Akiros Favor VS Temple of the Dawnbreaker

[Moonglow]

Indeed!

I guess I'd never thought of the dice re-roll as part of the spell effect, so kind of its own step.  So step 5 has ended, you reveal AF, and that allows you to do something.  In this case re-roll the dice. 

Ninja'ed

[ringkichard]

Not for me, once again the question to me, is does this card allow you to roll dice after the Roll Dice Step. Yes or No.

I agree that this is definitely the current question.

If there were a surplus of resources and designer time I think the long term solution would be to define things like "roll" and "re-roll" with steps, similar to what has been done for movement and other game procedures.

--

I got to thinking the other day about boardgame rules and the different approaches people take to interpreting them. I'm coming to the conclusion that what matters most is how the rules are played, not what exactly is written. Those two things interact, of course, and only logic (or designer fiat) may guide us in the interpretation of the rules as written, but more and more, Oliver Wendel Holmes seems correct:

The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience... The law embodies the story of a nation's development through many centuries, and it cannot be dealt with as if it contained only the axioms and corollaries of a book of mathematics.

[Zuberi]

I still don't think that's important. Let's say the new ruling didn't exist. We'd still have the same issue. You reveal after the dice have been rolled, can you change the roll? If it was yes before, then it's still yes. If no, then no. As stated before, there's nothing in the rules or on the card that says the dice are limited to being rolled in the roll dice step. The only issue is whether a roll that has already occurred can be affected by a future reveal.

The ruling actually had no influence on me sike. My mistake was that because a reroll seems to kind of naturally want to change the past, I forgot temporarily that enchantments can't do that. It is possible for the card to break the normal rules, and kich has stated a way in which that could make sense, but I don't feel like it's really written that way and the fact that there exists an equally valid interpretation that doesn't break the normal rules makes me lean towards that. it also seems to me like it would be cleaner and clearer when determining exactly when it's too late to reveal. In the end though, this is what needs a ruling. Can it work after the roll? Yes or no?

[sIKE]

I am not sure if that is needed. I think concise wording on the cards like this would go a long way to preventing these questions in the first place.

So here's [mwcard=MWSTX2FFE02]Akiro's Favor[/mwcard]

Once per round during the Dice Roll Step,

or

Once per round after the Dice Roll Step,

Would make this card crystal clear both in execution and intent....

I still don't think that's important. Let's say the new ruling didn't exist. We'd still have the same issue. You reveal after the dice have been rolled, can you change the roll? If it was yes before, then it's still yes. If no, then no. As stated before, there's nothing in the rules or on the card that says the dice are limited to being rolled in the roll dice step. The only issue is whether a roll that has already occurred can be affected by a future reveal.

The ruling actually had no influence on me sike. My mistake was that because a reroll seems to kind of naturally want to change the past, I forgot temporarily that enchantments can't do that. It is possible for the card to break the normal rules, and kich has stated a way in which that could make sense, but I don't feel like it's really written that way and the fact that there exists an equally valid interpretation that doesn't break the normal rules makes me lean towards that. it also seems to me like it would be cleaner and clearer when determining exactly when it's too late to reveal. In the end though, this is what needs a ruling. Can it work after the roll? Yes or no?

What I find interesting all of this is that we are talking about Enchantments in a general sense. I always have thought of them as a tool that can be cast now and used later to change/modify events. So it made logical sense to me that something like Akiro's Favor would work in-between the steps as they are now defined, as how could the card be a "surprise" or "change the results" if you always had to reveal the card before the step that it was needed? How can I have that surprise mechanic with Enchantments in the way you have described things?

[Sailor Vulcan]

I am not sure if that is needed. I think concise wording on the cards like this would go a long way to preventing these questions in the first place.

So here's [mwcard=MWSTX2FFE02]Akiro's Favor[/mwcard]

Once per round during the Dice Roll Step,

or

Once per round after the Dice Roll Step,

Would make this card crystal clear both in execution and intent....

I still don't think that's important. Let's say the new ruling didn't exist. We'd still have the same issue. You reveal after the dice have been rolled, can you change the roll? If it was yes before, then it's still yes. If no, then no. As stated before, there's nothing in the rules or on the card that says the dice are limited to being rolled in the roll dice step. The only issue is whether a roll that has already occurred can be affected by a future reveal.

The ruling actually had no influence on me sike. My mistake was that because a reroll seems to kind of naturally want to change the past, I forgot temporarily that enchantments can't do that. It is possible for the card to break the normal rules, and kich has stated a way in which that could make sense, but I don't feel like it's really written that way and the fact that there exists an equally valid interpretation that doesn't break the normal rules makes me lean towards that. it also seems to me like it would be cleaner and clearer when determining exactly when it's too late to reveal. In the end though, this is what needs a ruling. Can it work after the roll? Yes or no?

What I find interesting all of this is that we are talking about Enchantments in a general sense. I always have thought of them as a tool that can be cast now and used later to change/modify events. So it made logical sense to me that something like Akiro's Favor would work in-between the steps as they are now defined, as how could the card be a "surprise" or "change the results" if you always had to reveal the card before the step that it was needed? How can I have that surprise mechanic with Enchantments in the way you have described things?

How? By revealing directly before the step that it was needed, but not a moment sooner. It's not like you can arbitrarily just choose to cancel an attack step once the attack sequence has started. It's still a surprise.

[jacksmack]

Enchantments are suppost to be revealled and benefit you immediatly.

There are very few exceptions to this, and to be honost they are probaly bad design and should have been reworded unless for balance issues its decided that they should be revealed in advance to only potentially give a benefit based on a currently unknown result.

Falcon Prescision fall both inside and outside of this category. If the opponent flips up a defense enchantment after the declare attackstep then you can counter it with falcon prescision. If its block or reverse attack then you cannot.

Besides that its only Adramelechs touch and potentially Akiros Favor that must be revealed before you know if you need their effect.

Apparently there are now time to reveal during a move which fixes chain of agony, and magebane has already been confirmed that you can reveal after cast spell and still trigger the 1 damage.

So we are left with Akiro and Adramelachs

[ringkichard]

The "obvious" solution is to make everything a step.  Only half kidding.

If you want to keep the "Surprise!" effect of enchantments (and of course you do, that's the whole point) but you also want enchantments to be revealed only after a Step, Phase, or Action (to get away from the "event" language) you have to add Steps where previously there were none.

Roll dice, for example, could get 4 steps.
1. Chose Dice
2. Pay Costs
2. Toss dice
3. End (Re-roll)

Some of the effects of a change like this would be good: it's always bothered me that Poison Blood can be revealed after the die roll for the Vampiric trait, but not after the die roll for Asyran Cleric's healing ability. Or, why shouldn't you be able to reveal Adremelech's Touch after a burn is rolled but before the damage is applied? It seems weird that you can use Astral Anchor to counter a Grey Wraith's Teleport movement, but not to counter a Teleport Trap.

Some of the effects of a change like this wouldn't be so good, mostly because the imprecision of the old rules let some things work more by fiat than logic. E.g. the rules specifically used to say that rolling dice was an event, and that you could reveal after any event. This was incompatible with the ruling that you couldn't reveal Poison Blood to stop Gray Angel's healing ability. We just kinda skimmed over this and went on with our lives.

But now it seems that we've clarified ourselves into a corner. And it looks to me like the only way out is through: if you want to be able to reactively use a hidden enchantment, in many cases it needs to be revealed at a Step after your opponent has declared intent, but before its effects have been resolved. For abilities and procedures that lack steps, if we want to allow surprise enchantments, we need to add steps or loosen the restriction.

Likewise, if you ever want to be able to reveal enchantments during the Upkeep phase, we'd need to insert Steps in there.

[Kharhaz]

But now it seems that we've clarified ourselves into a corner.

Well done gentlemen

[Zuberi]

Yes, you need to reveal after a phase, step, or action. Yes, some enchantments must be revealed before they can be used rather than as a surprise. This is how I had thought it had always been, and I think a lot of this thread is just about people being upset about these facts. However they are not what's being questioned here. They were already answered.

Perhaps it would help to approach this question from a different angle. Akiros favor also allows you to reroll daze rolls. If an attack skips the declare attack step, you roll the daze rolls as soon as the attack starts, I.e. before entering any other steps. This eliminates the whole step issue all together.

So we are rolling a die between steps, and we can reveal the enchantment between steps. If we reveal after the die has been rolled, can we use it to reroll the die? Whatever the answer is for this, would then also apply to attack rolls, because in both cases we are talking about the roll being completely finished and then revealing an enchant to allow a reroll.

I can honestly see this going either way and we simply need an official answer on it. I personally think requiring it to be revealed beforehand would be the easiest way and make the most sense, but won't be upset if it goes the other way. What I am annoyed with is that people keep trying to drag other issues into this. It's not a matter of limiting rerolls to a step. It's a matter of can they be triggered by a roll that already happened. That is the only thing that needs answered, but it does need an official answer. Once that's answered, we'll be fine.

[ringkichard]

Yes, you need to reveal after a phase, step, or action. Yes, some enchantments must be revealed before they can be used rather than as a surprise. This is how I had thought it had always been, and I think a lot of this thread is just about people being upset about these facts.

Well, to some degree, yes. This *is* a change, and it was written in accidentally. Version three rules specifically say that a roll is an event, and that you can reveal after any event. Now, as I pointed out, the consiquenses of this rule weren't pursued aggressively at the time, but by removing opportunities to reveal enchantments some cards just don't work the same as they used to, and this is potentially one. We didn't need a definition of re-roll that specified if it could re-roll an attack after the Roll Dice Phase, because you could just reveal Akiro's Favor after the roll while still in the Phase.

I really am thinking of going through every card in the game and making a list of every card this change affected. Or maybe I'll just take a break for a bit and calm down. Something about this really seems to have my goat.

[sIKE]

I am still baffled. What part of re-roll the dice needs it own special set of rules? Why does it have to be done within a step? I keep reading once a round in the card text and scratch my head at 6 pages.

[ringkichard]

Why does it have to be done within a step?

Maybe it doesn't. I don't know, because we don't have many rules for re-rolling. It's totally possible that you can re-roll any time before the roll is applied.

The old rules called rolling an event, so it was more clear that you *couldn't* re-roll during a roll, so you had to re-roll afterwards. Now? Donno.

[Moonglow]

That might be my fault - I guess the step thing was about when AF can be revealed - although that also depends on whether it can affect past events (the roll happening in this attack action. 

Which is an alternate question/resolution to the same problem/issue under discussion.  I think we're all coming up with different explanations/solutions to the same problem, most all seem viable and choosing between them comes back to design intent.

Why does it have to be done within a step?

Maybe it doesn't. I don't know, because we don't have many rules for re-rolling. It's totally possible that you can re-roll any time before the roll is applied.

The old rules called rolling an event, so it was more clear that you *couldn't* re-roll during a roll, so you had to re-roll afterwards. Now? Donno.

[Moonglow]

Enchantments are suppost to be revealled and benefit you immediatly.

I thought this was an interesting point, but wasn't sure of its umm integration with the MW design ethos/intent.  The end of this 'benefit you immediately' seems more a true statement for incantations.  I mean if you cast and incantation and it did nothing, itd be a dumb card (or really poor play).  But an enchantment is played face down for tempo, bluff, hedging your bets, mana conservation etc.  Knowing/deciding when to reveal it is a big part of the ebb and flow of the game, too soon you reveal your hand (sic), too late and you miss the optimum timing. 

Like someone (Sike I think) said, AF seems like it could go either way and I can see merits to both. But it doesn't seem that big a deal for the card to get revealed before the dice roll.  You've got something you really need to make sure you kill, you reveal it then.  Having it revealed doesn't negate the card or make it useless.  In some ways saving it up until you know it must be used seems a bit stronger, for 2 mana you can guarantee one timely re-roll (still doesnt guarantee a good roll, but its a statistical improvement). 

I guess one of the problems is that the dice roll is the primary point of uncertainty.  So almost everything else you can better estimate when you should reveal for best initial/immediate benefit.  AF revealed before a dice roll doesnt give you that certainty, you might reveal it, then roll awesomely.  Does that mean it wasn't worth having revealed it?  If your creature gets killed that round, probably annoying.... otherwise its an emerging threat to be considered.

I can't think of another decision with the same uncertainty - the other main uncertainty is around opponent face down enchantments, or what they will do with their actions.  But all of these would give you opportunity to reveal your own enchantments before resolution i.e. if a creature with a large stack of hidden enchantments declared an attack on your imp with face down rhino hide or similar, you can wait right through to the end of step 5 before you reveal it, so you'll have seen whatever they've rolled and what effects they're using before you decide.  I have been caught out by surprise teleports or rouse the beast moves which have meant I thought I'd picked the right moment to reveal my protection/use my defense and something nastier came along, but that's good play (or bad on my part).

I guess Jack's comment seems as good a question of intent as any, just how good an in the pocket card was AF meant to be?

PS I don't mean to be rule lawyering the fun out of the game, I was just enjoying the curves of the discussion. There are plenty of other threads that just seem meh, this one seems interesting and has people bouncing some interesting design/intent/solution thoughts around.


 

[exid]

As often, i globally agree with Zuberi!

Yes, you need to reveal after a phase, step, or action. Yes, some enchantments must be revealed before they can be used rather than as a surprise. This is how I had thought it had always been, and I think a lot of this thread is just about people being upset about these facts. However they are not what's being questioned here. They were already answered.

Perhaps it would help to approach this question from a different angle. Akiros favor also allows you to reroll daze rolls. If an attack skips the declare attack step, you roll the daze rolls as soon as the attack starts, I.e. before entering any other steps. This eliminates the whole step issue all together.

So we are rolling a die between steps, and we can reveal the enchantment between steps. If we reveal after the die has been rolled, can we use it to reroll the die? Whatever the answer is for this, would then also apply to attack rolls, because in both cases we are talking about the roll being completely finished and then revealing an enchant to allow a reroll.

here i see it diferently:
there is a roll to miss step, so for me it's the same problem: A'sFavor must be revealed before the roll to miss step.

I can honestly see this going either way and we simply need an official answer on it. I personally think requiring it to be revealed beforehand would be the easiest way and make the most sense, but won't be upset if it goes the other way. What I am annoyed with is that people keep trying to drag other issues into this. It's not a matter of limiting rerolls to a step. It's a matter of can they be triggered by a roll that already happened. That is the only thing that needs answered, but it does need an official answer. Once that's answered, we'll be fine.

here i would prefer if the official answer would treat the global problem (how far in the past an enchantment can have effect when it's revealed) and not only the A's favor problem. i prefere a unique global rull than 30 exceptions.