Jump to content

Shindulus

Members
  • Content Count

    284
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Shindulus

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    , 0, France
  1. I got the answer from Lukas : Thanks for the question. It only refers to Archives (and not the root). The root must be called out specifically and is not normally included when an effect refers to a central server. Hope that helps, Pretty clear
  2. The pretty sure is the same problem I have .
  3. Industrial Genomics Identity: Division • Deck: 45 • Influence: 15 The trash cost of each card is increased by 1 for each facedown card in Archives. I am in trouble to know if in this text "in Archives" refers to the central server Archives (Archives + root) or only the Archives by itself (the place where cards are trashed or discarded and inactive).
  4. They are 3 types of units : - Warlord unit - Token unit - Army unit Each time a card refer to a Unit, without precision, it refers to all types.
  5. So yes you can because nothing in the rules makes Grimgor an illegal target for raise dead although he is already in play. You just can't resolve the effect of raise dead if Grimgor is still in play when resolving.
  6. ppski said: We may assume that those actions met their triggers and are waiting to be activated till current stack resolves. After stack resolved, we want to activate that triggered action (choose target and pay cost ) however to do this we have to have source card in play - Thief is not so actions just vanishes. Is that correct ? Yes, this is the description of triggered action in the FAQ 1.6 p4. I just would not say exactly "Thief is not so actions just vanishes". But something like "thief is not, so you can not actived its action, which trigger has occured during last stack resolution" ppski said: On the other hand, if Thief's actions triggers during stack creation, it would be simply triggered and 'in response' added/activated on current stack and would resolve eventually ? Yes. The simpliest example that come to me is when you have to sacrifice a unit as a cost : - Player A plays a card that requires the sacrifice of a unit as a cost (so a unit leaves play at this moment) - Player B can play in response Thief's action, because the trigger condition of its action occured.
  7. Entropy also says that thief does not "fire", I think that he just makes an amalgam that disapoint you, (and I must say me, when I first read) between trigger condition and the fact that the action is triggered. Quoting Entropy : 1. Yes, you can take the Thief action at the next opportunity. It has already triggered, it is just waiting to be put on the chain. (See B1 of the flowchart: Players take turns putting Triggered Actions that have met their trigger condition since the last Action Window on a chain...) That Triggered Action is already "floating" out there, even though the unit is dead. You can choose to put it on the chain at the first opportunity, or you can pass on it and its gone. [...] 1c. The Thief doesn't trigger when he (or his friends who die simultaneously) leaves play. This is for the same reason that Dwarf Ranger doesn't trigger on himself leaving, or his buddies leaving during a Troll Vomit. About your other questions : That makes sense, however whose ruling is this? No offence, just want to know whether it is yours/others suspicion/assumption or ruling from game's creators. I think that we agree that is "all about" the golden rule, this not normal for a unit / support card to trigger their action as they are no more in play. Using golden rule must be the consequence of an explicit card text. In others cases you must follow the rules. So "when this unit leaves play" would trigger when card is out of play or in with no distinction, however "when other or one/more units leave" then it can only be triggered when card stays in play and cannot be triggered by itself ? Yes, cf. my first answer. PS : I have replaced "when this unit" by "when this unit leaves play"
  8. Teokrata said: THX for answers! Could You explain in more words difference between triggered action of Glorious Preceptor and Thief of Essence? Glorious Preceptor - Action: When this unit enters or leaves play, draw a card. Thief of Essence - Action: When one or more units leaves play, draw a card. You can also take account in your exemple of Blue Horrors, Corsairs of Ghrond, Crypt Ghouls, Doombull, Sigmar's Blessed, Spirit Host, Ungor Raiders, Vanguard of Woe, Walking Sacrifice, Zhufbar Engineers. Cards that are able to trigger in a non normal way as they trigger when they are no more in play. The "when this unit leaves play" explicitly specify that this unit is able to trigger his action in a "non normal way", as it trigger when it is no more in play." "When one or more units leaves play,...." does not, implicitly, mean "When one or more units, including this one, leaves play..." In "other wordds", the card check if cards have leaved play but is not able to check if it has leaved play itself, as it is not explicitly written. @ ppski : The answer of your question is in FAQ 1.6 p.4 : Triggered Actions (formerly Response Actions) (v1.4) Triggered Actions are a subset of Actions that contain a trigger condition. Each Triggered Action can be triggered once per copy of the Triggered Action and only once per trigger condition. If this trigger condition is met during the resolution of other effects (or outside of an Action Window) then the Triggered Action must be played during the first available opportunity once an Action Window opens, or it cannot be played at all. The trigger condition is met during the first action window and you play your triggered Action during the next one, which is according to Jaszczurr's answer. In your example the trigger condition is met (but it does not trigger the action itself); during the next window you can use actions with this trigger (and more generaly with any trigger that has occured during this action window), but you can't use your thief action as it is no more in play. To use Entropy's words, only "trigger condition are floating" and they are only floating until the end of the next action window. @HappyDD : Don't give up man .
  9. I use this thread to ask for a question. Just a little doubt on Volkmar, you can put a unit on the bottom of a deck in 2 cases. As there is no punctuation, it's hard to know if the from play is also effective when a unit enter it's owner discard pile or not So my question is : Should the first volkmar condition should be read as : When a unit enter it's owner discard pile (no matter from where the unit comes) or When a unit enter it's owner discard pile from play Volkmar : If a unit would enter its owner’s discard pile or return to its owner’s hand from play, you may instead put it on the bottom of its owner’s deck.
  10. I have really many troubles with this rulling too. There is no real definition of destruction in the rules just : Hit Points: The amount of damage a unit can take. If a unit has as many damage tokens as it has hit points, that unit is destroyed and is placed in its owner’s discard pile. We can found for sacrifice : Sacrifice Any time a player is instructed to sacrifice a card, the card is placed in its owner’s discard pile. A sacrifice is absolute, and cannot be cancelled by other effects. In the first case it's obvious that placing the unit into the discard pile is just a consequence of the destruction. (This does not at all define what is a destroyed unit, a unit is destroyed when it has as many damage token as hit point) In the case of the sacrifice it's like Lukas considers that placing the card into the discard pile is a part of what is defining the sacrifice and not just only the consequence of the sacrifice. (but for me a unit is sacrificed when a card effect "tell me" to sacrifice a unit) That really make no sense to me... Even reading en re-reading sacrifice text information... I was really playing like : Cause : Sacrifice / destroyed Consequence : place card into discard pile. That's not because you change the consequence by any way, that you cancel the cause and why I was playing like that : "Last way : my life for the hold is effective and volkmar can trigger his action." Can't talk about that, it makes me sad ....
  11. Last way : my life for the hold is effective and volkmar can trigger his action. The additional cost of my life for the hold has been paid and volkmar can put the sacrified card on the bottom of it's owner deck. Volkmar effect does not cancel nor prevent sacrifice he just "change the state of the card after it has been sacrified". I am not saying that's the correct answer but I think it's another way to answer your question (And I guess that's the good way)
  12. Quite sure that this card is commonly played as if it is written this unit. But have to agree that the wording leads to some ambiguities (and make my answer not so consistant)
  13. Units () Bule, Lord of Pus x 3 => out Screamers of Tzeentch x3 => out Support () Effulgent Boils x3 => out Disc of Tzeentch x3 => out Tactics () Seductive Delusion x3 Seduced by Darkness x3 At least Sorcerer of tzeench in Some more low cost (3 or less) unit in, like savage forsaken, moulder elite... Think about plague bomb if it's good in your "meta" game or not. Think about call the breyhard (cause you have now less high cost unit and more low cost unit) and call the breyhard has a good synergy with blood summoning. And sometime able to get some "infamous" combo as Khorvak coming in BZ (or not), getting enought unit to blood summon your shaggoth and attack with "crazy" amount of power.
  14. Yes sorry, and they are applied when they are assigned.
  15. Dark Bunny Lord said: 1. What is "combat damage"? There is no combat phase merely a battlefield phase so is combat all damage dealt during this phase or is it all damage dealt by creatures power when attacking and defending (and/or other abilities like counterstrike and savage)? To keep your words : "It is all damage dealt by creatures power when attacking and defending" (counterstrike / savage are not combat damage). Dark Bunny Lord said: 2. If damage is dealt by, say, a tactic can toughness negate non combat damage? The confusion here is that toughness doesn't say it's an action but it does say it negates damage when it's applied and yet non-combat damage is applied as soon as it's assigned making me wonder if there's any possibility for toughness to butt in at that point and cancel some of it or not. Yes, thougness is a constant effect, it's allways effective (you don't even have the choice to use or not thougness) unless a card tell that damage are uncancelable.
×
×
  • Create New...