September 22, 2018, 06:52:05 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Zuberi

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 121
Rules Discussion / Re: Ranged Attack vs Wall bordering same zone
« on: September 09, 2018, 08:48:39 PM »
Luminous Blast can absolutely be used to attack walls bordering your zone. While walls are NOT in your zone, they also are not 1 zone away. The situation is exactly the same as it has been described earlier in the thread, that walls exist in a nebulous in-between state where counting them as range 0 is equally as valid as range 1, which is to say neither is actually correct but we don't have another way of measuring range. So you still pick one of the zones bordering the wall, even if the one you choose happens to be the one you're standing in. That's fine.

General Discussion / Re: The Killer Bees
« on: August 29, 2018, 04:07:36 PM »
Conjurations, Creatures, Enchantments, and Equipment are all spells that turn into objects after they are cast. As spells, they absolutely cannot target or affect Swarms, so you can't cast Tanglevine on a Swarm, for example. However, after they've been cast and they turn into objects, it's a little different. They kind of have to be able to affect swarms, because otherwise creatures couldn't target swarms or affect them, making them immune to virtually everything except attack spells. That would be seriously problematic.

Rules Discussion / Re: obscure and vines
« on: August 24, 2018, 11:05:25 AM »
The problem here, as Kharhaz stated, is that the rules for using a Vine as the source prevents you from targeting anything outside of the vine's zone (or a wall bordering it). It doesn't matter what the range on the spell is, when you use a vine as the source you are limited to within that vine's zone (or a wall bordering it).

Now, if it's just the Necromancer who has obscured and not the whole zone, you could target a vine in the zone with the Necromancer to attack them.

Rules Discussion / Re: Flying and no flying and logic
« on: August 24, 2018, 10:57:15 AM »
I agree with wtcannonjr. There's already ways to deal with flyers. They're not too powerful, you just need more games and experience. In fact, they have pretty significantly reduced stats for their cost compared to non-flying creatures. The trait isn't free.

In addition to ranged attacks and using you're own flyers, you can simply remove their ability to fly. Obviously you have things that say they remove flying, like Gravikor and Maim Wings, but you're not limited to that. Any ability that incapacitates or restrains also removes flying. Attack spells that slam are a very popular way of dealing with them.

Or you could just ignore them. Since they have lower stats than a non-flyer, if you just make non-flyers you'll have more powerful creatures for the same cost. And the flyers can't get in your way unless they lose flying. So just focus on the enemy mage. If they try to guard, throw a Tanglevine or Force Hold on them. Now they can't effectively guard AND they are grounded if you want to focus on them.

My guess is that it's guardian angles that are really giving you trouble, and restraining them not only counters their flying AND their guarding, it also negates their defense. So that's a really good strategy against them.

Rules Discussion / Re: order in damage and effect die
« on: August 23, 2018, 02:07:24 AM »
This is answered in the Rules Supplement. Damage is always applied first, before effects.

General Discussion / Re: Gen Con Academy pre releases
« on: August 06, 2018, 06:13:33 AM »
Interesting that you don't have to pay 2 extra mana for 3+ level shields (since the target line only refer to minor weapons and any level shild) with Freeze Weapond.

You have misread. The minor applies to the shield part as well. In English it is grammatically correct to apply an adjective to both nouns linked by a conjunction. I agree it can be confusing, is not how I would choose to do it, but it is correct English and Arcane Wonders has used this convention on lots and lots of cards in the past.

I think this is a good idea. Compiling all of the rules into a single document would be very useful, and it will be easy enough to indicate any rulings that are still pending official clarification.

I'm having trouble thinking of a situation in which this would matter and am curious what you're thinking about to give this more context. As is, I think the most complete answer would be to point you towards the steps for revealing an enchantment in the Supplement. They rarely matter, to the point that they're not even mentioned in the core rules, but they do exist. They are:

1. Show the enchantment
2. Counter the enchantment (only usable by effects that specifically say they can counter reveals)
3. Pay Costs
4. Resolve the effect

When you are unable to pay the cost in step 3, the reveal is canceled and the card is discarded. I believe this would prevent any effects contingent on the reveal occurring.

As referenced in one of the linked threads, I remember a discussion I had about using the word "attack" to mean different things between the two games would bite us in the butt. In general, I would recommend reading all text on Academy cards, when used in Arena, to mean the same thing they generally would in Arena. So this would only work on one attack, like the other "Strike" cards. And I'm pretty sure that was the intention.

The problem is, that causes some of the other academy cards to behave a bit wonky in Arena. In Arena, each roll of the dice is one attack, and the entirety of the attack steps is an attack action. Normally if something gained a trait for one attack, it would lose it before doing another attack in the "Additional Strikes" step. But having that happen with traits like doublestrike and sweeping doesn't make sense because it would lose them before they could actually be utilized. They become nonsense on certain Academy cards and the cards would be useless if played as written. Obviously, we're not going to have useless cards. So we had to do some mental gymnastics and make special exceptions for them to get them to work. This resulted in "well, attack should just be attack action in this case." That allows those cards to function and makes sense because Academy has the two terms being synonymous. But these should really be considered special exceptions, and not a precedent to judge other cards by. In general, just play the cards as written.

Okay, that order is correct. A dead mage would not get a counterstrike though. They are treated basically identical to other creatures upon death, with just a few additional rules tacked on. But I think your main issue is the fact that the game doesn't end immediately, and I can understand why that would be frustrating and think you have a good argument to be made. I think the fact that the game handles everything linearly though, without any "stack" or true simultaneous events, makes the whole "it ends at the end of the phase" thing make some sense. You finish what you were in the middle of, and anything that happens during that phase "kind of" happened at the same time.

I don't really have an opinion on this. I can see merit in both methods. You are right that ending it immediately would be simpler though, which is the point of the thread.

When the mage dies, like other creatures, he is immediately destroyed and removed from play along with anything attached to him. There are a few additional restrictions that don't normally apply to other creatures, such as being unable to pay any mana for things, but for the most part it follows the normal creature death rules. I'm not really sure the problem here.

I believe Kharhaz would like the game to end immediately upon Mage Death, which is a reasonable argument, but it currently doesn't end until the phase finishes. Basically, the game can't end mid-phase which does allow time for the other Mage to be killed. Basically, if both deaths happen in the same phase it is considered simultaneous.

I'm not sure the issue with Magebane, because the Mage takes the Magebane damage after resolving the attack. As in, the Mage doesn't get to complete an attack after death and isn't working different from other creatures. The comparison to a damage barrier seems apt.

That said, I think the rules could definitely be simplified, but I don't think that's the games biggest problem and the changes I would like to see actually aren't possible without rewriting the game to a significant extent. Maybe a new edition will see them. Stuff like simplifying traits and conditions, cleaning up the spell restrictions and training rules, and yes the order of operations could use some attention. I agree with all of that, but those are significant overhauls to the game. Basically, after nearly 6 years, I feel we've learned a lot about how this very unique first of it's kind game operates and we can do better. But not without making a whole new game.

But again, that's not really the problem with the game. The real problem is output and support. LCG's tend to get an expansion per month. We've gotten 1 or 2 per year. To put out more expansions they would need to prepare more material in advance, because there's only so much you can do to speed up playtesting. So, there's no way for us to really fix that with the game already being out there, it's something that would need to be planned for pre-launch. They then also need to fix their support for the game, maybe approaching it more like a miniature war game than a CCG, but I don't really know. That's an area that they really haven't figured out yet imo, with even the GenCon tournament still experimenting on how to run things (no more timed victories this year).

Strategy and Tactics / Re: Any way to protect a flying creature?
« on: May 11, 2018, 08:57:31 PM »
Maim Wings and Eagle Wings can both be revealed during an attack, they just won't have any affect until the attack is finished. Which is kind of splitting hairs, it would be much easier to say they can't be revealed until the attack is finished, but if someone screws up and does reveal during an attack, they haven't really broken any rules or suffer any repercussions, they just have to wait till the end of the attack before the enchantment actually takes affect.

Rules Discussion / Re: Rules Supplement - where can i find it
« on: May 05, 2018, 09:15:33 AM »
For future reference, Arcane Wonders links all relevant documents for a game to that game's specific page on their site. Just go to, click games, and then click the game you're interested in. Documents are listed down at the bottom.

Rules Discussion / Re: Eye for an Eye and damage type
« on: April 23, 2018, 05:35:09 AM »
This is clearly covered in the Official Rules and Codex Supplement, if people want to give it a read. Zot is correct, the damage is untyped.

General Discussion / Re: forum name
« on: April 23, 2018, 05:29:46 AM »
But Data isn't a Vulcan.
no, but he isn't only a
mechanical androids or computers and their logic is often shown to be a flaw or short coming rather than something to aspire to.

Actually, he is. The entire point of his character was that his highly logical nature was a shortcoming, a flaw, that he spent the entire series trying to overcome and to become "more human". He's different from most such characters in that he realizes these traits are "flaws" that limit his perspective and capabilities but they're still depicted as such even when their usefulness is being proven time and time again. He taught us we should want to be human, not that we should want to be like him as he didn't even want to be like him.

Quote from: SailorVulcan
Oh god no. Trying to be an emotionless robot isn't rationality. If you're completely calm all the time no matter what the circumstances, that is not indicative of any kind of good reasoning skills and it also means that *something is very wrong with you*. Vulcans are not rational.

If people here think that I aspire to be as unreasonable as Spock, then I really should change my username.

Nobody said that you had to be emotionless to be rational. But you can't let emotions dictate your actions either. Emotions can be useful, but they are involuntary and often very irrational. The entire point of the Vulcan Philosophy is that Vulcans are VERY emotional beings who are prone to outbursts of passion, and this nearly tore their society apart as they let those passions rule them. Those emotions haven't gone away, but the philosophy is to ensure that they think through their decisions so that they can be reasonable. But yeah, we have kinda hijacked the thread. Sorry about that. I could talk about Star Trek all day long. It's such an amazing series, and the Vulcan culture is one of my favorite aspects. You're right that they aren't perfectly rational and reasonable at all times, but the point is that they TRY to be and consider such traits to be virtues. If you wanna discuss further, we can take it to private messages.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 121