June 12, 2021, 07:26:09 AM

Author Topic: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker  (Read 234890 times)

Zuberi

  • Rules Guru
  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2504
  • Banana Stickers 57
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #120 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.

bigfatchef

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 603
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #121 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.

exid

  • Legendary Mage
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
  • Banana Stickers 4
  • The longer the better!
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #122 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?...)

sIKE

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 4172
  • Banana Stickers 18
  • Ugh
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #123 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?
  • Favourite Mage: Malakai Priest

Kharhaz

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2109
  • Banana Stickers 7
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #124 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

sIKE

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 4172
  • Banana Stickers 18
  • Ugh
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #125 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....
  • Favourite Mage: Malakai Priest

bigfatchef

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 603
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #126 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.

sIKE

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 4172
  • Banana Stickers 18
  • Ugh
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #127 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?
  • Favourite Mage: Malakai Priest

bigfatchef

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 603
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #128 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.

exid

  • Legendary Mage
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
  • Banana Stickers 4
  • The longer the better!
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #129 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?...

Zuberi

  • Rules Guru
  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2504
  • Banana Stickers 57
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #130 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.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2015, 12:40:34 AM by Zuberi »

exid

  • Legendary Mage
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
  • Banana Stickers 4
  • The longer the better!
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #131 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.

wtcannonjr

  • Ambassador of Wychwood
  • Legendary Mage
  • *****
  • Posts: 812
  • Banana Stickers 3
    • View Profile
    • WBC Mage Wars Tournament
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #132 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.
  • Favourite Mage: Wychwood Druid
"Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced." - James Baldwin

DaveW

  • Legendary Mage
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
  • Banana Stickers 4
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #133 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?
  • Favourite Mage: Asyra Priestess

exid

  • Legendary Mage
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
  • Banana Stickers 4
  • The longer the better!
    • View Profile
Re: Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker
« Reply #134 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.