Reveal Magic

[Borg]

It seems to me that this card could soon become a staple in most books, often replacing Seeking Dispel especially because it is a range 2 Novice card and it costs zero mana to cast.

There is a line though that is not quite clear to me, so let me repeat the text here first :

" Peek at target hidden enchantment. Once reveal Magic has been cast, the enchantment cannot be revealed this round. If it is a mandatory enchantment, then it is not destroyed if it would be forced to be revealed this round"

Let me see if I understand all of this correctly.

Example 1 : I play Reveal Magic on a FD Nullify on an enemy mage, thereby neutralizing the Nullify, then I successfully Dissolve an Equipment piece on that Mage. Is that correct ?

The Nullify cannot be revealed anymore this round once Reveal Magic was played against it but stays in play and becomes "active" again at the start of the next round.

The sentence I find confusing though is : "If it is a mandatory enchantment, then it is not destroyed if it would be forced to be revealed this round"

Can someone give me an actual example of a mandatory enchantment that is forced to be revealed this round after a Reveal Magic was played on it earlier that round, but is not destroyed ?

[Puddnhead]

Your example is correct.  Reveal Magic would prevent the Nullify from countering your Dissolve and then the Nullify would remain on the opposing mage and be usable next round.

The issue is with a mandatory reveal who's trigger is met and the player forgets or "chooses not" to reveal it.  If it is discovered later that the enchantment was triggered and not revealed then it is destroyed without effect.

The reason for "it is not destroyed" on Reveal Magic is so that you can't actually kill the enchantment by triggering it this round after forcing it to stay hidden.

[Donovan]

Also if you have no mana to reveal the mandatory reveal, the card is destroyed.

With Reveal Magic, that card is not destroyed when it would need to be revealed, but may not be revealed due to RM.

[Borg]

The reason for "it is not destroyed" on Reveal Magic is so that you can't actually kill the enchantment by triggering it this round after forcing it to stay hidden.

OK, that makes sense now.
Thanks Puddnhead.

That leaves the part : " it is not destroyed if it would be forced to be revealed this round"
Can someone give me an example of that situation where you force a mandatory enchantment to be revealed after it's been hit by a reveal Magic and where it is not destroyed ?

[Halewijn]

Borg, you really are searching complexities that are not there. 

They just mean that mandatory enchantments will not be destroyed/revealed during this turn, even if you would trigger the "mandatory reveal condition" this round. It's just a sentence to make the card clear.

You give an example yourself:

Reveal magic + dissolve. Normally the dissolve would trigger the nullify, but with reveal magic, the opponent cannot reveal the nullify. He also does not have to destroy nullify. Normally he would have to destroy it after an incantation, even when the effect of nullify would not work.

edit: Technically, the sentence is unnecessary, but it's there to make things extra clear. You just get a bit confused searching for hidden meanings that are not there.

[bigfatchef]

All in all it is a very strong card and I agree it could advance to a standard or maybe staple card.
It gets hard to keep equipment safe now. You need nullify and arcane ward to stop a dissolve with reveal enchantment for example. (In one mage activation)

But with more and more of those tricky cards coming it gets even harder to guess whats coming. I like that growing diversity.

[Borg]

Technically, the sentence is unnecessary, but it's there to make things extra clear. You just get a bit confused searching for hidden meanings that are not there.

Must be my paranoia getting worse 

So actually what they are saying is :

"If it is a mandatory enchantment, it becomes inactive until the end of the round, it stays face-down and you cannot destroy it this round"

Correct ?

[Halewijn]

Well, you could still destroy it with seeking dispel or something like that but not by "having to reveal it". But I'm quite sure you understood that. 

[Donovan]

That leaves the part : " it is not destroyed if it would be forced to be revealed this round"
Can someone give me an example of that situation where you force a mandatory enchantment to be revealed after it's been hit by a reveal Magic and where it is not destroyed ?

I think that sentence was added to avoid people saying:

"Hey, now I play Dissolve, so your Nullify has to be revealed. But because of my Reveal Magic, you are not able to counter the Dissolve. But because you revealed it, it has to be destroyed."

So this just means: You peak at the enchantment (say Nullify) and then the enchantment cannot-become-active / cannot-be-revealed in that round any more - even if something would happen that would force it to reveal itself.