|
9 months ago ::
Sep 08, 2012 - 12:01AM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2010
|
I agree a clarification would be nice, but given things usually follow Magic pretty closely in this game, my guess is that the prevention effect creates a shield, so that when the card resolves, it creates an effect that will prevent damage when the source actuall deals it. (In other words, the Riposte prevention resolves at the top of the stack, but doesn't do anything until the bottom.) As you say though, clarification would be nice.
Clarification would also be nice as to what "source" actually means in terms of a damage source. I sort of assume "source" is shorthand for "a thing sitting on the stack" because that interacts with Feint in the way everyone I've played with expects (ie, you tap your dude and can't play a defensive immediate yet because there's nothing to target). It could be the intent is that the source is the creature making the attack, though, in which case it seems like you could respond to Feint with a prevention card and have it work if that creature then attacked you later (presumably in the turn, though that's also not clear if this is how source works).
Basically I can see why no one wanted to write a comprehensive rules for Dungeon Command, but sadly it probably needs it.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 09, 2012 - 11:43PM
#52
|
Date Joined:
Oct 29, 2005
|
If I have to declare a target for the attack when I cast Shadowy Ambush (that is, when the ability goes on the stack), then I would need to name the War Wizard as the intended target. If, after my shift, my opponent decides to interrupt by shifting his War Wizard away, then my attack would fizzle, despite the fact that my Drow is now also adjacent to a Human Ranger I could have attacked instead.
Or; does targetting happen upon the resolution of an attack? In this case, I can shift my Drow up without announcing a target. My opponent would probalby still try to save his wizard from the predictable attack, but at least I'd get to waste a ranger instead.
He absolutely would know the target of the attack and have a pirority stop where he could play an intterupt with that knowledge.
Play Shadowy ambush (declaring your target and taping your creature), putting the attack on the stack then the shift.
Opponent's priority
Resolve the Shift (assuming it's still legal)
Opponent's priority
Resolve the Attack (assuming it's still legal)
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 09, 2012 - 11:51PM
#53
|
Date Joined:
Oct 29, 2005
|
Clarification would also be nice as to what "source" actually means in terms of a damage source. I sort of assume "source" is shorthand for "a thing sitting on the stack" because that interacts with Feint in the way everyone I've played with expects (ie, you tap your dude and can't play a defensive immediate yet because there's nothing to target). It could be the intent is that the source is the creature making the attack, though, in which case it seems like you could respond to Feint with a prevention card and have it work if that creature then attacked you later (presumably in the turn, though that's also not clear if this is how source works).
The judges at the PAX tourament said that a "source" is an action. It was exactly the feint, uncanny dodge, sneak attack senario. They ruled that no he could not name the creature as a source and prevent an undeclared attack. It seemed like it wasn't the first time they had encountered that question.
Also the example on page 9 of the rules (under "THE STACK") says "uncanny dodge goes onto the stack above Killing Strike and resolves first: ... chooses to prevent the damage from Killing Strike." If the intent was creatures are sources I think it would have said Dragon Knight instead.
I expect that in addition to errata the rules will get an updated version sooner or later.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 10, 2012 - 3:19PM
#54
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2010
|
The judges at the PAX tourament said that a "source" is an action. It was exactly the feint, uncanny dodge, sneak attack senario. They ruled that no he could not name the creature as a source and prevent an undeclared attack. It seemed like it wasn't the first time they had encountered that question.
Also the example on page 9 of the rules (under "THE STACK") says "uncanny dodge goes onto the stack above Killing Strike and resolves first: ... chooses to prevent the damage from Killing Strike." If the intent was creatures are sources I think it would have said Dragon Knight instead.
I expect that in addition to errata the rules will get an updated version sooner or later.
That's how I've been playing it, good to hear. I really wanted to play in that tournament and/or pick the judge brains, but sadly I could only drop by briefly and had to get back to my booth. If only it'd been an evening event.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 8:13AM
#55
|
|
|
i‘m not sure if this has been addressed before but do you need to make a distinction between your Creature and Order cards? when you hold them, do you hold them altogether or do you need to keep your Order hand from your Creature hand?
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 10:13AM
#56
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2010
|
i‘m not sure if this has been addressed before but do you need to make a distinction between your Creature and Order cards? when you hold them, do you hold them altogether or do you need to keep your Order hand from your Creature hand?
They have different backs, which suggests to me that they're supposed to be distinguishable in hand. I don't think there's anything wrong with holding them all at once, but sleeving them all in identical sleeves in order to create confusion is not something I'd allow.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 10:15AM
#57
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2010
|
Oh, and of course they also have to be clearly identifiable since you draw up to your creature hand size every turn. So yeah, which cards are creature as opposed to order cards is and needs to be public information. Other than that I don't see any problem with holding them at the same time.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 10:47AM
#58
|
Date Joined:
Oct 27, 2007
|
Other than that I don't see any problem with holding them at the same time.
Per the tournament rules, the creatures have to be in your left hand, the orders in your right hand, and your pinkie has to be extended.
Or maybe that was just a bad dream.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 2:27PM
#59
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2007
|
Unfortunately, thetourney floor rules state that if using sleeves, they must have identical backs (see page 12 of floor rules).
But a player is allowed to know the number of order cards or creature cards an opponant has at any time.
Though, to me, it would have made sense to use two different backed sets of card sleeves.
But I suppose using identical sleeves is just like keeping your cards face down in a single pile,
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 2:36PM
#60
|
|
|
If I have a creature with Flanking, and I use a card that allows an attack at a specific amount of damage (such as make an attack that deals 20 melee), does flanking apply to that attack, making it deal 30 damage? All this is assuming it has an adjacent ally to make flanking work.
Fear Of The Dark, Fear Of The Dark, I Have A Constant Fear That Something's Always Near; Fear Of The Dark, Fear Of The Dark, I Have A Phobia That Someone's Always There- Iron Maiden Fear of the Dark shall be feared no longer! Let him be praised instead! (Many, many thanks for all your hard work!) - darkwarlock  I am Red/Green Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.I'm both instinctive and emotional. I value my own instincts and desires, and either ignore or crush anything that stands in my way; planning and foresight are unnecessary. At best, I'm determined and fierce; at worst, I'm headstrong and infantile. Check out my DnD blog! www.artificersintuition.blogspot.com
|
|
|
