other cards that might need clarification.

Let's see where the ruling comes down on this one.

It kind of feels like we are waiting for the Supreme Court of Mage Wars to weigh in on this debate. :)
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: ringkichard on December 05, 2015, 08:49:29 PM
I don't see what's changed. Whether you reveal within the step, after the roll, or you reveal after the step, either way you are revealing after the roll. Meaning both ways we would have the same problem and I'd be making the same arguments. Can it affect a roll that has already occurred? If it was yes, it is still yes. If it was no, it is still no. You say it was yes, but I can find no support for that answer. I would be perfectly fine with that answer if we had an official source on it, but we don't seem to and saying no to it seems easier and cleaner to me.

Ok, I'm back to my home, and a full sized keyboard:
Here's every instance of the word event in the v3-3 rules.

Quote from: 6
The player with the initiative acts first during the Action Stage, and goes first whenever you must determine the order of events.

This tells us that we may need to determine the order of events. In this context, it seems that events are just whatever things need to be put into order.

Quote from: 7, about the upkeep phase
You always choose the order in which events that affect your creatures and objects occur during this phase. In the rare case that a timing issue occurs, the player with the initiative decides the order.

Example: You control a Highland Unicorn with the Regenerate 2 trait that has a Burn marker on it. Since the creature has a lot of damage on it, the Burn effect could destroy it. You can choose to resolve the Regenerate trait first or the Burn condition first.

This tells us that Regenerate and Burn are events, and by extension pretty much everything else that normally happens in the Upkeep Phase that you'd want to order.

Quote from: 18
Revealing Enchantments
Important: Hidden Enchantments have no effect as long as they are hidden! You may choose to reveal an enchantment immediately after any action or event, even if it is your opponent’s turn! This is a “free action” that does not require you to activate a creature or flip an action marker (See sidebar “When Can You Reveal?”).

This is the source of the event language that was the grease that allowed many cards to function in ways they perhaps cannot under a strict reading of the 4th printing rules.

Quote from: 18 again
Enchantments cannot affect an event that occurred before it was revealed. For example, you cannot reveal a Rhino Hide enchantment after the enchanted creature takes damage from an attack, to reduce the amount of damage it received.

Somewhat ironically, this is the "no going back in time" rule. It only applies to events. What's an event? Well, taking damage, in this example. The 4th printing rule is very similar.

Quote
When Can You Reveal?
You can reveal an enchantment immediately after any action or event in the game:
• At the end of any Phase of the game round. Example: An Essence Drain can be revealed at the end of the Reset Phase, so that it will take effect during the Upkeep Phase.
• Immediately after a creature is activated, before it chooses its actions for the turn.
Example: You could reveal Chains of Agony when your opponent activates his creature. If the creature moves that turn, it will take damage.
• Immediately after a creature completes its move action, but before it takes a quick action.
Example: After a creature moves into a zone, but before it can make an attack, you could reveal Sacred Ground.
• At the end of any of the eight steps of an attack or three steps of casting a spell.
Example: After the Avoid Attack Step of an attack, you could reveal the Rhino Hide enchantment on
your creature to reduce the amount of damage it will take from that attack.
• You can reveal an enchantment immediately after it is cast, right after the Resolve Spell Step.
When an enchantment is “resolved” it is placed face down as a hidden enchantment. Then, immediately after it has resolved, you may choose to reveal it at the end of that Step.
• You cannot interrupt an event to reveal an enchantment.
Example: You cannot reveal an enchantment on a creature in the middle of its Move Action, or in the middle of rolling dice during an attack. You would have to wait until that “event” (step or action) has finished.

In this portion, we learn that events are steps and actions, and by implication, also phases. We learn that rolling dice is an event.

Quote
If a mandatory or single use enchantment is revealed at any time other than the event for which it is supposed to trigger, it has no effect and is immediately destroyed and discarded. You cannot hold the revealed spell, to use its effect at a later time. For example, if a Block spell is revealed when there is no attack, it has no effect and is destroyed and discarded instead.

Here we learn that events are anything for which an enchantment triggers. Which makes sense, because it allows all enchantments to be revealed after they trigger.

--
Quote
I really don't see what the steps have to do with it at all. It's merely a question of what a reroll is and is it changing the past? If a reroll is changing the roll, then it has to happen when the roll happens because the game doesn't allow you to change the past. If it's not changing the past, and rather is a brand new occurrence, then it doesn't matter when it happens or when the enchantment is revealed as long as you can still make use of the dice somehow.

Let me put it as a question: would we have any reason to believe that the following card breaks the rules?
Re-roller. Mandatory Enchantment: Whenever this creature rolls an effect die for an attack and gets a result below 7, you must reveal Re-roller. Re-roll the attack and effect dice, then destroy Re-roller.

If we can do that, we have to be revealing the enchantment after the roll, because there's no way to reveal it during the roll. There's no reason to suspect that the roll procedure continues after the dice have stopped moving, is there? I propose that the only time the rules would allow a re-roll (if the above enchantment is legal, and it seems to me like it would be) is after the roll.

Under the version 3 rules, you could always reveal any enchantment after the roll, which would also be the soonest a mandatory enchantment could be revealed. This was because rolling dice is an event, and you could reveal after any event. If we believe the mandatory enchantment has an opportunity to function within the rules, all hidden re-roll enchantments could have done the same.

Under the version 4 rules, since you can't reveal after the roll unless the enchantment specifically tells you to, you have to wait till after the roll step to reveal Akiro's Favor. It's possible that once the step is passed, you're outside the window of opportunity for re-rolls, so you can't reveal in time to have any effect.

That's why steps come into it. Previously, you didn't have to wait till the end of a step to reveal, but now you do, and that may cause you to have to wait longer than is permissible.

--

I like your supreme court of Mage Wars analogy. We don't know the outcome, just the existing law such as it is. The decision makes new law. 
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: wtcannonjr on December 05, 2015, 10:07:23 PM
Hmmmm...pondering this further.

What if the wording on Akiro's Favor said "... you may roll all of the attack dice again,..." instead of the current wording "... you may re-roll all of the attack dice,..."?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on December 05, 2015, 10:49:31 PM
The idea of steps in this form of linear flow implies one is complete before the next starts.  The dice roll step needs to be complete before the damage can be applied. 

For that reason, to me, and  yes I get the other rationale, but I prefer that the dice rolling re-rolling and anything else that can be done to change the value of the dice is done in the dice roll step.  That makes it nice and clear to trigger the apply damage step... and anything that is going to moderate that step, needs to be in play prior....

I get and feel that other interpretation is fairer (pr better) for AF as a card.  But creates more potential for confusion in the rules overall.... at least I think I think that, I'm not reading through the 8 pages to check ;)


Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on December 06, 2015, 08:12:22 AM
I have always played by the steps rule, so to me nothing has changed. All of the cards and rulings that have ever occurred, and that I have ever discussed, have been under the assumption of the steps rule and worked just fine with it, so I'm not sure why people think we need to reevaluate them or that we've somehow broken something. Even if we were playing by the "event" rule though, I would want answered the question of whether the enchantment had to be revealed before you roll dice or if it could be revealed afterwards, which seems to be what most people are concerned with. Whether dice can only be rolled inside of the Roll Dice step seems like a separate issue entirely, and I'm not sure where it is coming from. There are no rules that limit rerolling to a specific step.

If we were playing by the "event" rule, and we had an official answer saying that the enchantment had to be revealed before the initial roll took place, because rerolling changes a die roll and you can't change the past, then you still could not reveal an enchantment to get a reroll after the initial roll even if you did it within the Roll Dice Step.

If we were playing by the step rule, and we had an official answer saying that the enchantment could be revealed after the initial roll, because rerolling is a new die roll that supersedes the previous one, then you could still reveal after the Roll Dice step to get a reroll, because there is no rule to limit rerolls to the Roll Dice step.

The rules only say that the Roll Dice step is when you make your initial attack roll. It doesn't mention rerolls at all, and once we learn more about the nature of rerolling then it should not only settle the main argument, but also make this "limited to a step" argument moot. If we determine that rerolling is changing the initial roll of the attack dice, then the enchantment needs revealed before you ever roll. If we determine that it is a brand new roll, then it is not tied to the initial roll at all and thus not limited to a particular step by any existing rule. It'd be a separate beast entirely, and this presumption that it would need to be limited to a particular step is entirely baseless, without any support from the rules.

That is part of why I suggest ruling in favor of it being a changed dice roll, and requiring the enchantment to be revealed beforehand, because it's simpler and cleaner. Creating an entirely new beast could cause unforeseen consequences, which is something you guys seem concerned with, so I think it would be better to consider it as modifying something already present instead. Though if you guys want to create an entirely new beast, for something that is not well defined in the rules, then we've got plenty of space to write rules regarding it.

This baseless idea that we may rule in favor of rerolling being an entirely new roll that supersedes the previous roll, and thus allows the enchantment to be revealed after the initial roll, but then we limit rerolls to particular steps seems preposterous to me. There's no support for it in the rules, no reason to do it, and very flimsy logic behind it. Other dice rolls that aren't performed within steps wouldn't have the same issue, and creating such limits for some rerolls but not others would seem entirely arbitrary.

No. Our two possible solutions are that either rerolls are changing a die roll, and thus must be available before making the initial roll, or that they are a new roll, an entirely different beast, that supersedes the previous rolls (which may possibly involve writing new rules regarding them, though I can't think of any such rules needed currently), but definitely should not be limited arbitrarily.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: bigfatchef on December 06, 2015, 09:26:12 AM
The other possibility without even touching a beast is to clarify just that one card of akiro's favor. Then the card overwrites the “underspecified“ standart ruling.

To keep the card as powerful as it is I would prefer to allow to reveal it after rolling and then allow a reroll. I guess there would not even errata on the card itself be needed, just a clarification in the supplement. Casual players won't realize that problem anyway.

What I want to say is that besides printed ruling it seems everybody knows there are two ways to handle Akiro's Favour. One of those two has to be voted the correct one. I would recommend focusing on that card instead of changing global rules with all problems coming with it.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on December 06, 2015, 09:35:50 AM
in etheria, Sikes and Zuberi would enter the arena to make a decision!

on earth all is more complicate...
i allways played with Zuberi's interpretation: A'sF follows the rulles (and therefor has to be revealed before the roll step).
i think a card that contradicts the rules should say it clearly and define clearly the "over-rule" (can i reveal A'sF after the end of attack action? after the end of the round? after the end of the game?...)
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on December 06, 2015, 10:11:10 AM
One of those two has to be voted the correct one.
There is no voting in Etheria, the decree will be handed down from upon high, when he is ready to favor us with his knowledge. The ruling will not be directly revealed to us either, it will be passed down to the trusted Right Hand who will let us know.....


If we determine that rerolling is changing the initial roll of the attack dice, then the enchantment needs revealed before you ever roll.
Wouldn't that by definition be going back in time? Changing something that has already happened?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Kharhaz on December 06, 2015, 01:35:05 PM

If we determine that rerolling is changing the initial roll of the attack dice, then the enchantment needs revealed before you ever roll.
Wouldn't that by definition be going back in time? Changing something that has already happened?

rerolling by definition is changing something that has already happened...... :P
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on December 06, 2015, 02:32:48 PM
You can change the existing roll or you could replace it....I know, the same but different....
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: bigfatchef on December 06, 2015, 03:48:32 PM
Sitting at a table at home you can re-roll your dice without traveling back in time. Try it out!  :P

Rolling dice is not dealing (applying) damage for that is the next step.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on December 06, 2015, 06:31:49 PM
Sitting at a table at home you can re-roll your dice without traveling back in time. Try it out!  :P

Rolling dice is not dealing (applying) damage for that is the next step.
Yes you are correct, but are you "updating" that 1 non-crit 2 effect die roll or are you replacing it?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: bigfatchef on December 06, 2015, 07:15:35 PM
Sitting at a table at home you can re-roll your dice without traveling back in time. Try it out!  :P

Rolling dice is not dealing (applying) damage for that is the next step.
Yes you are correct, but are you "updating" that 1 non-crit 2 effect die roll or are you replacing it?
I re-roll not change diceresults. Looking at the real world I take the same dice and roll them a second time without travelling through time. It is a second throw. Only magic hands could change their effects without throwing those dice again. That would be replacement I guess.
Taking it to a magic world... Everything is possible. Still dice are rolled on the table here for fighting wizards in etheria.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on December 06, 2015, 11:45:35 PM
You can change the existing roll or you could replace it....I know, the same but different....

lets say you replace it, my question is still unanswerd:

can i reveal A'sF after the end of attack action? after the end of the round? after the end of the game?...
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on December 07, 2015, 12:36:55 AM
If we determine that rerolling is changing the initial roll of the attack dice, then the enchantment needs revealed before you ever roll.
Wouldn't that by definition be going back in time? Changing something that has already happened?


In a sense. This is why I had trouble with this issue initially, lol. The steps thing never played into my mind, but rerolling does seem to naturally be an alteration of the past. This definition can work within the rules though, as such:

A rerolling ability would need to be present before the initial dice roll. When the dice are rolled, it then triggers the ability to reroll before "finalizing" the dice, so to speak. Like any triggered ability, you would resolve these rerolls ASAP, and then see what you're left with before moving on, at which point the dice can not be altered (save for specific card text).

Quote from: Exid
i allways played with Zuberi's interpretation: A'sF follows the rulles (and therefor has to be revealed before the roll step).

I am not currently saying that sIKE's interpretation breaks any rules. I am saying that right now we don't really have a firm rule on how rerolling works. I am actually fine with sIKE's interpretation and think that it would allow a great deal of flexibility and fun with the enchantment. At this point I'm taking up the contrarian view for two reasons. First, because the opposition needs an advocate and I don't mind playing contrarian. Second, because I do think it's possible, that ruling rerolls to be a new separate roll of the dice could cause unforeseen consequences.

Quote from: Exid
can i reveal A'sF after the end of attack action? after the end of the round? after the end of the game?...

Technically, if it is ruled as a separate replacement roll, then you COULD do that (except for the after the game part). However, it would be rather pointless as the results of the roll are not used past the Damage and Effects step. I'm failing to think of any dice rolls that utilize their results multiple times, but if any do exist that would be a consequence that we need to be wary of. We could end up using one result for an effect, and then replacing the result before determining a secondary effect.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on December 07, 2015, 12:47:01 AM
Quote from: Exid
can i reveal A'sF after the end of attack action? after the end of the round? after the end of the game?...
Technically, if it is ruled as a separate replacement roll, then you COULD do that (except for the after the game part). However, it would be rather pointless as the results of the roll are not used past the Damage and Effects step. I'm failing to think of any dice rolls that utilize their results multiple times, but if any do exist that would be a consequence that we need to be wary of. We could end up using one result for an effect, and then replacing the result before determining a secondary effect.

if i look it in Sikes' way, the new roll could replace the first roll and create a new damage step, that would replace the first damage step, and a new winner of the game would replace the first winner!
my point is: if you open this box you have to write clearly how it'll be closed.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: wtcannonjr on December 07, 2015, 06:14:47 AM

In a sense. This is why I had trouble with this issue initially, lol. The steps thing never played into my mind, but rerolling does seem to naturally be an alteration of the past. This definition can work within the rules though, as such:

A rerolling ability would need to be present before the initial dice roll. When the dice are rolled, it then triggers the ability to reroll before "finalizing" the dice, so to speak. Like any triggered ability, you would resolve these rerolls ASAP, and then see what you're left with before moving on, at which point the dice can not be altered (save for specific card text).

This is how we play it. It isn't going back in time (as measured by the sequence of play (SOP)) since the effect happens in the current step of the current attack. I am talking game time here not actual player time measured by a clock. I think this distinction is important to keep in mind. For me the trigger for the reroll ability is the Roll Dice Step of an Attack Action for the creature with AF attached.

I believe for sIKE's interpretation to work we have to allow the term "once per round" to be it's own effect that either (1) adds another step or (2) modifies an existing step in the SOP so as to allow an attack dice roll to happen outside of the Dice Roll step. We have many other cards where the term "once per round" is used. Does that mean we get to add steps in the sequence of play for each of their effects?

That is what has me concerned when I think about where interpretations other than Zuberi's quote above might take us.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: DaveW on December 07, 2015, 08:12:21 PM
if i look it in Sikes' way, the new roll could replace the first roll and create a new damage step, that would replace the first damage step, and a new winner of the game would replace the first winner!
my point is: if you open this box you have to write clearly how it'll be closed.

I guess I don't understand this line of reasoning. I don't think anyone is advocating resolving the damage step more than once. The idea is that the dice would be rerolled before the damage step no matter which way the official ruling goes.

Aren't we done arguing this? Shouldn't we just let it go until we get a final answer from someone at AW?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on December 08, 2015, 01:30:15 AM
if i look it in Sikes' way, the new roll could replace the first roll and create a new damage step, that would replace the first damage step, and a new winner of the game would replace the first winner!
my point is: if you open this box you have to write clearly how it'll be closed.

I guess I don't understand this line of reasoning. I don't think anyone is advocating resolving the damage step more than once. The idea is that the dice would be rerolled before the damage step no matter which way the official ruling goes.

Aren't we done arguing this? Shouldn't we just let it go until we get a final answer from someone at AW?

i think we need an official ruling.

i know nobody wants to re-roll after the damage step, but the arguments to re-roll after the rolling step could apply to defend that!
what i said is that if the official ruling sais that A'sF can be reveaeled after the roll step, it must clarify precisly the limits of this oportunity.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: DaveW on December 08, 2015, 05:38:34 PM
i know nobody wants to re-roll after the damage step, but the arguments to re-roll after the rolling step could apply to defend that!
what i said is that if the official ruling sais that A'sF can be reveaeled after the roll step, it must clarify precisly the limits of this oportunity.

Again: No one is saying that you will reroll after the damage step.

It would be roll, re-roll, apply damage... no matter which way this turns out.

So, if AF already is revealed, it would be 1) roll, 2) reroll, 3) apply damage and effects.

Or, if AF is not yet revealed (and if it is determined to be allowed), it would be 1) roll, 2) reveal, 3) reroll, 4) apply damage and effects.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: bigfatchef on December 08, 2015, 06:54:39 PM
It would be roll, re-roll, apply damage... no matter which way this turns out.

So, if AF already is revealed, it would be 1) roll, 2) reroll, 3) apply damage and effects.

Or, if AF is not yet revealed (and if it is determined to be allowed), it would be 1) roll, 2) reveal, 3) reroll, 4) apply damage and effects.

That summes it up better than every version the previous pages. And from those 2 variations I personally would prefer number 2 for there is more surprise momentum.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: wtcannonjr on December 09, 2015, 06:01:05 AM
It would be roll, re-roll, apply damage... no matter which way this turns out.

So, if AF already is revealed, it would be 1) roll, 2) reroll, 3) apply damage and effects.

Or, if AF is not yet revealed (and if it is determined to be allowed), it would be 1) roll, 2) reveal, 3) reroll, 4) apply damage and effects.

That summes it up better than every version the previous pages. And from those 2 variations I personally would prefer number 2 for there is more surprise momentum.

Then we might add "May reveal during the Roll Dice step." as the last sentence on the spell effect to clarify the second option.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: DaveW on December 09, 2015, 07:20:20 PM
It would be roll, re-roll, apply damage... no matter which way this turns out.

So, if AF already is revealed, it would be 1) roll, 2) reroll, 3) apply damage and effects.

Or, if AF is not yet revealed (and if it is determined to be allowed), it would be 1) roll, 2) reveal, 3) reroll, 4) apply damage and effects.

That summes it up better than every version the previous pages. And from those 2 variations I personally would prefer number 2 for there is more surprise momentum.

Then we might add "May reveal during the Roll Dice step." as the last sentence on the spell effect to clarify the second option.

If it is determined that revealing after the roll dice step does not allow a reroll, yes. (If it is determined that you can reroll between steps, then you could reveal after the roll dice step and then roll, since it is a once per round ability... no extra text would be needed then.)
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on December 10, 2015, 01:24:48 AM
Again: No one is saying that you will reroll after the damage step.
it's not about what anybody says, it's about having rules that translate clearly what you want, without bad side effects.

Then we might add "May reveal during the Roll Dice step." as the last sentence on the spell effect to clarify the second option.
there are 2 rules: no revealing during a step and no come back.
i think it would be better not to touch the revealing rule, and add something like "once per round, DURING AN ATTACK, BEFORE THE APPLY STEP you may re-roll..."

(but i still prefere the version i'm use to: A'sF must be revealed befor the rolled step)
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: bigfatchef on December 10, 2015, 03:16:47 AM
This all is turning in circles.

To move forward there are 2 steps to be taken:

1) first of all we need an answer how AF is meant to work or how it should work. Does AF have to be revealed before the roll dice step or does it still work when revealed after the first roll of dice and before damage is applied?

2) as soon as 1) is clear, there is a solution needed how this is fixed in the rules. Change card text? Change step ruling? How to clear this...
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: auronvi on December 11, 2015, 03:48:19 PM
Quote
Enchantments cannot affect an event that occurred before it was revealed. Pg 18.

Quote
At the end of any of the eight steps of an attack or three steps of casting a spell Pg 19.

AF if revealed AFTER the roll dice step of an attack cannot effect the dice rolled in that step. This means you have to reveal AF before you roll dice otherwise it will not benefit you.


I think that makes your first part quite clear. Now that means that going into the dice roll we have both AF revealed and Temple of the Dawnbreaker ready to affect the dice roll. This has 4 different outcomes depending on what kind of roll. Initiative doesn't matter.

Mage 1 has AF, Mage 2 has TotD.

Mage 1 attacks, good roll, Mage 2 rerolls, good roll, Mage 1 keeps.
Mage 1 attacks, good roll, Mage 2 rerolls, bad roll, Mage 1 rerolls, keeps.
Mage 1 attacks, bad roll, Mage 1 rerolls, good roll, Mage 2 rerolls, keeps.
Mage 1 attacks, bad roll, Mage 1 rerolls, bad roll, keeps.

To me a reroll is basically an undo. That last roll never happened but now someones ready marker is flipped and they can't undo the new one again but the other player still might be able to. I think this match up is in favor of the player with TotD. It makes the person running Akiros have to roll well twice to keep a good roll while giving them only 1 opportunity to reroll bad rolls.

Now is this fair or intended? I would hope they predicted and tested this interaction before releasing Akiros Favor but it might have been missed and needs to be addressed. I would play like I have written out though and that, I believe, is how Arcane Duels played it out during a tournament when this came up.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: DaveW on December 11, 2015, 09:43:36 PM
Quote
Enchantments cannot affect an event that occurred before it was revealed. Pg 18.

Quote
At the end of any of the eight steps of an attack or three steps of casting a spell Pg 19.

AF if revealed AFTER the roll dice step of an attack cannot effect the dice rolled in that step. This means you have to reveal AF before you roll dice otherwise it will not benefit you.

This is one interpretation, yes. The other (for completeness) is that the subsequent roll of the dice is a separate event (thus not affecting a prior event).

One of these days someone from AW will tell us what the intent is, and the correct way to interpret this. In the meanwhile, we wait.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on December 12, 2015, 12:44:53 AM
answer is comin'
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on December 21, 2015, 08:01:02 AM
answer is comin'
winter has come... and no answer...
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Laddinfance on December 21, 2015, 08:11:17 AM
With everything else going on with AW, Bryan and I haven't been able to talk about it yet. I have not forgotten this.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on January 21, 2016, 03:01:10 AM
With everything else going on with AW, Bryan and I haven't been able to talk about it yet. I have not forgotten this.

You promise?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Laddinfance on January 21, 2016, 08:58:00 AM
With everything else going on with AW, Bryan and I haven't been able to talk about it yet. I have not forgotten this.

You promise?

Yes.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on January 21, 2016, 05:01:19 PM
:)

With everything else going on with AW, Bryan and I haven't been able to talk about it yet. I have not forgotten this.

You promise?

Yes.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on February 29, 2016, 02:07:38 AM
Really really promise?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on February 29, 2016, 04:44:12 AM
the question was:
when a card allows to "re-roll" something,
- must the re-roll take place during the normal roll-step (in this case, if the card is an enchantment like Akiro's Favour, it must be revealed before the normal roll-step)
OR
- can the re-roll take place later... and until when? (in this case an enchantment could be revealed after the rolling is known)
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on February 29, 2016, 09:22:43 AM
the question was:
when a card allows to "re-roll" something,
- must the re-roll take place during the normal roll-step (in this case, if the card is an enchantment like Akiro's Favour, it must be revealed before the normal roll-step)
OR
- can the re-roll take place later... and until when? (in this case an enchantment could be revealed after the rolling is known - like Rhino Hide.
There fixed!
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on February 29, 2016, 12:10:48 PM
the question was:
when a card allows to "re-roll" something,
- must the re-roll take place during the normal roll-step (in this case, if the card is an enchantment like Akiro's Favour, it must be revealed before the normal roll-step)
OR
- can the re-roll take place later... and until when? (in this case, if the card is an enchantment like Akiro's Favour, it could be revealed after the rolling is known).
There fixed!
:D that's not what i meant... re-fixed!
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on February 29, 2016, 12:16:15 PM
I was just wanting to point out that there is a place after the dice have been rolled and an enchantment is commonly revealed. It would be down in-between the two steps. As this sentence:

Quote
- can the re-roll take place later... and until when?

made it appear that something like this hasn't already been happening in the game.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on February 29, 2016, 12:32:05 PM
I was just wanting to point out that there is a place after the dice have been rolled and an enchantment is commonly revealed. It would be down in-between the two steps. As this sentence:

Quote
- can the re-roll take place later... and until when?

made it appear that something like this hasn't already been happening in the game.
oh! no! that was not my point!
i just wanted to say that if a re-roll enchantment can be revealed after the rolling, the "untill when" question must be answered in the rull.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: sIKE on February 29, 2016, 12:41:14 PM
What I am saying in the case of the second option the only space this can happen is in-between the Roll Dice Step and the Apply Damage and Effects Step. There is no mystery there, the real question (in my mind) is when an effect says you can re-roll a dice, does the re-roll happen in the Roll Dice Step or after the step.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on March 01, 2016, 11:49:31 AM
If it helps I think we'd worked out the question and we're just waiting to hear back from Brian and Laddin.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on March 01, 2016, 12:17:53 PM
If it helps I think we'd worked out the question and we're just waiting to hear back from Brian and Laddin.
yep!
but how to formulate the question is still to discuss  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on April 07, 2016, 04:48:55 AM
You promised!! ;)

With everything else going on with AW, Bryan and I haven't been able to talk about it yet. I have not forgotten this.

You promise?

Yes.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on April 07, 2016, 05:58:04 AM
 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on September 06, 2016, 04:45:59 AM
What ever happened to answer this?  Was it addressed somewhere else and I missed it?

I mean come on, there's even a promise on this! :)
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Laddinfance on September 06, 2016, 07:00:24 AM
Spells that allow for the re-rolling of dice, allow the dice to be re-rolled any time prior to the Damage and Effects step, of an attack.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on September 07, 2016, 12:38:33 AM
Spells that allow for the re-rolling of dice, allow the dice to be re-rolled any time prior to the Damage and Effects step, of an attack.
very clear!
please put it in the new rules supplement  ;D
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Moonglow on September 07, 2016, 05:15:26 AM
ummm, its clear, but is it answering all of the question?  I think one of the aspects of the question was around when AF can be revealed.  I think Laddin's reply says that:

If the AF effect can be applied any time before the damage or Effect step then you can reveal AF after the dice roll step (before the damage step) and then re-roll the dice.

If I've understood the implications correctly then I guess it is fully answered :)

The more I re-read the thread the less sure I am - a lot of the question was about whether AF could have an effect on dice already rolled if it was revealed after the roll.... Laddin's answer doesnt explicitly clarify this question.

Quoting an older post:
4th edition, p18: Enchantments cannot affect an event that occured before it was  revealed.
and since it can't be revealed during the step...

Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Puddnhead on September 07, 2016, 07:16:38 AM
The way I understand it, Akiro's Favor and its ilk are giving you an additional (albeit partial) "roll dice" step that must be taken before the "damage and effects"  step. so as long as you have revealed before "damage and effects" you are entitled to your reroll.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Donovan on September 07, 2016, 07:25:40 AM
One could say the effect that AF influences is the damage and effect. So as long as you reveal it before dmg and effect is executed, you can re-roll.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Laddinfance on September 07, 2016, 08:06:06 AM
You can roll the dice, then reveal Akiro's Favor and re-roll the dice. But you have to do so before the Damage and Effects step. The re-roll is not changing the "roll" itself. It does not add or subtract any dice from that event, it simply allows you to replace the result rolled, with whatever you re-roll.

The biggest thing with the "enchantments cannot affect an event that occurred before it was revealed" is that you can't reveal something that actually modifies the roll. Basically, if you roll an attack, and then decide to reveal a Bear Strength you will NOT gain 2 dice because that event has already happened. Akiro's Favor is generating a re-roll which is not modifying the previous event, but rather making it's own event.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on September 07, 2016, 08:45:22 AM
The biggest thing with the "enchantments cannot affect an event that occurred before it was revealed" is that you can't reveal something that actually modifies the roll. Basically, if you roll an attack, and then decide to reveal a Bear Strength you will NOT gain 2 dice because that event has already happened. Akiro's Favor is generating a re-roll which is not modifying the previous event, but rather making it's own event.
??? ??? ???
that's not clear anymore!

I think it's better to see the "can re-roll" rule as a exception on the "cannot affect an event that occurred before" rule.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Puddnhead on September 07, 2016, 08:59:22 AM
Exid,

You are replacing the roll with a new one that is generated by Akiro's Favor.  Akiro's Favor triggers a new event that is rolling dice (either damage dice or effect die) that replaces the previous event.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Donovan on September 07, 2016, 09:12:58 AM
I think it is a very good and clear explanation.

Bear strength would change the roll event. So that's why revealing BS and rolling 2 extra dice is not possible.

AF does not change the last roll. It just prevents its effect on damage and replaces its effect with the results of a new roll.

I see no conflict regarding the rule that revealing enchantments that would change events that already happened. You are changing the effect not the event with AF.

See it as a roll of 6 dice that did 2 damage now gets the effect of a roll of 6 dice that does 7 damage.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Zuberi on September 07, 2016, 09:29:18 AM
I was on the same side as you Exid, so maybe I can help clarify. The sequence of events would go something like this:

Roll Dice Step: You roll your dice. Afterwards, that roll is locked in and can not be changed or modified in any way.

Reveal Akiro's Favor: This generates a new roll that must be handled in identical fashion to the first (i.e. all the same traits and modifiers). Afterwards you have a brand new roll that is separate and distinct from the previous roll.

Apply Damage and Effects Step: You now have two different dice rolls independent of one another but must use the most recent one, the one generated by Akiro's Favor. It's not that the first one has been modified or changed. It's been replaced.

Basically, they're defining reroll to mean generating a brand new, separate, roll identical to the first which will then be used for all future references. The important thing here is "future references". It is consistent with the rule that you can't change the past.

You could technically reveal after the Damage and Effects step to reroll the dice, I think, but since the Damage and Effects have already been applied you wouldn't be able to change the Damage and Effects, and so the reroll would not really have any affect. Similar thing if you wanted to use it to reroll a failed Daze roll. If you reveal it after the Roll to Miss step, you could reroll the die, but you've already suffered the effect of having to skip to the Additional Strikes step and would still be beholden to that effect regardless of the new roll.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Kelanen on September 07, 2016, 10:50:57 AM
Thanks for that Ivan - I was also of the opinion that Aaron only explicitly answered half of the question, and was unsure what it meant for when you can reveal AF.

Curiously, this now means that you can roll damage, not like the result and reveal Akiro's Favour for a reroll, but you can't roll a burn, not like the result and reveal Adramelech's Touch for a reroll modified effect. I understand why (and to my mind defining 'event' rather than removing it was the way forward), but it's a curious anomaly, and I'm sure a number of more casual players will hear one rule, and apply it to both scenarios erroneously.

Having removed the event option in upkeep, and made the no retroactive effects from revealing rule, I'm glad it was finally ruled this way though. AT was a weak niche card made very weak, AF is an average card that would have become weaker, and I'm all for making as many cards useful as possible. It seems the better ruling in a broader sense too.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Donovan on September 07, 2016, 01:21:06 PM
Huh? Adramelech's Touch has nothing to do with a reroll?

With AT you just prevent a burn condition from being removed in the upkeep phase when a 0 is being rolled?

What did you mean exactly?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Kelanen on September 08, 2016, 05:12:36 AM
Sorry, you are right, sloppy wording - it's not a reroll per se, but it's a do-over of the effect.

But you can roll 0 damage, reveal AF and use it... You can't roll 0 on a burn, reveal AT and use it - it's too late at that point.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on September 08, 2016, 05:31:54 AM
Exid,

You are replacing the roll with a new one that is generated by Akiro's Favor.  Akiro's Favor triggers a new event that is rolling dice (either damage dice or effect die) that replaces the previous event.

and to replace doesn't affect?
well... it's no problem for me since we know how to play it!
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Donovan on September 08, 2016, 06:28:58 AM
Sorry, you are right, sloppy wording - it's not a reroll per se, but it's a do-over of the effect.

But you can roll 0 damage, reveal AF and use it... You can't roll 0 on a burn, reveal AT and use it - it's too late at that point.

Hi Kelanen. You can't use AF to re-roll fire damage. That happens in upkeep and AF only works with attacks.

I agree the cards are not 100% clear. With AT one could say the wording is: "Whenever a burn condition on this creature rolls a zero...". It says "rolls" not "has rolled".

But then again AF says "Once per round if this creature makes a melee or...".

Using the same argumentation one could say the attack has already started.

AF should perhaps say: "Once per round while this creature is in the process of making a melee or...".

Guess Exid is right:

well... it's no problem for me since we know how to play it!

 8)
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: drmambo23 on September 08, 2016, 09:21:43 AM
If player A reveals AF to reroll dmg, can player B then reveal rhino hide or whatever  since its still before damage and efffect?

Armor or any enchantment being the reaction to AF.
I believe the answer is yes but i just want to make sure
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on September 08, 2016, 09:52:24 AM
Yes
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on September 08, 2016, 10:50:50 AM
Yes
:o
can we have official ruling on this one?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: iNano78 on September 08, 2016, 10:54:55 AM
Yes
:o
can we have official ruling on this one?

You can always reveal an enchantment between steps. Thus, you can reveal Rhino Hide before the Damage and Effects step, like always.

The debate regarding Akiro's Favour was whether or not revealing it at that point is "too late" to have an effect on the original roll (e.g. does the AF roll replace the original roll, or has that opportunity passed by the time you get to the point between the Roll Dice step and Damage and Effects step), not whether or not an enchantment can be revealed then.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Kelanen on September 08, 2016, 12:23:25 PM
Hi Kelanen. You can't use AF to re-roll fire damage. That happens in upkeep and AF only works with attacks.

Agreed, but I didn't say this, or anything close to it.

I agree the cards are not 100% clear. With AT one could say the wording is: "Whenever a burn condition on this creature rolls a zero...". It says "rolls" not "has rolled".

But then again AF says "Once per round if this creature makes a melee or...".

Using the same argumentation one could say the attack has already started.

AF should perhaps say: "Once per round while this creature is in the process of making a melee or...".

Again, none of this has a relevance to my point, I think we're talking completely across purposes...
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Donovan on September 08, 2016, 04:35:10 PM
Ah see what you mean. When you said "you can roll 0 damage" I thought you meant 0 damage on the burn.

Misunderstanding.

Also, I thought you said "sloppy wording", because the card texts of Akiro's Favor and Adramelech's Touch were sloppy.

Misunderstanding.

My point was, you can't reveal AT to correct a 0 on burn, because the card text says "rolls" not "has rolled". "Rolls" indicates a future roll. Although I think "the next time this creature rolls" would have been clearer.

But if you use that argument, AF should not say "makes a Melee or Ranged attack", because "makes" would indicate a future attack. Better would be "has just rolled damage for a Melee or Ranged attack".

Sometimes I think the wording could be changed a little to make the rules clear in the text.

On the other hand we just witnessed how difficult it is to write a text so there is just 1 interpretation.  8)
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: DaveW on September 08, 2016, 10:41:22 PM
My point was, you can't reveal AT to correct a 0 on burn, because the card text says "rolls" not "has rolled". "Rolls" indicates a future roll. Although I think "the next time this creature rolls" would have been clearer.

But if you use that argument, AF should not say "makes a Melee or Ranged attack", because "makes" would indicate a future attack. Better would be "has just rolled damage for a Melee or Ranged attack".

The difference between these cases is that the attack is continuing... from declaration to applying damage and effects... so in the case of AF, you are still in the process of making that same Melee or Ranged attack.

With AT, the only action is the roll for the burn. Once the roll has been made, there is no continuation of the same action, so no time to reveal after the roll that could let you use AT for that same roll.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: exid on September 09, 2016, 06:07:30 AM
one point i'm not sure on: between the first roll and AF's roll, is it possible to reveal a bear's strength (or other modifier on the roll)?
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Halewijn on September 09, 2016, 06:30:09 AM
one point i'm not sure on: between the first roll and AF's roll, is it possible to reveal a bear's strength (or other modifier on the roll)?

No, you have to make the exact same roll. Once the roll dice step has happened you cannot change your dice pool anymore by revealing enchantments. (Same for divine protection or agony or something like that)
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Donovan on September 09, 2016, 09:57:06 AM
The difference between these cases is that the attack is continuing... from declaration to applying damage and effects... so in the case of AF, you are still in the process of making that same Melee or Ranged attack.

With AT, the only action is the roll for the burn. Once the roll has been made, there is no continuation of the same action, so no time to reveal after the roll that could let you use AT for that same roll.

Ahh! That makes sense. Thanks!
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Laddinfance on September 09, 2016, 10:13:22 AM
one point i'm not sure on: between the first roll and AF's roll, is it possible to reveal a bear's strength (or other modifier on the roll)?

No, you have to make the exact same roll. Once the roll dice step has happened you cannot change your dice pool anymore by revealing enchantments. (Same for divine protection or agony or something like that)

This is correct. You cannot reveal a Bear Strength after the Roll Dice Step and have the extra 2 dice.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Kelanen on September 15, 2016, 04:17:39 AM
Ah see what you mean. When you said "you can roll 0 damage" I thought you meant 0 damage on the burn.

I did mean that.

My point was, you can't reveal AT to correct a 0 on burn, because the card text says "rolls" not "has rolled". "Rolls" indicates a future roll. Although I think "the next time this creature rolls" would have been clearer.

No, the tense isn't what prohibits this, it's the fact that the AF scenario occurs in an attack sequence with steps in between generating and applying damage, whereas the AT scenario occurs within the upkeep step, where all damage is both generated and applied within that step - there is no opportunity for non-triggered enchantment reveals mid-step.
Title: Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
Post by: Donovan on September 15, 2016, 06:18:05 AM
I realized that restriction during upkeep only a few days ago when reading the post on Enchantment Transfusion.