June 17, 2019, 06:02:25 AM

Author Topic: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.  (Read 8008 times)

Zuberi

  • Rules Guru
  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2496
  • Banana Stickers 57
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #30 on: December 08, 2013, 02:06:50 PM »
Quote from: Kharhaz
This topic has never been about denying information;

I can't speak for everyone, but this is exactly what the topic has been about to me. Are you allowed to deny information that clearly affects game play from your opponent?

Quote from: Kharhaz
As for enchantments. If I slide a hidden bear strength under my zombie brute, that is an illegal play. However if I shift enchantment that bear strength to my necromancer and reveal it was an illegal spell cast?

Same situation but you cast a seeking dispel on that zombie brutes bear strength...

So you see there are some examples that go beyond the identical enchantment stacks argument for hidden enchantments.

In each of these examples though, it would be revealed that an illegal play had been made. It is something that can be verified. As soon as the enchantment is flipped up, I see that you cheated and I can get a judge involved.

However, by refusing to tell me what your mage is trained in, I can not tell if you are cheating or not when you cast a restricted spell or otherwise take control of a restricted spell. You say I should just assume you're being honest, but that doesn't work for me. There should be some way for me to tell you are playing fairly.

Quote from: Kharhaz
As for examples of information you do not have to tell your opponent. I do not have to tell my opponent any prepared spell information, the number of spell book points my book is, if any illegal cards are in my book, my spawnpoints prepared spell, what any hidden enchantment is, and my wizard training

With spell preparation I am allowed to see if you are making legal plays. I can tell how many spells you are preparing, and when you cast the spell I can verify that it is something you are legally able to cast. What impact are they having that I am not able to verify it's legality? The spellbook is also verified before the game begins by the judges with registration, so that when you come to the table I am told that your spellbook is completely legal just by you participating. Information on enchantments becomes known as soon as they are revealed. None of your examples represent information denied to your opponent except for your attempt at denying training.

Quote from: Kharhaz
I do not have to tell you what enchantments are placed in what order. It is your job to keep up with that information yourself.

Actually, you do have to tell me. Newly cast enchantments are always placed on top of older ones so that I can tell the order in which they were placed.

Quote from: Kharhaz
If you try to cast a sleep on my zombie, it is not my responsibility to say, "Do not pay the mana for that my zombie is immune!" In mage wars information gathering is the responsibility of each player, not the responsibility of the player to give that information and assist you in casting / preparing spells.

I agree that it is the responsibility of each player to gather the information they desire themselves, but I maintain that they have to be ABLE to gather that information as well. If a player wants to check if your zombie is non-living, they are allowed to gather that information. It can not be denied to them.

In situations where a trait is variable, I do not believe that overrides the pretext that such information is public. For example, take the Vigilant trait. This is a variable trait that gives you the option to maybe put your creature on guard after each of its actions, if you should so desire. When you make this choice, you have to declare it. You can't just wait for me to attack and then say "Oh, he's vigilant, so he was on guard."

Same thing with mage training. It is a choice that you make. You must declare this choice. It is public information that impacts game play. There are no situations in which you are allowed to keep such information secret.

Kharhaz

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2108
  • Banana Stickers 7
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #31 on: December 08, 2013, 02:33:08 PM »

Same thing with mage training. It is a choice that you make. You must declare this choice. It is public information that impacts game play. There are no situations in which you are allowed to keep such information secret.

I was typing my post while you posted this :P

Okay so I am an idiot. The issue here is not about information gathering, stratagem, or leveling playing fields. It's about making choices while playing mage wars.

The question here is, "Do I have to announce my choices (as per the text on cards that state you make a choice or choose)?"

I will list all the choices I can think of at (spells with the word choice / choose)

Wizard must choose an element at the beginning of the each game.

All mages must choose a spellbook during setup.

Helm of fear allows the attacker to make a choice.

Dissolve and Explode require you to choose in addition to targeting.

Resurrection requires you to choose a destroyed living creature in addition to targeting.

Gate To Voltari requires you to choose a mage to link it's ability to.

Mana Siphon requires you to choose a mage to link it's ability to.

Temple of the Dawn Breaker requires you to choose one ability or the other.

Force Push and teleport trap require you to make a choice.


As the word choice has direct effect on the mechanical workings on the game I am jumping to the other side of the fence and siding with the "must announce choices made during the game" crowd.


Kharhaz

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2108
  • Banana Stickers 7
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #32 on: December 08, 2013, 03:01:38 PM »

Actually, you do have to tell me. Newly cast enchantments are always placed on top of older ones so that I can tell the order in which they were placed.


The point I was making was that I am not required by the game to tell you. I cannot alter the order they were played but if you choose not to look at them I do not have to tell you.

Also note that while I am "switching sides" I want to take a second and insure you that you are not allowed to look at my prepared spells to insure I'm making legal plays or peak at my hidden enchantments to check for legality. You can make those interpretations when they are cast and revealed, not prepared or or placed(as with hidden enchantments)

If you suspect an illegal play is made you can get a judge to investigate, but there is nothing in the rules that gives you the authority to insure your opponent is making legal plays. That's just the nature of secretive plays.

As for the variable trait vigilance. The guard marker has to be applied at the end of it's action. I am still not 100% sure that choices have to be declared (although for the sake of the game they probably should). That is a rule that has to be made by Mr. Pope

However I completely understand if they are not required. A vigilant creature would not need to announce it is guarding as per vigilance, it only needs to have a guard marker placed on it at the end of its activation. Gate to Voltari only needs the controller to know whom it is tied to and keep track of it's ability as per the card (although like I said that information should probably be public).

This topic is on the thin line of personal responsibility of a mage wars player. If I am to trust your hidden enchantment is legal and mandatory enchantments are revealed when appropriate, I also assume you are conducting choices in a fair and proper manner.

DeckBuilder

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 666
  • Banana Stickers 3
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #33 on: December 08, 2013, 05:04:35 PM »
Well done, Kharhaz! Give the man a prize for taking on all-comers here. Bravo!

I simply don't see the logic of why you need to declare anything beyond what's already printed on a mage card at a beginning of the game (which is what this topic originated from as it is related to the tactical importance of choosing who has first initiative).

When I join a tournament, I hand the judge my book list with training and spells. Everybody's book list is secret.
(To not do this would allow me to scout my opponents and change my book according to the tournament meta.)

At the end of any game, be it casual or tournament, a player has every right to look at the opponent's book and count his spell points. This is when any Wizard player will have to reveal his training to the opponent, to satisfy the opponent that he has spent within his spell points budget. This also applies to any face down enchantments when a game ends so as to ensure a player does not have his own duplicate enchantments (hidden or revealed) on an object. This is simply integrity checking and whilst I'd bristle (at the the sore loser's implication that I have cheated), you must accede to such requests. Just like in major Magic tournaments, after a match, a player is allowed to ask a judge to check the opponent's deck to ensure it reconciles with his deck list handed in at the start.

At the start of the game, when I reveal I am a Wizard, there is no need for me to declare my elemental training, just as there is no need to for any player to reveal any spell in their book. Your book and how you made up your spell points budget remains a secret. You've broken no rules in keeping anything that is not already on your mage card a secret.

When I play an Epic spell, I am assuring the opponent that I only have 1 copy of that spell in my book. You don't get to look at my book to check this until the game is over.

Below are the reasons given so far for why "a Wizard must declare Elemental Training at the start of a game":

(1) Nobody else has this ability. Well, nobody else currently has training in Arcane, a Voltaric shield or an in-built ranged attack either!

(2) This will invalidate future Element X Mage Only spells. Firstly none exist and may never exist in "minor schools" so this is hypothetical and secondly no, you simply play it and thereby indirectly declare you are trained in that element, else you are playing an illegal spell. As for the desperate "what if I want to target you with my Fire Mage Only equipment?", why would you ever give an opponent this hypothetical beneficial item? Even if you want to and I am forced to reveal I am not one, oh dear, I am an illegal target, you must target yourself instead. Basing an argument on equipment that does not exist and there is no reason to ever cast on an opponent to his benefit is embarrassing.

(3) This is a Duel between Renown Mages. Well, if I am so renown, how come nobody knows my spells? Am I the Fire Wizard who plays Lord of Fire and Angel of Light? Or the Fire Wizard who plays 4 Hydra that I buff with enchants? Or the Fire Wizard who plays 4 Devouring Jelly? C'mon, if I'm so renown, how come nobody knows what my "signature spells" are? Whilst as a role-player I applaud this role-play argument (I am all for "retaining fantasy realism"), this renown argument makes no sense when you don't know the spells that I can cast.

(4) Because OCTGN ensures your opponent knows your training. Well, I contend that this is an error on the part of OCTGN programming.

(5) "Because it is not fair!" Now here I have the greatest sympathy. The wizard is probably the strongest mage. Those playing other mages must hate facing Wizards. To find out this mysterious versatile mage doesn't need to even declare his unspecified elemental training (just like it says on the tin) must be the final straw. This is understandable and explains the passionate denial of even a possibility that Wizards don't need to declare their elemental training at the start of a game. However "it's not fair!" is simply not an argument, let alone a valid one.

Not declaring training may not be good for play balance (Kharhaz contends it has little relevance, I disagree and no doubt others from the passion in this thread). "Not good for the game because it strengthens the strongest mage" would be a very valid argument. Nobody has yet said it, rather relying on other spurious justifications. So let's be honest. We simply don't want to give the Wizard any further advantage.

Our local meta (all of us once very competitive Magic players) have always played that Wizards don't need to declare elemental training. This was made clear in the first post of the Golem Pit thread...

Turn 2: forge Arcane Ring for other adjacent Mana Crystal and an Iron Golem in your starting corner kill zone
Ok, so you have very early on revealed your elemental specialty but you often need a guard on turn 3, especially if you started with initiative.

One of the disadvantages of that Turn 2 Golem was you were telegraphing your training but that early guard is often essential.

Knowledge is advantage. To me it's interesting that we have a mage that has an unknown Trained Element at game start. This is a game about uniqueness, with cards breaking rules. We should rejoice in mechanics that make things different instead of trying to homogenise the game.

By all means argue Wizard needs to be nerfed (I've constantly argued Teleport shouldn't be able to target enemy mages as this shortcuts so many better ideas so that Teleport becomes a "spell points tax" in every book). But please don't dress up the reason why Wizards have to declare something not on their card with arguments that just don't hold water (or fire or earth or air).
« Last Edit: December 08, 2013, 06:06:50 PM by DeckBuilder »
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye. And then it's just fun.

HeatStryke

  • Legendary Mage
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
  • Banana Stickers 1
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #34 on: December 08, 2013, 06:14:24 PM »
If training wasn't used as part of deckbuilding I'd be more sympathetic. While to a certain extent you must assume that your opponent's deck is legal, there is a limit. This isn't Magic, the deckbuilding rules are far more flexable and training is an important part of that.

Beyond that, fairness is a valid argument. Every other mage has their training as a known quality. Having the Wizard not announce their training is a notable advantage. Honestly as any pre-match procedure both Mages should announce class and training.

DeckBuilder

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 666
  • Banana Stickers 3
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #35 on: December 08, 2013, 07:23:14 PM »
If training wasn't used as part of deckbuilding I'd be more sympathetic. While to a certain extent you must assume that your opponent's deck is legal, there is a limit. This isn't Magic, the deckbuilding rules are far more flexable and training is an important part of that.

Beyond that, fairness is a valid argument. Every other mage has their training as a known quality. Having the Wizard not announce their training is a notable advantage. Honestly as any pre-match procedure both Mages should announce class and training.

How does knowing my Elemental Training at the start of the game tell you that my book is legal? It doesn't help you at all.

Every mage is unique with unique advantages. This is one of the Wizard's advantages.

It is absolutely necessary that your opponent can at least be sure your spellbook is legal. Without the Wizard announcing his training it is impossible to do this.

You are saying that knowing my training is necessary to validate my spellbook's legality. Sure it does, but only when you are checking for its legality, which is at the end of the game.

At game start, look at what it says on the tin. I am trained in an element. You don't get to know which until later because it's not on the tin.
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye. And then it's just fun.

Zuberi

  • Rules Guru
  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2496
  • Banana Stickers 57
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #36 on: December 08, 2013, 08:08:21 PM »
Quote from: DeckBuilder
(1) Nobody else has this ability. Well, nobody else currently has training in Arcane, a Voltaric shield or an in-built ranged attack either!

It's not simply a matter of no other mage having the ability. It's a matter of the mechanic does not exist anyplace else in the game at all. Nowhere are you allowed to deny your opponent the information he needs to determine if you're making legal plays. Enchantments are the only thing that comes close, but they simply delay the information until revealed, they don't deny the information all together.

Quote from: DeckBuilder
(2) This will invalidate future Element X Mage Only spells. Firstly none exist and may never exist in "minor schools" so this is hypothetical and secondly no, you simply play it and thereby indirectly declare you are trained in that element, else you are playing an illegal spell. As for the desperate "what if I want to target you with my Fire Mage Only equipment?", why would you ever give an opponent this hypothetical beneficial item? Even if you want to and I am forced to reveal I am not one, oh dear, I am an illegal target, you must target yourself instead. Basing an argument on equipment that does not exist and there is no reason to ever cast on an opponent to his benefit is embarrassing.

There are cards that allow one to steal equipment which may be training restricted. Or to steal a wand with a training restricted spell bound to it. Or to steal a training restricted enchantment. Both casting illegal spells and gaining control of illegal spells could occur during a game and your opponent needs to have a way to tell if such has occurred. Sure, if you take control of my Fire Only equipment I can assume you are a Fire Wizard, but I have no way to be sure.



Any choice you make that affects game play has to be declared. Anything that affects legal game play is public information. If there is no way for you to tell if someone is breaking the rules, then there is no reason to have those rules. If someone can point out an issue besides the Wizards training where a person could permanently deny their opponent from ever knowing if they were cheating or not, then you might have a case. Honestly, I still would not be convinced and simply argue that it was something else that needed fixed, but at least you would have a precedent to support your claim.

Hedge

  • Full Mage
  • ***
  • Posts: 174
  • Banana Stickers 1
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #37 on: December 08, 2013, 09:51:14 PM »
If a choice in Mage Wars is not visually apparent through the resolution of said choice. The Choice must be verbally announced.

Zuberi, Kharhaz does this adequately represent your current stance?

I also agree with said stance.



Hedge

Kharhaz

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2108
  • Banana Stickers 7
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #38 on: December 08, 2013, 11:59:34 PM »
ehhh I could go either way on this one.

Most choices in the game are obvious and go hand in hand with the spells effect.

I cast a dissolve targeting the mage, it resolves, and I choose an equipment to destroy.


You get into some gray areas like the unstable zombie. When it activates I make a choice. Do I have to tell you that choice? I am not sure and could easily see Bryan ruling that you do not have to reveal choices you make.

If that is the case then the wizard does not have to reveal his choice at the beginning of the game.

As I pointed out earlier the game mechanic rule has little to do with the wizard and the trivial choice of his minor school. When I use Tataree's ability do I have to tell you what I am doing, or is the act of removing the damage / adding mana enough of an acknowledgement that I do not have to tell you if you were not paying attention?

Aylin

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 494
  • Banana Stickers 4
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #39 on: December 09, 2013, 12:20:06 AM »
ehhh I could go either way on this one.

Most choices in the game are obvious and go hand in hand with the spells effect.

I cast a dissolve targeting the mage, it resolves, and I choose an equipment to destroy.


You get into some gray areas like the unstable zombie. When it activates I make a choice. Do I have to tell you that choice? I am not sure and could easily see Bryan ruling that you do not have to reveal choices you make.

If that is the case then the wizard does not have to reveal his choice at the beginning of the game.

As I pointed out earlier the game mechanic rule has little to do with the wizard and the trivial choice of his minor school. When I use Tataree's ability do I have to tell you what I am doing, or is the act of removing the damage / adding mana enough of an acknowledgement that I do not have to tell you if you were not paying attention?

Normally I state the action I take as I do it.
"I activate Tataree and have it heal my Kralathor for 1 damage"
"I activate my Unstable Zombie, having it heal 2 damage as it does, then have it attack your Warlock"
"I activate my Priest and make a melee attack against your Wizard using my Staff of Asyra"

With kids, pets, other people around, etc. (basically any non-tournament setting) it is unreasonable to expect my opponent to be able to constantly pay attention to a board game. If asked what was my last action, I have no problem telling my opponent what it was. In return I get the same courtesy if I missed something. Just because the game is about defeating your opponent doesn't mean the players can't be courteous to each other.

Hedge

  • Full Mage
  • ***
  • Posts: 174
  • Banana Stickers 1
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #40 on: December 09, 2013, 01:34:29 AM »
ehhh I could go either way on this one.

Most choices in the game are obvious and go hand in hand with the spells effect.

I cast a dissolve targeting the mage, it resolves, and I choose an equipment to destroy.


You get into some gray areas like the unstable zombie. When it activates I make a choice. Do I have to tell you that choice? I am not sure and could easily see Bryan ruling that you do not have to reveal choices you make.

If that is the case then the wizard does not have to reveal his choice at the beginning of the game.



I believe that you should annouce which you do for the zombie, because it is information that I should know what choice you made so I can react properly. IE  reveal an agony if you chose to lose the lumbering trait.

Quote
As I pointed out earlier the game mechanic rule has little to do with the wizard and the trivial choice of his minor school. When I use Tataree's ability do I have to tell you what I am doing, or is the act of removing the damage / adding mana enough of an acknowledgement that I do not have to tell you if you were not paying attention?


Which is clearly dictated in the stance above. However, from the Rules on Pg 13.

Some spells require you to make additional choices. Your
spell may have a variable casting cost (indicated by an X
in the mana cost), or it may have multiple effects for you
to choose from. You must announce which choices you are
making when you cast the spell.



Granted this is only when casting spells, but could easily be extended to anytime a choice has to be made.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2013, 01:55:41 AM by Hedge »

Mrmt

  • Jr. Mage
  • **
  • Posts: 83
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #41 on: December 09, 2013, 01:57:27 AM »
Oh my goodness. What an incredibly nerdy rules lawyering argument.

Just announce what kind of wizard you are and be done with it.


lettucemode

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
  • Banana Stickers 3
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #42 on: December 09, 2013, 08:06:41 AM »
There are cards that allow one to steal equipment which may be training restricted. Or to steal a wand with a training restricted spell bound to it. Or to steal a training restricted enchantment. Both casting illegal spells and gaining control of illegal spells could occur during a game and your opponent needs to have a way to tell if such has occurred. Sure, if you take control of my Fire Only equipment I can assume you are a Fire Wizard, but I have no way to be sure.

Strongly agree.

Shad0w

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2934
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #43 on: December 09, 2013, 09:05:50 AM »
The rules team is currently in talks about this once we have made the final choice we let you know. I would want to see each sides reason for or against this.
"Darth come prove to meet you are worthy of the fighting for your school in the arena and not just another scholar to be discarded like an worn out rag doll"


Quote: Shad0w the Arcmage

DeckBuilder

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 666
  • Banana Stickers 3
    • View Profile
Re: Does the wizard have to reveal elemental training.
« Reply #44 on: December 09, 2013, 09:10:35 AM »
Fair point, Zuberi (as always). Except no such object exists. And may never exist as Elemental schools are minor.
If I steal that hypothetical Fire Mage Only object, at game end, I have to prove I've built legally (and in-line with my book list in a tourney).
If I am not a Fire Mage, I forfeit the game. Simple as it is blatant cheating by me.
There are many such hypothetical holes in the rules - if such a card ever exists.
I appreciate Future Proofing but "what if" is a shaky argument. If wishes were fishes, we'd all cast nets.

A Playtester who I respect immensely PM'd me and berated me for taking this ridiculous stance.
I assured him that I am not trolling (I confess to a few mischievous provocative comments in the past...).
Maybe I just have a different midset because to me, this knowledge denial seemed like a Wizard advantage.
I actually thought it was clever design by AW (like some of ACG's excellent ground-breaking Custom Card ideas).
To not leverage information as a resource would sadly reduce the dimensions hence depth of the game to me.

I think it's a shame as many assymetric games use information (or denying opponents information) as an ability.
Prophetess (Talisman), Oracle (Cosmic Encounter), Illusionist (Magic Realm), Atriedes (Dune), Runewitch (Rune Wars) etc
Netrunner is based on the value of information (in HQ, R&D, Archives) - and the deterence of not knowing (ICE).
Magic values looking at opponent's hand or library as a benefit, as well as morph creatures and Illusionary Mask.
I think it a shame if Mage Wars refused to acknowledge this mechanic and stayed Total Knowledge like Chess.

The total lack of Blue AW Posts on this subject seems to suggest that AW are undecided and canvassing views.
It would be nice if a ruling was made.

Edit as Ninja'd:
The rules team is currently in talks about this once we have made the final choice we let you know. I would want to see each sides reason for or against this.
Thanks, Shadow!

Meantime, I will try to convince my local meta of uber-competitors that we are wrong to read it as per spell card.
I seem to have zero allies here - et tu, Fence Hopper? :)
So just like when I first brought up Flying vs. Guarded Conjurations, I will fold to peer pressure like a wuss.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2013, 09:46:47 AM by DeckBuilder »
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye. And then it's just fun.