Jump to content

saluk64007

Members
  • Content Count

    134
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About saluk64007

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. While you can work out simultaneous timings for some simultaneous effects, the game wasn't built with simultaneous effects in mind. Having the active player order effects that occur at the same time is much simpler. If there were simultaneous effects, you would not need the rulebook to mention that the active player resolves timing conflicts, as there wouldn't be any. The difference between the passive ability and "destroyed:" abilities is that they DON'T happen at the same time. "Destroyed:" abilities happen BEFORE a card is destroyed. Passive abilities that resolve "when a creature is destroyed" or "each time a creature is destroyed" happen DURING the destruction. There is no conflict between the rulings. All of the destroyed: abilities will trigger first - during which there may be a window for something like archimedes to grant extra abilities. And then tolas and all of the remaining cards that were targeted for destruction are discarded simultaneously, which DOESN'T give tolas a window in which he is in play to see those cards be destroyed. There are three timing windows: before, during, and after. The active player orders effects that resolve during the same timing window. This is supported by all rulings and the rulebook to this point. FFG just needs to actually include this information into a timing chart so it is clear to everyone.
  2. Hmm, interesting. I think I may have read the rules wrong. Under damage on page 10: "If multiple creatures are damaged by a single effect, that damage is dealt simultaneously." I had previously understood the above as "all damage done by an effect is simultaneous". This text was clearly changed due to questions about positron bolt. But in this situation the specific wording comes into play, that it's talking about damage applying to multiple creatures and not multiple parts of damage. That 1 damage definitely hits all creatures simultaneously. But the additional 3 may be dealt (simultaneously) afterward.
  3. It doesn't hurt to report these kind of issues, even if there is little now that FFG can do about it. I definitely remember how muted excitement was in general for the game before it came out though. It had its fans, mostly from within the existing lcg or destiny sets of players, but there was a pretty prevaling thought that it was a dumb gimmick that was going to just fall completely flat. A lot of stores just didn't buy it at all, and then when they heard it it was doing so well, tried to get product allocated, and then complained about not getting enough supplies to run sealed events. There were also legitimate supply or distribution issues in other places. Hopefully things smooth out with AoA.
  4. I kind of agree with this. I do think this would be a good inclusion into the rules: "whenever a card has permission to be used for an action, it has permission to be used even if the card cannot take that action". Maybe even just "if a card has permission to be used for an action, it is automatically granted permission to be used to unstun, even if it cannot perform the specified action." I find that some of the rules seem to imply as such (the plethora of places that reference "use to fight" rather than just fight), but it's not spelled out. I also think you've pointed out areas in the rules that seem to imply otherwise.
  5. There is no such thing as a card letting you fight, without also letting you use the card, and using takes precedence over fighting because it's the more general action. It is not consistent, but several times in the rulebook and on some cards, they use the term "use to fight". Normally, "fight" and "use to fight" are synonymous, because use on it's own does not do anything. A card is used to fight, which means it will fight, which then let's it exhaust and carry out the fight instructions. Ready and fight in the glossary does use this term: "If an ability instructs a player to “fight with” or “ready and fight with” a creature, the ability is granting the player permission to use the designated creature to fight." Cards or situations that restrict fighting don't restrict using. They are restricting the more specific case of the use. Foggify for example says that "Your opponent cannot use creatures to fight on their next turn." This does not mean that your creatures cannot be used to do something else. There are no effects in the game that trigger on the base use of a creature that I know of, except for stun, which says "The next time that creature is used, the only effect of it being used is the creature exhausts and the stun status card is removed instead of anything else happening." So it intercedes after a use, but before the type of use has been resolved. Theoretically new cards could introduce things that also trigger on a card use in this same way. These would have to happen even if a specific type of use is specified under this interpretation of the rules. Which, yes, is weird. Skippy Timehog notably prevents cards from being used, which is a more general condition that prevents removing stuns under all current conditions.
  6. It's not as bad as it sounds. If you have 4 mars creatures on the board, key abduction pulls them into your hand first. If you reap with those creatures, that's 4 aember. +4 aember and being able to forge for the normal 6 out of turn. Yeah 4 living mars creatures is not common But even base cost key abduction (no mars creatures, 5 cards in hand after playing key abduction) lets you forge for 10. That's slightly better than key of darkness in it's worst case.
  7. Relevant rules (that were quoted above): A. "If a card effect causes a creature to be used while it is stunned, the creature is exhausted and the stun status card is removed, just as if the creature had been used normally." B. "The next time that creature is used, the only effect of it being used is the creature exhausts and the stun status card is removed instead of anything else happening. The creature does not reap or fight" C. "While resolving a card ability, resolve as much of the ability as can be resolved, and ignore any parts of the ability that cannot be resolved." D. "When a creature is used to fight, the creature exhausts and its controller chooses one eligible creature controlled by the opponent as the target of the attack" 1. Card effect causes a creature to be used to fight, through the text "Ready and fight with a neigboring creature." 2. That creature is stunned, the opponents board is empty. 3. According to rule A - The creature is exhausted and the stun status card is removed, just as if the creature had been used normally. 4. According to rule B - The next time the creature is used, it does not actually fight 5. According to rule C - Resolve as much of the ability as we can. It cannot fight for many reasons - namely it was stunned, secondarily the opposing board has no targets, thirdly, it is already exhasted due to rule B. 6. Rule D doesn't come into play because the creature did not fight. 7. Other cards that may trigger based on things fighting don't trigger because of 6. There are different ways to interpret the rules as written. Various rulings guide you how it is meant to be interpreted. Hopefully future rule updates spell this out more clearly, especially with regards to the priority between different sometimes interacting processes.
  8. What copying a card means is not defined in the rules - all we have to go on is how the card mimicry is worded. So it's a philosophical discussion at this point. We just learned today that mimicry doesn't count for rule of six (the card you copied counts but you can play mimicry 7 times if you are copying different cards). I'll wait for a ruling on this one. Unlike some other set 2 questions that might only come up if certain cards return, you can play a mimicry deck against a set 2 deck, so we'll need a solid answer.
  9. I can see this version as well. It seems though that "treat it as a copy" would inherit the restrictions, just as it inherits the bonus aember and the effect. Wild wormhole can't play a kelifi dragon if you don't have enough aember (kelifi returns to the deck), this feels like the same sort of grey area to me. Resolve as much as you can of mimicry - you try to copy the alpha card, but the card can't be played, so no effect happens. You can still play it, it just cant copy the alpha card. I could see it going the other way, but feels against the intent of alpha.
  10. If you have an insp in discard, you can call sanctum, play an insp to ready and use the witch, grabbing the other insp. Then do that again 5 more times. (I think the OP had initially assumed you could pull the inspiration you played to ready the witch, but it can be done if you have multiples).
  11. I'm assuming they have it under both sets, as a confirmed card coming back, although since its the only one it might have been a mistake. Going to be confusing with some cards coming back and others not moving to AoA.
  12. Twitter ruling says this: "Gabos' ability is just dealing the elusive creature damage, while it fights someone else." The creature gabos is fighting is not important to this ruling, elusive or not. The creature gabos is fighting, if it has elusive, will deal no damage, and is still considered to be attacked "the first time". Choosing the same creature to target with the before fight, "rather than", seems legal to me, but is the part of this that is not clearly answered for me in that ruling. I don't think it falls into do as much as you can. Maybe as much as you can is nothing, because there is no other creature to target with the before fight. But considering the before fight says "choose a creature" rather than, say, "choose a creature gabos is not fighting", I think it's an uphill argument to say you can't.
  13. My theories: 1. An alpha card has to be the first card you play. Cards are played one by one, not simultaneously. Once an alpha card is played, the next card you play is the second card you play not the first. The card you play after an alpha card can not be alpha. 2. An alpha card must be the first card you play. If wild wormhole is the first card you play, and it tries to play an alpha card, it can't. Wild wormhole can't play kelifi if you don't have enough aember either. Can't overrides can on conflicting card abilities. 3. Mimicry is a copy of the card. If mimicry is your first card, it can be an alpha card. If it is your second card it can't. I'd be shocked if the first 2 were ruled differently.
  14. saluk64007

    Drummernaut

    Yeah that's my reading as well. Other than hunting witch or a maverick full moon, he's basically a chain unless you have another giant to play him with.
  15. The folks at the compendium were quick. Full spoilers of 42 cards: https://keyforge-compendium.com/cards?utf8=✓&filterrific[search_title]=&filterrific[search_text]=&filterrific[with_traits]=&filterrific[with_power]=&filterrific[with_armor]=&filterrific[type_like]=&filterrific[house_like]=&filterrific[rarity_like]=&filterrific[with_expansion]=2&filterrific[with_tags]=&filterrific[sorted_by]=number_asc&commit=Filter+Results
×
×
  • Create New...