Cloak of Shadows vs Reverse Attack/Magic

[Borg]

Take this situation :

A Dark Mage wearing a [mwcard=DNQ01] Cloak of Shadows[/mwcard] throws a Fireball from 2 zones away at an enemy creature carrying a FD Reverse Attack.

If I read the explanation of the cards and traits correctly, it looks as if the Cloak does NOT stop the reverse attack from hitting the Dark Mage, even if there's a 2 zone range between the two creatures.

Second situation :

A Dark Mage wearing a [mwcard=DNQ01] Cloak of Shadows[/mwcard] plays an Enchantment from 2 zones away targeting an enemy creature carrying a FD Reverse Magic.

Again, if I read everything correctly, it seems that in this case the cloak DOES prevent the enemy creature from targeting the Dark Mage.

Can anybody confirm if this is correct or not and why, please ?

Thanks.

[andy]

I mostly agree with both of your interpretations, with a slight subtlety in Situation 2.  Take a look at pages 44-45 of the rules supplement: http://www.arcanewonders.com/resources/Mage_Wars_Official_Rules_and_Codex_Supplement.pdf.

Situation 1) The updated wording of Reverse Attack given in the supplement is:

When this creature is attacked, you must reveal Reverse Attack during the Avoid Attack Step. The attack is
avoided and then redirected back; this creature becomes the new source (although the attacker stays the same),
and the original source becomes the new target (even if the original source would not normally be a legal
target), for the next 2 steps (Roll Dice and Damage and Effects).
Then, destroy Reverse Attack. If the attack is Unavoidable, destroy Reverse Attack without effect.

It specifies both that the attacker stays the same (so the dark mage is both the attacker and target now, and they are in the same zone), and even if the dark mage would not have been a legal target for the attack initially, it still is for the reversed attack.

Situation 2) In the case of Reverse Magic, the wording given is:

When this creature is targeted by an incantation or enchantment spell controlled by an opponent,
you must reveal Reverse Magic during the Counter Spell Step. Redirect it back to the caster, who now becomes
the target of the spell. You become the caster of that spell, and now control that spell, and may reselect any other
choices the spell requires you to make. Recalculate the total mana cost of the spell; if the new cost is higher than
the original cost, you must pay the difference. Then, destroy Reverse Magic.

In "You become the caster", the "You" refers to the controller of Reverse Magic (which is presumably the enemy mage, even if the Reverse Magic is on a different enemy creature).  So, for the reversed incantation/enchantment, the caster is the enemy mage and the target is the dark mage.  If the enemy mage is not in the same zone as the dark mage, it seems that Obscured should prevent the reversed spell.  On the other hand, if the two mages are in the same zone as each other and the enemy creature with Reverse Magic is in another zone, then I would say the reversed spell DOES affect the dark mage.

[Borg]

Situation 1) The updated wording of Reverse Attack given in the supplement is:

When this creature is attacked, you must reveal Reverse Attack during the Avoid Attack Step. The attack is
avoided and then redirected back; this creature becomes the new source (although the attacker stays the same),
and the original source becomes the new target (even if the original source would not normally be a legal
target), for the next 2 steps (Roll Dice and Damage and Effects).
Then, destroy Reverse Attack. If the attack is Unavoidable, destroy Reverse Attack without effect.

It specifies both that the attacker stays the same (so the dark mage is both the attacker and target now, and they are in the same zone), and even if the dark mage would not have been a legal target for the attack initially, it still is for the reversed attack.

That's how I think it works, as well.

If the enemy mage is not in the same zone as the dark mage, it seems that Obscured should prevent the reversed spell.

I think that should be "If the enemy mage is not in the same zone as the dark mage or a zone adjacent to him, it seems that Obscured should prevent the reversed spell. " as obscured works only on a range of 2+

On the other hand, if the two mages are in the same zone as each other and the enemy creature with Reverse Magic is in another zone, then I would say the reversed spell DOES affect the dark mage.

Not sure. Not if it's 2 zones away imo.

[andy]

I think that should be "If the enemy mage is not in the same zone as the dark mage or a zone adjacent to him

Yes, sorry about my mistake.  Obscured does not prevent being targeted from one zone away.

Not sure. Not if it's 2 zones away imo.

From context, I think "it" refers to the enemy creature, in which case I disagree.  To be completely clear, the situation I'm refering to is the following: you are playing as the dark mage with Cloak of Shadows attached.  You are in the same zone as the enemy mage.  There is another enemy creature which is 2 zones away with a facedown Reverse Magic attached.  You target the enemy creature with, say, an incantation.  The Reverse Magic triggers.  According to the rules supplement I quoted before, the original caster (you, the dark mage) becomes the new target, and the controller of Reverse Magic (the enemy mage, not the enemy creature) becomes the new caster.  Since the new caster of the spell is within one zone of the Obscured target, I think the reversed incantation should resolve.

Some additional rules quotes to consider:

Each spell or object in the game is controlled by the player who cast it.

This creature is a Mage, and represents the player in the game.

I can only interpret the "You" on Reverse Magic as referring to the controller, which is the enemy mage.  So I'm not sure why you think the Cloak of Shadows blocks the reversed spell in this scenario.

[wtcannonjr]

It would be simpler for game play if the "Reverse" effect worked the same way for all spells.

Perhaps AW can update the wording in the Rules Supplement to Make this consistent.

[Borg]

I can only interpret the "You" on Reverse Magic as referring to the controller, which is the enemy mage.  So I'm not sure why you think the Cloak of Shadows blocks the reversed spell in this scenario.

Let's go over the possibilities for Reverse Magic :

1- Dark Mage w Cloak of Shadows plays enchantment/incantation from 0/1 zone away targeting enemy mage w Reverse Magic :
In this case, the Cloak has no effect and RM works as intended.

2- Dark Mage w Cloak of Shadows plays enchantment/incantation from 2 zones away targeting enemy mage w Reverse Magic :
The way I interpret the rulings, if the enemy mage pays the reveal cost of the RM, the enchantment spell will end up going to the discard pile as the enemy mage cannot target the Dark Mage due to the Cloak/Obscured.
( I also assume he cannot target another creature - there's nothing in the ruling that suggests something like changing the target in this case. )

3- Dark Mage w Cloak of Shadows plays enchantment/incantation from 0/1 zone away targeting enemy non-mage creature w Reverse Magic and enemy mage is 0/1 zone away :
Again, a situation where the Cloak has no effect and RM works as planned.

4- Dark Mage w Cloak of Shadows plays enchantment/incantation from 0/1 zone away targeting enemy non-mage creature w Reverse Magic and enemy mage is 2 zones away :
Here it gets fishy. Is the distance from the Reverse Magic to the Dark Mage the deciding factor ( 0/1 zone, in which case the Cloak has no effect ) or is the distance from the enemy mage ( 2 zones ) the deciding factor ( in which case the Cloak Obscures the Dark Mage and the RM would fizzle when revealed and paid for )

5- Dark Mage w Cloak of Shadows plays enchantment/incantation from 2 zones away targeting enemy non-mage creature w Reverse Magic and enemy mage is 0/1 zone away :
Essentially same issue as ex4. Is the range to the RM or the enemy mage the deciding factor ?

6- Dark Mage w Cloak of Shadows plays enchantment/incantation from 2 zones away targeting enemy non-mage creature w Reverse Magic and enemy mage is 2 zones away :
This case should be simple imo. Since the Dark Mage is 2 zones away from both, the RM and the enemy mage, the enchantment/incantation that was originally cast should never be able to target the Dark Mage.

[Kharhaz]

A couple of clarifications for reference:

First a clarification on targeting:
Targeting
In order to successfully target an object, 3 conditions must be met.

1) You must be able to “see” the object – trace LoS (Line of Sight) to the object.
2) If the spell, effect, or ability you are targeting with specifies a range, then the target must within the specified range. If a range is not specified, then ignore this requirement and assume any range is permissible.
3) The target must be a “legal” target and match whatever requirements are specified for that spell, effect, or ability. For example, a spell might say “Flying Creature” in the target line, and thus it cannot target a Nonflying creature.
Note that the first requirement (LoS) is mandatory for targeting, and the second 2 requirements may or may not be required by the particular spell, effect, or ability.

Here is Controller from codex
"Each spell or object in the game is controlled by the player who cast it. The controller may use and act with that object, and makes all decisions and choices for that spell or any abilities that object may have.

Exception: Equipment is controlled by the Mage it is attached to. Control does not determine source of attacks or spells."

Control is a term used to distinguish which player makes decisions. Examples include determining which attack bar and available targets and other effects (just for clarification)


For Reverse Attack:
The updated wording allows it to target the mage with obscure because of the "even if the original source would not normally be a legal target"

For Reverse Magic:
Current Text: "When this creature is targeted by an incantation or enchantment spell controlled by an opponent, you must reveal Reverse Magic during the Counter Spell Step. Redirect it back to the caster, who now becomes the target of the spell. (Check the above targeting reference to insure legality) You become the caster of that spell, and now control that spell, and may reselect any other choices the spell requires you to make. Recalculate the total mana cost of the spell; if the new cost is higher than the original cost, you must pay the difference. Then, destroy Reverse Magic."

Also
"Only one of the targets of the reversed spell needs to be the original spell’s caster. The caster of the reversed spell is free to select any other targets, as well as any other choices made “when you cast this.” If a spell has multiple targets, a Reverse Magic on any of the targets will cancel (and reverse) the whole spell."

When RM resolves you go through the 3 steps of casting a spell as per normal. There is nothing in the wording of reverse magic (currently) that would not have anyone other than the mage who controls RM be the new caster of the spell.

So:

3. Correct
4. & 5. Enemy mage cast the spell and must at least target the dark mage
6. Correct