Jump to content
Marioosh

Will lowering power of creature to 0 kill this creature?

Recommended Posts

I have one question:
1. Will reducing power of a creature to 0 kill the creature?

The questions has raised when my opponent had "King of the Crag" card played, (Brobnar: "Each enemy Brobnar creature get -2 power"). In my deck also was Brobnar and I had "Looter Goblin" card on table.

My questions are:
- Will Looter will be killed?
- Can I play other Brobnar characters with power 1 or 2? What if they have "Play" abilities?

In the rulebook is nothing about Power, especially where is no such case explained. I found only in damage section that creature is killed when total damage is equal or greater than Power. But does it mean that it has at least one damage token on creature to kill it?

 

Edited by Marioosh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a creature is reduced to 0 power it dies. Direct rules quote is under Damage, page 9

”Damage a creature has take is tracked by damage tokens on the creature. If a creature has an amount of damage on it equal to or greater than its power the creature is destroyed”

Since the creature has 0 power it always has damage on it equal to or greater than its power even when it has none.

As for play abilities those would still go off because the card was still played. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say it is not destroyed as 0 means nothing is present, if the rules state that the amount of damage on it is equal to or greater than its power, it must by definition have some damage, 0 is an absence of damage, so it dies as soon as it receives any damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is more of a language issue that it is a rules issue

One could say

"There is 0 damage on this card, 0 is equal to its power of 0, thus the creature is destroyed"

One could also say

"Damage on this card is false, card requires damage to be destroyed, thus the creature is not destroyed"

Now personally, I think it would be destroyed, but additional clarification would be nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically it is not destroyed, there is no rule as far as I'm aware the prevents a power 0 creature from existing, provided it has no damage tokens on it.

I can imagine the intent is for it to be destroyed like in most other games, but that is not in the rules so far, I think, and would need to be added if that is the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Palpster said:

Debatable, since it has no damage on it, but I do see your point.

Nothing in the rules says it needs to have damage on it to be destroyed by damage.  It states damage is tracked by tokens and that "If a creature has an amount of damage on it equal to or greater than its power the creature is destroyed". 0 is indeed >= 0 in modern math.  The philosophical mean of 0 does not apply here :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, CSteele said:

Nothing in the rules says it needs to have damage on it to be destroyed by damage.  It states damage is tracked by tokens and that "If a creature has an amount of damage on it equal to or greater than its power the creature is destroyed". 0 is indeed >= 0 in modern math.  The philosophical mean of 0 does not apply here :)

Does that help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/24/2018 at 2:36 PM, player3691565 said:

I would say it is not destroyed as 0 means nothing is present, if the rules state that the amount of damage on it is equal to or greater than its power, it must by definition have some damage, 0 is an absence of damage, so it dies as soon as it receives any damage.

It’s needs damage equal to or greater than 0. If a creature has zero power and hasn’t been damaged then it has 0 damage on it which is equal to its power. This is not even a language issue it’s basic grade school math.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Palpster said:

Technically it is not destroyed, there is no rule as far as I'm aware the prevents a power 0 creature from existing, provided it has no damage tokens on it.

I can imagine the intent is for it to be destroyed like in most other games, but that is not in the rules so far, I think, and would need to be added if that is the case.

It is in the rules though, I quoted them. If a creature has 0 power and hasn’t been damaged it has damage on it equal to its power. No damage is 0 damage, this fits the requirements for destruction.

If I ask you how much damage has been done to a creature with 0 damage then you would say 0. That’s equal to its power, I don’t get where the confusion is here no damage on it is equivalent to saying it has 0 damage on it.

Edited by TwitchyBait

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TwitchyBait said:

It’s needs damage equal to or greater than 0. If a creature has zero power and hasn’t been damaged then it has 0 damage on it which is equal to its power. This is not even a language issue it’s basic grade school math.

I'm on the side that says its Destroyed while able to recognize that it's a language issue, it has no damage on it, thus cannot be destroyed 

or

Creatures are destroyed when they have damage on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Talamare said:

I'm on the side that says its Destroyed while able to recognize that it's a language issue, it has no damage on it, thus cannot be destroyed 

or

Creatures are destroyed when they have damage on them.

Yes, but no damage is exactly the amount needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Talamare said:

I'm on the side that says its Destroyed while able to recognize that it's a language issue, it has no damage on it, thus cannot be destroyed 

or

Creatures are destroyed when they have damage on them.

How is no damage different than 0 damage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Talamare said:

Boolean - Does monster have damage = Yes or No

Yes - Destroy it

No - Do not Destroy it

So a creature with 0 power has no power and thus dies because the damage is also none and thus equal to or greater than its power. You can’t really have it both ways where 0 is nothing for damage but something for power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TwitchyBait said:

So a creature with 0 power has no power and thus dies because the damage is also none and thus equal to or greater than its power. You can’t really have it both ways where 0 is nothing for damage but something for power.

Now you're just being intentional misleading. I've already told you I'm on the side that the creature is destroyed so there is no need for underhanded tactics to win an argument.

You're working with values for Power

2 - 2 = 0, you're always using values

With damage it's different because while a creature has no damage he has no damage on him. Values hasn't started yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Talamare said:

Now you're just being intentional misleading. I've already told you I'm on the side that the creature is destroyed so there is no need for underhanded tactics to win an argument.

You're working with values for Power

2 - 2 = 0, you're always using values

With damage it's different because while a creature has no damage he has no damage on him. Values hasn't started yet.

A lack of damage is still equivalent to 0 damage. This feels like the most extreme version of twisting words to manipulate the game. 

So I must respectfully disagree this is anything other than people trying to split hairs to over complicate a very obvious answer. I’m not trying to be underhanded just trying to demonstrate a lack of power is represented as a 0 just like a lack of damage is 0. Out of all the questions we can get answered by the Devs this feels like such a massive waste of their time.

Edited by TwitchyBait

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I wish?  I wish these were the only types of rules questions that existed for this game.  Imagine a world where FFG actually included a thorough, well written, comprehensive rulebook because after two years of meticulous and scrutinized play testing they had actually worked out a way to present the game in a clear and concise manner.  That's the world I want to live in...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dperello said:

You know what I wish?  I wish these were the only types of rules questions that existed for this game.  Imagine a world where FFG actually included a thorough, well written, comprehensive rulebook because after two years of meticulous and scrutinized play testing they had actually worked out a way to present the game in a clear and concise manner.  That's the world I want to live in...

If I could only give this more likes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, dperello said:

You know what I wish?  I wish these were the only types of rules questions that existed for this game.  Imagine a world where FFG actually included a thorough, well written, comprehensive rulebook because after two years of meticulous and scrutinized play testing they had actually worked out a way to present the game in a clear and concise manner.  That's the world I want to live in...

John Lennon needs to add that line to Imagine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damage a creature has taken is tracked by placing damage tokens on the creature. If a creature has an amount of damage on it equal to or greater than its power, the creature is destroyed. Damage on a creature does not reduce its power

I get that if a creature power is 0, then none damage is actually needed because it is already equal. No damage is 0 and 0 is the amount required for it to die. This is probably the right rule.

At the same time the rulebook says "damage ON IT"

It's confusing because they made the number os power being the same as the creature "damage" and "health". Since it's Garfield you could imagine a 2 power creature receiving -2 will be alive but won't deal any damage on fights, just like a 0/2 creature in MTG.

A simple note on the rulebook like "a creature dies if it power is reduced to 0 or negative" should remove any questions.

 

I remember reading articles from MTG website telling how hard it is to come with very clear wording, because a lot of people will understand something a little bit different. And you aim to make the cards to be understandable in the same way for everyone. What the devs understand can be seen differently by other. For them those power rules are probably so obvious that they missed some people could think differently. Happens in a lot of aspects in life, when we know something and we expect people to have the same knowledge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...