Jump to content
player3690031

Anger and Stunned Creatures - Brad Clarifications

Recommended Posts

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.

Edited by saluk64007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tinathir said:

That's what the rules say.

Kind of. That’s what the rules for “fight” say. However if we pop on over to the rules for stun they say:

“The next time a 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 fight or reap...”

And then a second part of the use rules say:

”If a card causes a creature to be used while it is stunned” (anger does) “the creature is exhausted and the stun card removed”

So the rules actually do cover the video interpretation in that we:

1. Have a stunned creature

2. Play a card that causes the creature to be used (fight)

3. And then the stun rules say when the creature is used the creature exhausts, removes stun, and doesn’t fight. Since it doesn’t fight it doesn’t need to meet the requirements for fighting (ie a target).

Granted it’s a little complicated and if you only examine the fight rules and don’t examine the stun rules then it doesn’t make sense. But the stun rules actually do cover this which I never would have known if not for this thread/video.

Edited by TwitchyBait

Share this post


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

Kind of. That’s what the rules for “fight” say. However if we pop on over to the rules for stun they say:

“The next time a 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 fight or reap...”

And then a second part of the use rules say:

”If a card causes a creature to be used while it is stunned” (anger does) “the creature is exhausted and the stun card removed”

So the rules actually do cover the video interpretation in that we:

1. Have a stunned creature

2. Play a card that causes the creature to be used (fight)

3. And then the stun rules say when the creature is used the creature is exhausts, removes stun, and doesn’t fight.

Granted it’s a little complicated and if you only examine the fight rules and don’t examine the stun rules then it doesn’t make sense. But the stun rules actually do cover this which I never would have known if not for this thread/video.

No, but you've correctly spotted where the issue is.

”If a card causes a creature to be used while it is stunned” (anger does) “the creature is exhausted and the stun card removed”

For that to work, fight would have to cause use, even when the instruction to fight is "ignored".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Tinathir said:

No, but you've correctly spotted where the issue is.

”If a card causes a creature to be used while it is stunned” (anger does) “the creature is exhausted and the stun card removed”

For that to work, fight would have to cause use, even when the instruction to fight is "ignored".

Nope. You’re assuming the order is fight, then use. Not so.

page 7, using creatures:

“When using a creature that player must exhaust the creature” (this is where stun is removed and you don’t follow the rest of the use rules which continue as:

”...and the player has the option to reap, fight, trigger the creatures action ability or trigger the creatures Omni ability.”

 

Thus anger is effectively saying you ready and use a creature but limits the use choices to just fight. Stunned creatures skip that choice and simply remove stun. The only way it would not allow for stun to remove is if you choose fight and the used, but as pointed out in the use rules you use then must make a choice unless it’s stunned (as per the stun rules which interrupt this choice segment.)

 

TLDR version: Fight is a subset option of use. You first choose to use a creature and then must make a valid choice. Anger only allows the fight choice but stun resolves first as per the stun rules and overides any choice when used.

Edited: Spelling

Edited by TwitchyBait

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TwitchyBait said:

Nope. You’re assuming the order is fight, then use. Not so.

page 7, using creatures:

“When using a creature that player must exhaust the creature” (this is where stun is removed and you don’t follow the rest of the use rules which continue as:

”...and the player has the option to reap, fight, trigger the creatures action ability or trigger the creatures Omni ability.”

Thus anger is effectively saying you ready and use a creature but limits the use choices to just fight. Stunned creatures skip that choice and simply remove stun.

TLDR version: Fight is a subset option of use. You first choose to use a creature and then must make a valid choice. Anger only allows the fight choice but stun resolves first as per the stun rules and overides any choice when used.

I was also hoping I could make the rules agree with that interpretation: it's clearly — given the rational of the ruling — the close to the intent. But it's not present in the rules. The core problem with the rules as written remains: Anger says "fight with" (which expands to "permission use to fight with") but since you can't fight, the "fight with" part of the instruction is ignored, so you can't use, and never get to "when using". I'm not saying your logic is wrong (I expect it will be confirmed), I'm just saying that the rules as written don't get you to the justification provided in the ruling. (Also note that "fight is a subset of use" (from the video) is part of what gets in the way of using the rules to justify the ruling, since, if that's true, ignoring fight means you don't use.)

A better stab at making the rules work to explain the ruling is the interpret "use to fight" to mean (as you suggest) "use, with your options restricted to fight" which lets you use, ignoring fight (but that's not the justification given in the video).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Tinathir said:

I was also hoping I could make the rules agree with that interpretation: it's clearly — given the rational of the ruling — the close to the intent. But it's not present in the rules. The core problem with the rules as written remains: Anger says "fight with" (which expands to "permission use to fight with") but since you can't fight, the "fight with" part of the instruction is ignored, so you can't use, and never get to "when using". I'm not saying your logic is wrong (I expect it will be confirmed), I'm just saying that the rules as written don't get you to the justification provided in the ruling. (Also note that "fight is a subset of use" (from the video) is part of what gets in the way of using the rules to justify the ruling, since, if that's true, ignoring fight means you don't use.)

A better stab at making the rules work to explain the ruling is the interpret "use to fight" to mean (as you suggest) "use, with your options restricted to fight" which lets you use, ignoring fight (but that's not the justification given in the video).

I think this is a case of “do as much as you can”

can the creature be used? Yes, can it fight? No. Use the creature, the unstun as a result of stun rules then ignore fight including any qualifications of fight as a result.

The only thing with RAW that makes this work is that 

1. Use is explicitly stated to be a choice before you choose “how” you’re using it. Anger merely forces that choice and stun stops that choice before it occurs.

Thus the order is use, unstun, ignore fight.

Without stun there is nothing stopping the forced choice and thus you’d get the instance of use, fight, can’t complete. The fact that stun however explicitly states the creature ignores any of the following choices and just unstuns it instead means it checks out as RAW. 

We may have to simply agree to disagree as I can see how the rules do cover this if not in a complicated not to obvious at first glance way.

Edited by TwitchyBait

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TwitchyBait said:

I think this is a case of “do as much as you can”

can the creature be used? Yes, can it fight? No. Use the creature, the unstun as a result of stun rules then ignore fight including any qualifications of fight as a result.

The only thing with RAW that makes this work is that 

1. Use is explicitly stated to be a choice before you choose “how” you’re using it. Anger merely forces that choice and stun stops that choice before it occurs.

Thus the order is use, unstun, ignore fight.

Without stun there is nothing stopping the forced choice and thus you’d get the instance of use, fight, can’t complete. The fact that stun however explicitly states the creature ignores any of the following choices and just unstuns it instead means it checks out as RAW. 

We may have to simply agree to disagree as I can see how the rules do cover this if not in a complicated not to obvious at first glance way.

That's pretty much exactly the reasoning I used when I first heard the ruling, and it's exactly what I meant above by interpreting "use to fight" to mean "use, with your options restricted to fight". It's the justification of the ruling that doesn't match. (Also, this interpretation does open up a bit of a problem: if the creature isn't stunned, then this reasoning means you must still use it: do as much as you can, but to no effect other than to exhaust it.)

There's no question the rules, in light of this ruling, need some reworking and clarification, and the concept of use as something that can happen distant from any of the options of which it is a "superset" is new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Tinathir said:

That's pretty much exactly the reasoning I used when I first heard the ruling, and it's exactly what I meant above by interpreting "use to fight" to mean "use, with your options restricted to fight". It's the justification of the ruling that doesn't match. (Also, this interpretation does open up a bit of a problem: if the creature isn't stunned, then this reasoning means you must still use it: do as much as you can, but to no effect other than to exhaust it.)

There's no question the rules, in light of this ruling, need some reworking and clarification, and the concept of use as something that can happen distant from any of the options of which it is a "superset" is new.

In the situation of the creature not being stunned and there being no fight target there is no valid use and thus it wouldn’t exhaust. With stun your valid use changes from fight to unstun, so a bit different. In other words you always must choose a “use” according to the use rules but when a creature is stunned that choice is forced to unstun and supersceeds all other choices as per the stun rules.

Edited by TwitchyBait

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your patience in bearing with me. I think I am finally getting what you are saying. I still think the rules as written do cover this topic adequately, but if you want to say they could clean it up a bit I can support that. As of right now you read the rules for use earlier in the rulebook, then don't read about stuns until the glossary, then in the case of anger don't find out you can play it if your opponent has no creatures in play (on stunned or unstunned creatures) until you get to the FAQ. In all fairness that's pretty fragmented.

I haven't put a lot of thought into how I would do it better but I think this is a good "halfway spot" for us to meet. That counts for something, right? :)

Edited by TheSpitfired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mentioned on BGG but I'll repeat it here.  There is a thematic and cognitive disconnect for me with the current ruling because it makes it easier to use a stunned creature than an unstunned creature.  Why would a creature in a stunned state be usable in a wider range of situations than an unstunned one?

Not only does the ruling create a special case that is counterintuitive, it damages the narrative the gameplay is attempting to create, at least for me, and everyone I've had to explain this edge case to, which so far has been everyone who has had questions about how Anger works...

Edited by dperello

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×