Casting cost of Purify?

[Zuberi]

If you say that the fact that it is in the target bar makes you able to target it, then you have to be consistent and apply that logic to every card. There is nothing written differently about this target from every other target on every other card. Other targets can be out of range as well. Other targets can be out of line of sight as well. The fact that they are the required target does not allow you to ignore range and line of sight. There is also nothing in the text box that says you can ignore those things.

It's not just atypical. It doesn't work. We are given no instructions on how to make it work. Just like Purify gives us no instructions on how to make the variable casting cost work. We can guess at the intent, but they just do not work as written.

[Moonglow]

Or just say that all cards not on the board/cast are 0-0 from all mages playing.

Does make me wonder if technically you're raising the dead or corrupting the lingering essence of a previously cast and destroyed spell?i.e. is it the spell or the creature you're restoring? It only really matters in terms of the mythology or explanation you use.

I was thinking that all spells exist in potentia, cast spells leave an echo in etheria's mana or on the plane of voltari. A necromancer actually rebuilds this echo, not drags a corpse from the ground...

Cause we don't leave dead summoned creatures all over the board I always figured the creatures remains dissipated back into the ether, which is probably why I think that's a good explanation.

[sIKE]

If you say that the fact that it is in the target bar makes you able to target it, then you have to be consistent and apply that logic to every card.

You don't have to be consistent at all, it would be nice, but its not a requirement. Look at a speed sign, they are not all the same some say 50, others 20, and so forth. They are not consistent. However the layout is, so whatever the number that is shown on the sign we all know that it is the posted speed limit. I belive it is the same for the target bar.

What I think you are trying to do is mix how things happen in the Arena with LoS + Targeting (Mage) and how a good part of the game "happens" outside of the Arena, during spell preparation with you digging through your spellbook (Player). Typically you prepare a spell by placing "it" face down on the "table" not in the arena and it is the same with the discard pile. As far as I know the discard pile does not exist to any Object in the Arena and therefore under normal game rules does not exist and can never be targeted. How do you imagine the mage running out of the Arena to the Table to dig through the history of the spells he cast for Resurrection or both Mages history of spells for Animate Dead, to dig out the creature in question. I think (and hope I do) I know the answer: No.

With that in mind, how would your Mage who is casting this spell work if the Target were a Zone? The two cards in question and their specific game mechanic is outside "the box" thematically and you would still have to write up specific card text (since the target is no longer the Discard Pile) to resolve the cards functional design, which is to access a Players discard pile and then cast it.

[ringkichard]

I think it's pretty safe to say that cards that target the discard pile or its contents are actually supposed to work. I guess the question is, does this work within the technical constraints of the rules, or only by fiat?

If I look at the rules and see that
1. The card requires something impossible to ever function even minimally,

Then

2. Either
a. The card does nothing,
Or
b. The requirement isn't actually impossible,
Or
C. The card doesn't have the requirement, appearances to the contrary.

A's not really an option. The game isn't a trick played on the players. Players can't and should never have to examine cards minutely to see if they do what they promise.

B, in this case is a non-starter, I think. Target is a heavily regulated term, and LoS rules are very clear that you can't draw a line to something that's not a zone.

This leaves C. Turns out that we're not actually targeting in accord with the rules. Yes, I know it has a target written on the card, but the parsimonious ruling seems to be that the card is technically written wrong. I would probably conclude that the cards really mean "choose" instead of target.

So, yeah, they probably needs to be fixed, because they only really work by fiat right now. That's probably mostly ok, but fiat has bad interactions with other rules and cards.

[sIKE]

I think it's pretty safe to say that cards that target the discard pile or its contents are actually supposed to work. I guess the question is, does this work within the technical constraints of the rules, or only by fiat?

If I look at the rules and see that
1. The card requires something impossible to ever function even minimally,

Then

2. Either
a. The card does nothing,
Or
b. The requirement isn't actually impossible,
Or
C. The card doesn't have the requirement, appearances to the contrary.

A's not really an option. The game isn't a trick played on the players. Players can't and should never have to examine cards minutely to see if they do what they promise.

B, in this case is a non-starter, I think. Target is a heavily regulated term, and LoS rules are very clear that you can't draw a line to something that's not a zone.

This leaves C. Turns out that we're not actually targeting in accord with the rules. Yes, I know it has a target written on the card, but the parsimonious ruling seems to be that the card is technically written wrong. I would probably conclude that the cards really mean "choose" instead of target.

So, yeah, they probably needs to be fixed, because they only really work by fiat right now. That's probably mostly ok, but fiat has bad interactions with other rules and cards.

No disagreement here!

[Zuberi]

I think it's pretty safe to say that cards that target the discard pile or its contents are actually supposed to work. I guess the question is, does this work within the technical constraints of the rules, or only by fiat?

If I look at the rules and see that
1. The card requires something impossible to ever function even minimally,

Then

2. Either
a. The card does nothing,
Or
b. The requirement isn't actually impossible,
Or
C. The card doesn't have the requirement, appearances to the contrary.

A's not really an option. The game isn't a trick played on the players. Players can't and should never have to examine cards minutely to see if they do what they promise.

B, in this case is a non-starter, I think. Target is a heavily regulated term, and LoS rules are very clear that you can't draw a line to something that's not a zone.

This leaves C. Turns out that we're not actually targeting in accord with the rules. Yes, I know it has a target written on the card, but the parsimonious ruling seems to be that the card is technically written wrong. I would probably conclude that the cards really mean "choose" instead of target.

So, yeah, they probably needs to be fixed, because they only really work by fiat right now. That's probably mostly ok, but fiat has bad interactions with other rules and cards.

Agreed as well. Right now, these two cards can only function by us ignoring the target bar and forgetting about some rules. Obviously they are supposed to work though, so that's what we have to do. It's a little harder with Purify though, because of the bad interactions you mention and not knowing exactly how to resolve the timing of the card.

@sIKE speed limit signs may have different numbers on them, but they all tell you what the max speed is. The target line always tells you what you are required to target, and target is a very precise game term with specific requirements. If the target of those two cards was zone, you could leave the card text exactly the same and it would work fine. Choosing a creature to summon, regardless of its origin point, doesn't require targeting that creature. Casting a spell though does require you to target according to the target bar.

In the end though, I think kich summarized things better than I've been doing.

[sIKE]

I think it's pretty safe to say that cards that target the discard pile or its contents are actually supposed to work. I guess the question is, does this work within the technical constraints of the rules, or only by fiat?

If I look at the rules and see that
1. The card requires something impossible to ever function even minimally,

Then

2. Either
a. The card does nothing,
Or
b. The requirement isn't actually impossible,
Or
C. The card doesn't have the requirement, appearances to the contrary.

A's not really an option. The game isn't a trick played on the players. Players can't and should never have to examine cards minutely to see if they do what they promise.

B, in this case is a non-starter, I think. Target is a heavily regulated term, and LoS rules are very clear that you can't draw a line to something that's not a zone.

This leaves C. Turns out that we're not actually targeting in accord with the rules. Yes, I know it has a target written on the card, but the parsimonious ruling seems to be that the card is technically written wrong. I would probably conclude that the cards really mean "choose" instead of target.

So, yeah, they probably needs to be fixed, because they only really work by fiat right now. That's probably mostly ok, but fiat has bad interactions with other rules and cards.

Agreed as well. Right now, these two cards can only function by us ignoring the target bar and forgetting about some rules. Obviously they are supposed to work though, so that's what we have to do. It's a little harder with Purify though, because of the bad interactions you mention and not knowing exactly how to resolve the timing of the card.

@sIKE speed limit signs may have different numbers on them, but they all tell you what the max speed is. The target line always tells you what you are required to target, and target is a very precise game term with specific requirements. If the target of those two cards was zone, you could leave the card text exactly the same and it would work fine. Choosing a creature to summon, regardless of its origin point, doesn't require targeting that creature. Casting a spell though does require you to target according to the target bar.

In the end though, I think kich summarized things better than I've been doing.

And I think he said what I was trying to say better than I was.

[exid]

I never noticed these problems! but it's problematic...

purify: the X isn't well defined.
for me it's clear AW forgot to wright "X=total cost" (and all time issues would then be solved)

resurection and animate dead: the discard pile is out of LOS, etc.
for me it's clear AW wrote the wrong target. the target should be the zone, as well as the creature's


... any official AW statement? ( or a new version of the official rulles supplement?  )

[ringkichard]

Yeah, I don't think y'all were actually disagreeing

[ringkichard]

I never noticed these problems!

All games/software/laws have corner-cases/bugs/errors. The are more, and worse! And AW has fixed far more, and far worse. Most people would never notice, or need to care, because the game runs smoothly in nearly all cases of actual play.

... any official AW statement? ( or a new version of the official rulles supplement?  )

Laddinfance no longer needs sleep or rest, but toils ceaselessly in the White Spires: working great magic, writing tomes of rules, and herding cats. I would expect one sooner than later.

[wtcannonjr]

I never noticed these problems! but it's problematic...

purify: the X isn't well defined.
for me it's clear AW forgot to wright "X=total cost" (and all time issues would then be solved)

... any official AW statement? ( or a new version of the official rulles supplement?  )

It seems another possible intent would be to have both X=casting cost AND pay additional mana for additional effects during the Resolve Step. This could be clarified as a spell with both a required Casting Cost and an optional Resolve Cost. This would work similar to Armor Ward when it is revealed.

It might help if this was made into a general rule with consistent language.

[Kaarin]

Does make me wonder if technically you're raising the dead or corrupting the lingering essence of a previously cast and destroyed spell?i.e. is it the spell or the creature you're restoring? It only really matters in terms of the mythology or explanation you use.

You may even not be killing those creatures. When one legendary creature is destroyed it may be summoned once again, resurrected or reanimated (and later summoned if reanimated copy is destroyed).

...the Target Bar: Discarded non-Epic Living Creature, here is one of the places where the card text overrides the typical rules, and is therefore possible).

I see no reason why Target Bar of those spells shouldn't state "Zone", just like normal summoning of a creature. EDIT: should have read 2nd page before posting.

[Moonglow]

Does make me wonder if technically you're raising the dead or corrupting the lingering essence of a previously cast and destroyed spell?i.e. is it the spell or the creature you're restoring? It only really matters in terms of the mythology or explanation you use.

You may even not be killing those creatures. When one legendary creature is destroyed it may be summoned once again, resurrected or reanimated (and later summoned if reanimated copy is destroyed).

See I think this is what this thread really needs to resolve first - it might be different for legendary creatures, since they're named.  I mean if you summon Aldremech, you're clearly summoning that demon.  If you summon it again, its the same demon.  So clearly when its destroyed it isn't destroyed, just returns to its pit.  Now if you summon a fox, destroy it and sumon a fox... is it the same fox...

[sIKE]

Does make me wonder if technically you're raising the dead or corrupting the lingering essence of a previously cast and destroyed spell?i.e. is it the spell or the creature you're restoring? It only really matters in terms of the mythology or explanation you use.

You may even not be killing those creatures. When one legendary creature is destroyed it may be summoned once again, resurrected or reanimated (and later summoned if reanimated copy is destroyed).

See I think this is what this thread really needs to resolve first - it might be different for legendary creatures, since they're named.  I mean if you summon Aldremech, you're clearly summoning that demon.  If you summon it again, its the same demon.  So clearly when its destroyed it isn't destroyed, just returns to its pit.  Now if you summon a fox, destroy it and sumon a fox... is it the same fox...

When you summon an object in the arena, it is a in our terms a copy/clone of the real thing, not the real thing.

[Coshade]

Does make me wonder if technically you're raising the dead or corrupting the lingering essence of a previously cast and destroyed spell?i.e. is it the spell or the creature you're restoring? It only really matters in terms of the mythology or explanation you use.

You may even not be killing those creatures. When one legendary creature is destroyed it may be summoned once again, resurrected or reanimated (and later summoned if reanimated copy is destroyed).

See I think this is what this thread really needs to resolve first - it might be different for legendary creatures, since they're named.  I mean if you summon Aldremech, you're clearly summoning that demon.  If you summon it again, its the same demon.  So clearly when its destroyed it isn't destroyed, just returns to its pit.  Now if you summon a fox, destroy it and sumon a fox... is it the same fox...

When you summon an object in the arena, it is a in our terms a copy/clone of the real thing, not the real thing.

From what I understand, when a mage summons a creature they are not actually summoning a thing in the world right now. The creatures are merely copies of what already exists. So a [mwcard=MW1C04]Bitterwood Fox[/mwcard] is just a "average" Bitterwood Fox (think of it like how all fireballs probably look similar). When you cast a legendary creature you are actually copying a specific thing. So for [mwcard=MW1C06]Brogan Bloodstone[/mwcard] the spell is most likely because the mage has gotten to know Brogan and can copy his exact likeness.