Transferring Limited Use Abilities

[Zuberi]

I was watching this Arcane Duels video and at the 55 minute mark an interesting question arose regarding [mwcard=MWSTX2FFE02]Akiro's Favor[/mwcard]. I knew I remembered reading something about this before and was pretty sure that they got the ruling wrong. However, after scouring all of the official documentation, I couldn't find anything pertaining to this situation. I finally uncovered a ruling on the forums dealing with Defense rolls that is probably what I was thinking of.

That ruling says that an enchantment which provides a Defense roll keeps track of that ability with it's own ready marker. If it gets moved to another creature after having already used it's Defense once that round, the new creature will not be able to use the Defense again until the next round.

Now, the wording is a bit different on Akiro's Favor than it is something like [mwcard=MW1E07]Cobra Reflexes[/mwcard], but in both cases you're essentially dealing with an object providing a once per round ability to what it's attached to. Can we extrapolate from the forum post that limited use abilities like this are kept track of by the object providing them, thus preventing someone from gaining extra uses by moving it around? Or, if not, what indicates the distinction between the two (does that rule only apply to defenses perhaps)?

I'm pretty sure it is tracked by the object providing it, but I'd like official confirmation which currently seems lacking (unless I missed something). And this is something likely to come up a fair amount with Enchantment Transfusion shenanigans.

[jacksmack]

It's not specified anywhere that ready markers come into play ready. But i think its still safe to assume they do.
Otherwise a newly summoned Knight of Westlock could not use his defense the round he is summoned etc.

DvsN talks about conjurations that can attack once per round and the round they come into play. A ready marker is used to keep track of this.


If the ready marker is used already there is nothing (currently) besides the reset phase that puts back to ready state.
Defenses are also kept track of with ready markers, so they are more or less the same.


I would argue that when you are resolving the enchantment that directly (akiros) or indirectly (cobra look up defense in rule book) gets you a ready marker then it comes into play 'ready'.
You are not resolving an enchantment when you are moving it with transfusion, only when you reveal it (after you paid reveal cost.)
So... the ready marker keeps its state.

[Zuberi]

The reason it doesn't specify what state that ready markers come into play in is because they're not really a thing that's in the game themselves. They're just a tracking method to keep tabs on whether or not something is available. As soon as you put a card into play, the effects of that card come into play as well. They're immediately available and if you are tracking them with a ready marker, this means the marker should be ready.

This isn't really about the ready markers though it can be discussed in terms of the state of such markers. Rather it is more about which object has and keeps track of these limited use abilities. Is it the object giving the ability, or the object receiving it? If it's the former, then we're saying that spells like Akiro's Favor can only be used once per round period, and moving them doesn't let you use them again. This would be consistent with the previous Defense ruling. However, an argument could be made for the latter, saying that the spell gives THIS creature a once per round ability, and when you move it it then gives a different creature a once per round ability that it hasn't used yet.

To put it another way, in terms of ready markers, the question is more about whether the object providing the ability hosts a ready marker itself to track the ability, or does it instead give a ready marker to it's target to track it. If the former, then when the granting object is moved it obviously carries the ready marker with it and the state of the marker doesn't change. However, if the latter is true, then when you move the granting object you would essentially be deleting the first ready marker off the original target and placing a new one on the new target. Does that make sense?

I could see either being true, but I'm not sure how to reconcile the latter with the previous ruling on Defenses. Thus, I lean towards the first option being true, where the object granting the ability is the one that keeps track of it. Regardless, it seems to be a blank spot in the rules which I think needs addressed.

[jacksmack]

If a mage uses the bracers and has cobra reflexes you need to keep track of which ready marker is what.

Or even akiros ready marker could be confused with a defense ready marker. Its certainly on the card that gives something to keep track of that the ready marker must be placed.

Also your not resolving a 'moved' enchantment, that only happens when you reveal and pay cost.
So its not really 'gaining anything' it just has it when the appropriate check for it is there.

[jacksmack]

Also the double Enchantment transfusion (bounce it back with nr 2) would mean that the creature would be able to use the same defense again.

And if not - how would you keep track of that?

[exid]

"once per round, if this creature..." i think the "once per round" is the important thing here, and that "this" means "the creature on which the encnatment is attached".
in a lore point of view, the enchantment is "empty" after a first use and need time to make effect again (the transfusion doesn't make a new spell).

... but i can't find a precise rule to say that...

[Coshade]

Thanks for bringing this up Zuberi. I wasn't sure which way the ruling goes since the top of the card seems to trump the bottom of the card (or vice versa?). Still not really sure, I can't say if I lean one way or another.

[Zuberi]

Thanks for bringing this up Zuberi. I wasn't sure which way the ruling goes since the top of the card seems to trump the bottom of the card (or vice versa?). Still not really sure, I can't say if I lean one way or another.

No problem. I was going to just comment on the video about it, but I wanted to cite my sources and when I started looking I realized that I didn't really have a source, lol. Made me a bit concerned, so I figured a question on here was warranted.

[Brian VanAlstyne]

The other thing I noticed and I might be wrong, but doesn't Akiro's Favor need to be revealed before the dice are rolled if you want to use it?

[Zuberi]

The other thing I noticed and I might be wrong, but doesn't Akiro's Favor need to be revealed before the dice are rolled if you want to use it?

This was a recent topic of debate, with good arguments on both sides. The final decision, I believe, was that as long as it gets revealed before you apply the damage and effects you can reroll. It's not in the official documents yet, but I'll see if I can find the official statement and link to it.

Edit: I'm having trouble finding such a link. This issue may still be unresolved.

[DaveW]

A similar question could be related to something like Bear Strength, which normally only applies to a first attack. Could Bear Strength, for example, not be able to give a second creature +2 melee if already used before Shifted?

[Zuberi]

A similar question could be related to something like Bear Strength, which normally only applies to a first attack. Could Bear Strength, for example, not be able to give a second creature +2 melee if already used before Shifted?

Bear Strength is slightly different. It's not restricted to a limited number of uses per round, but rather instead it's restricted to a limited number of uses per attack action. Even without moving the enchantment, if a creature manages to melee attack in multiple attack actions during a round (such as with Counterstrikes) it will be allowed to use the bonus from Bear Strength on the first attack of each of those attack actions.

However, this just makes it harder to abuse and the comparison you make isn't at all without merit. What happens if you Double Strike with a creature, and between the two attacks you move Bear Strength off and then back onto the same creature? Depending on how the final ruling is worded for our previous questions, it could definitely end up applying to things like Bear Strength as well, and indeed we NEED an answer for things like Bear Strength as well. If the buff is tracked by the enchantment, then it should recognize that the ability has already been used this attack action and provide no benefit for moving it off and back on. It is considered the same bonus as it moves. However, if the buff is tracked by the creature, then it should be able to apply it to the second attack after such transfer shenanigans. Because, it isn't just moving the bonus around but rather the creature is losing the bonus and then gaining it anew.

This makes me even more inclined to support tracking the ability with the originating card rather than the target. Allowing these kinds of shenanigans to get extra uses out of a spell may open up abuse similar to what we once saw with Battle Fury. Yes, it's not quite as powerful as that because you have to use multiple enchantment transfusions, costing spell points, actions, and mana, so it might not actually warrant any fears, but we'd still want to be careful and test such concerns before writing them off.

It is of course possible to have both answers in the game, with some spells working one way and others working the other. We would need a good way to easily identify that such was the case though within the wording of their effects, and right now I can't think of what that could be.

[exid]

The other thing I noticed and I might be wrong, but doesn't Akiro's Favor need to be revealed before the dice are rolled if you want to use it?

This was a recent topic of debate, with good arguments on both sides. The final decision, I believe, was that as long as it gets revealed before you apply the damage and effects you can reroll. It's not in the official documents yet, but I'll see if I can find the official statement and link to it.

Edit: I'm having trouble finding such a link. This issue may still be unresolved.

we had no official statment on this point,

[jacksmack]

You opened up a box of mess zub

What happens when the creature with double strike has a bear strength on it.
After first strike the BS is ET away to another target. Then from a third target another BS is going back to the attacking creature.
Now strike 2 happens... will it benefit from the new BS that the creature never had on it before?


A creature can potentially benefit from the same Bear strength up to 12 times in a single round.

[Reddicediaries]

Just ask Laddin.