House Rules to retain realism (and some clarifications)

[ringkichard]

And this turned into a rules clarification thread real quick- <.<

I try to stick with what I am good at. :-)

In all seriousness, the thread was getting kinda contentious, and it seemed like a good idea to find some common ground.  People were arguing a point, but it wasn't even clear anyone actually disagreed.

And maybe it's my competitive streak, but as much as I've complained about Plants' water immunity, I'd never implement a nonstandard and isolating house rule to fix it (though I might avoid playing plants in friendly matches). Petitioning for official rules eratta is about as far as I'll go in mucking with the game.

[Shad0w]

I might be a little drunk and a little ummm something else that gives me an excuse outside of normal politeness, but has anything been advanced over the previous discussions on this topic?  Which sort of implies no one bothered to read the previous posts anyway?

And this turned into a rules clarification thread real quick- <.<

I am dealing with some funeral arrangements and did not want to thread to wander too much but I guess it will be faster to edit the topic.

[Moonglow]

Sorry to hear that Shadow - wasn't expecting you to be the one who has to answer everything though.  Mostly just felt that the flying/guarding ambiguity seemed well dealt with on another thread.

This thread clarified that the Flyers guarding ambiguity was a misprint and should probably have been object to capture the statement in the rules:

Use Guard:
Guarding allows you to protect important creatures or conjurations.

(emphasis mine)

http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=12738.msg18464#msg18464

[DeckBuilder]

I guess it will be faster to edit the topic.

Hi Shad0w

I was sorry to read of your personal circumstances and I hope things have resolved themselves now. I trust I have waited an appropriate length of time before resurrecting this thread that had devolved into an opportunity to make a Single Source of Clarifications (in a separate new thread) for players to easily find and reference, at least until the FAQ is updated.

Some of these points are simply perceived ambiguity. It may be obvious to experienced players but new players will "argue the toss" that their interpretation is different and it is very hard to dispute without unambiguous clarity (I usually end up accepting their view so as to not colour their game experience). I suggest you copy these points onto a separate new LOCKED "Clarifications" thread, a single uncluttered point of reference only you can add to, so these issues can be resolved with a quick view of a device. Here are points from this thread...

So, for each of these clarifications, a TRUE or FALSE (clarifying what is True instead) would really help out.

1. Flyers cannot ignore Guards when attacking Conjurations (unless they qualify to ignore Guards via another exception)

Kharhaz has been playtesting Flyers can ignore Guards when attacking Conjurations because it is actually Rules As Written. Some have also voiced they find it logical due to the size of most conjurations. But many experienced posters also don't play this and I was convinced by them to play it as above = Rules As Intended

2. You must comply with all Equipment Traits where possible, choosing when a contradictory choice exists

The Weapon exception exists because a choice exists between Weapon, your melee basic attack and Attack spells, otherwise equiping a Weapon prevents Attack spells; if you wear Eagleclaw Boots with no other Boots, you cannot Force Push yourself unless you Dissolve it

3. Line of Sight to target is only needed for casting a spell on it or making an attack on it or if the effect text stipulates it

For all other purposes (e.g Teleport move actions, Enchantment Transfusion, Teleport Trap), Line of Sight is not needed as the text does not stipulate it

4. Any change of zone, including via Push, Teleport or Teleport move actions, triggers entry into a zone Trap enchantment and Orb of Suppression does include Teleport move actions

I added this as it came up in a recent game and I found it hard to rule; with Wraiths arriving soon, this may become more commonplace

5. A reveal effect does not target but legality must be checked after attaching an enchantment indirectly

Hence Enchantment Transfusion does not trigger the opponent's Nullify on destination but enchantments moved must be able to legally target that creature

6. Seeking Dispel only prevents the revealing of the target enchantment

Hence Enchantment Transfusion could move that enchantment and, as per the FAQ version 4th March page 3, this moving of the target (even to itself) counters the targeting; the same Transfusion as a counter capability applies to a Dispel cast on a revealed enchantment

7. With the current pool, the only way you can "heal" living conjurations is via innate regeneration

For example Tanglevine cannot be healed even though the Heal symbol ability (as per Asryan Cleric) allows for healing living creatures or living conjurations; Goblin Builder can remove damage from corporeal living conjurations (all of them so far) but this is not healing per se; this Rules As Written interpretation inversely means some area Poison effects like Idol of Pestilence will not harm living conjurations (whilst Deathlock specifically includes living conjurations), a huge impact on the impending expansion

8. Graveyard grants its bonus mana only for the first creature killed each round, irrespective of its controller, thus attack sequence is relevant in the case of multi-target attacks; in the case of simultaneous Upkeep death, the player with Initiative chooses between the first to die on each side as decided by their controller

Hence the bonus cannot be deferred for a larger creature killed later in that round, zone attacks sequence is relevant and Upkeep direct damage deaths on both sides is chosen by Initiative holder after each player chooses their first to die in Upkeep

9. You cannot remove Burn counters on objects with Hydro Immunity using Geyser or Surging Wave as they cannot be targeted

Obviously other spell effects (e.g. global conjuration played against fire mages) may over-rule this as card text always takes precedence, again a huge impact on the impending expansion


I think that covers most of the points covered in this thread so far, in some way or another. I have worded it in a way so that I'm anticipating as many "True" responses as possible from you. I know some of these may seem blatantly obvious but you try to argue them with newer players. So an unambiguous clarification would really help here. As I said, a separate locked (thus uncluttered) stickied thread where you (and other Moderators) collate these and other issues would be a great resource.

I am really sorry to have inconvenienced you with this request and I thank you in advance.

[lettucemode]

Nice clear list Deckbuilder. Looking forward to the responses!

[Moonglow]

I guess it will be faster to edit the topic.

Hi Shad0w



So, for each of these clarifications, a TRUE or FALSE (clarifying what is True instead) would really help out.

1. Flyers cannot ignore Guards when attacking Conjurations (unless they qualify to ignore Guards via another exception)

Kharhaz has been playtesting Flyers can ignore Guards when attacking Conjurations because it is actually Rules As Written. Some have also voiced they find it logical due to the size of most conjurations. But many experienced posters also don't play this and I was convinced by them to play it as above = Rules As Intended

True - Shadow read and responded to this topic in this thread  http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=12738.msg18464#msg18464

Didn't he?

[Shad0w]

Group is busy making the DvN FAQ. I can add this to the to do list.