Who said only creature based plants are susceptible to poison's? If a conjuration has the Living trait, it no longer has Poison Immunity, right?
I did not say Poison Immunity, I said "Poison effects by" which I meant poison damage and effects such as...
Altar of Skulls (which unlike Deathlock does not even give conjurations Finite Life)
Idol of Pestilence
Poison Gas Cloud
Malaconda
Weak counters
Ichthelid counters
Ghoul Rot
Plagued
Poisoned Blood
Cripple counters (irrelevant as conjurations don't have action markers to move)
In all the above cases, a Thornlasher is affected but a Flower is not.
You can place Rot or Tainted on a Living Conjuration and attack them with rare poison attacks (a Lotus is not immune to another Lotus). But that's it. In all other cases, Living Conjurations effectively have "most cases poison immunity" as they are excluded from those effects.
The rules were rife differentiating between Living Creatures and Living Conjurations yet this difference seems purely artificial for Plants.
You can't target Living Conjurations with most spells whilst having an action marker means you can
You can't heal Living Conjurations except by innate Regeneration or new Renewing Rain or Butterfly
You can't remove Rot or Tainted off a Living Conjuration using Priestess's Restore or Healing Wand
I appreciate that mechanically, they had to give Thornlasher an action marker as giving it a ready marker action like a Flower (you can only have 1 of each in a zone with 0 range effect) would be open to abuse with Thornlasher's range 1 effect (up to 5 zones).
The solution would have been to play-test Druid under a rules amendment: "Any effect that cites Creature includes Living Conjurations". Effectively undo the inconsistency in the base set which was only ever visible in 2 cards before this: Tanglevine and Wall of Thorn. But this was not done. And so those inconsistencies have been propagated.
I brought this up 2 months ago in my "House Rules (and some clarifications)" thread (Rules section), still being addressed in a new FAQ.
I feel bad highlighting this because the ambition of Plants is laudable and some of the creativity excellent. It just had rules inconsistencies to begin with that could not be fixed really. Creature based description enchantments applied to Plant creatures? Yet the game demands action markers for its dynamic. This was always going to be a Pandora's Box to open. I'm surprised they did not have a War Mage against the second Dark Mage just to round off the card pool more evenly, bring Warlord back in. It would not have had the Life vs. Death concept but it would have filled in the gaps instead of propagating fantasy realism issues. Oh well, hindsight is a wonderful thing. Most of the new cards are very interesting and I am looking forward to playing them. Just that they are eroding their USP and probably their greatest asset.
New player:
"Dad, why does the Poison Gas Cloud hurt the Thornlasher but not the Flower? It don't make sense!"And so this mechanical aspect of the game which creates inconsistency and a spell category-based artificiality destroys the illusion.