November 22, 2024, 02:40:01 PM

Author Topic: possible card errors  (Read 11947 times)

Klaxas

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 1092
  • Banana Stickers 1
    • View Profile
possible card errors
« on: August 30, 2012, 07:20:34 AM »
was looking through my cards and i found a few things that may or may not be errors.  some of these may just be me being OCD though.

1) deckbuilting traits are supose to be in grey instead of black.  unique is always in grey but it technicly has no effect on deckbuilding it just limits how many you can have in play.  i noticed legendary is listed in black not grey.  one of these two is probibly wrong.

2) temple of asyra and lay hands say "epic - holy mage only" and divine intervention says "holy mage only - epic"  is epic always supose to be first? for consistancy?

3) Temple of light.  in the attack bar it says 9-10 Stun, 11+ Daze.  shouldnt it be the other way around because stun is better?  ie 9-10 Daze, 11+ Stun?

4) Posion Gas cloud.  is this supose to be zone exclusive?  or is the lack intentional.

5) animal types.  is a serpent supose to be an animal too?  what about a worm?  the stonegaze basalisk is a reptile, lizard (which seems the same thing to me) should that also be an animal?

6) Human types.  the royal archer is listed as a high elf, should the asyran cleric, brogan bloodstone, and knight of westlock be listed as human?  or are they also high elves?

7) Demonhide Armor.  should this have the barrier subtype, as it provides a damage barrier.  (I noticed circle of lightning has a barrier subtype because it provides a barrier)

ok thats all i can find for right now.  i eagerly await the reply to see which of these if any i am correct on.  i hope no one thinks im being picky, i am just trying to help make this game even better.  im sure any issues can be corrected in the second print run.

EDIT: Oops i think i should have put this in the questions area.... my apologies
Favorite Mage: The one I am using.

kamishev

  • New Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2012, 09:07:27 AM »
Wow nice finds. I look forward to see the answers :)

SeanDeCoy

  • Full Mage
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #2 on: August 30, 2012, 10:41:25 AM »
Thanks, Klaxas! I've contacted our rules mods and we'll be getting an answer to your shortly!

Gigan

  • Elder
  • Jr. Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 59
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #3 on: August 30, 2012, 10:49:39 AM »
1) Legendary means there can be only one in play at a time.  It is not for deckbuilding purposes.  You can have more than one in your spellbook.

From the codex on Unique:  "Each player may only have 1 copy of this object in play at a time. Similar to Legendary, but each player is allowed to have his own copy in play."

2) Yeah, this should probably be consistent, but it is minor.  :whistle:

3) I'll have 1unatic or Arcanus reply to this one.

4) No, this is not zone exclusive.  It is basically both a zone attack and a conjuration.  It is meant to be able to be used against living Conjurations as well as turtling mages.   :evil:

5) It is needed for possible future specific spells that would target either all reptiles or just lizards.

6) These were gameplay decisions that were purposefully made.

7) I'll have 1unatic or Arcanus reply to this one.

SeanDeCoy

  • Full Mage
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #4 on: August 30, 2012, 11:01:17 AM »
Just a heads up, I moved this to the rules forum. Some of our mods get auto-alerts whenever someone posts in their specific sub-forum of expertise, posting in the right forum gets you much much quicker responses!

SeanDeCoy

  • Full Mage
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #5 on: August 30, 2012, 12:05:58 PM »
Klaxas,

Checked with the rules team and these are their answers:

1)    deckbuilting traits are supose to be in grey instead of black. unique is always in grey but it technicly has no effect on deckbuilding it just limits how many you can have in play. i noticed legendary is listed in black not grey. one of these two is probibly wrong.
 
Answer:  The grey is a misprint. It should be “black” like the Legendary trait.

2) temple of asyra and lay hands say "epic - holy mage only" and divine intervention says "holy mage only - epic" is epic always supose to be first? for consistency?
 
Probably. The mistake was unintentional.

3) Temple of light. in the attack bar it says 9-10 Stun, 11+ Daze. shouldnt it be the other way around because stun is better? ie 9-10 Daze, 11+ Stun?
 
No.  This was not a mistake.  The Temple gets more powerful and adds more to the d12 roll as the Priestess gains temples in play. We did not want the chance for the STUN to increase as the attack gained power, just the Daze portion.

4) Posion Gas cloud. is this supose to be zone exclusive? or is the lack intentional.

No mistake.  This was intentional.  We wanted Poison Gas Cloud to be placed in other important zones, such as where a spawnpoint is, so each new creature would have to gain damage on it.
 
5) animal types. is a serpent supose to be an animal too? what about a worm? the stonegaze basalisk is a reptile, lizard (which seems the same thing to me) should that also be an animal?
 
No.  We thought that through very carefully.  In Mage Wars, “animal” is a special subtype which refers to typical creatures the Beastmaster might summon, such as forest/jungle mammals, and no “monsters” or “aberrations”.  Scientifically, the Stonegaze Basilisk might be an “animal”, but in Mage Wars we consider it more of a mythical monster, and not an animal the Beastmaster might use.

6) Human types. the royal archer is listed as a high elf, should the asyran cleric, brogan bloodstone, and knight of westlock be listed as human? or are they also high elves?
 
The Royal Archer is a High Elf, but the others listed are not.  They are “humans”, but we are not using the human subtype in Mage Wars.
 
Important:  In Mage Wars, the subtype is not a true “scientific classification” of creatures. It is used as a way to group spells we want to link to other spells and Mage abilities.  For example, we will have future Legendary High Elves which give bonuses to other High elves in the arena, or in their zone.
 
There are way too many humans (most humanoid creatures without a race subtype are human), and we did not feel it was necessary to clutter every card with a subtype we had no plans to use.  Note though that many “humanoids” have the Soldier subtype, which will be used for many special abilities of the coming Warlord!
 
7) Demonhide Armor. should this have the barrier subtype, as it provides a damage barrier. (I noticed circle of lightning has a barrier subtype because it provides a barrier)
 
The “barrier” subtype is being reserved for a series of enchantments, all of which have a beginning tile “Circle of…”.   In coming sets you will see a Circle of Wind which pushes creatures away, a Circle of Fire, and a Circle of Frost which freezes.

Hope this helps!!

Klaxas

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 1092
  • Banana Stickers 1
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #6 on: August 30, 2012, 02:05:49 PM »
1) Answer: The grey is a misprint. It should be “black” like the Legendary trait.

I thought so.  just something extreemly minor to add to the corrections for the reprint.
 
2)  Probably. The mistake was unintentional.

same as 1.
 
3) No. This was not a mistake. The Temple gets more powerful and adds more to the d12 roll as the Priestess gains temples in play. We did not want the chance for the STUN to increase as the attack gained power, just the Daze portion.

interesting.  i thought this might be the case but i figured i would mention it to be sure.
 
4) No mistake. This was intentional. We wanted Poison Gas Cloud to be placed in other important zones, such as where a spawnpoint is, so each new creature would have to gain damage on it.

awsome. since that means they can stack in a zone.  now if only the spell was available in the core spell tome.....

 5) No. We thought that through very carefully. In Mage Wars, “animal” is a special subtype which refers to typical creatures the Beastmaster might summon, such as forest/jungle mammals, and no “monsters” or “aberrations”. Scientifically, the Stonegaze Basilisk might be an “animal”, but in Mage Wars we consider it more of a mythical monster, and not an animal the Beastmaster might use.

i also figured this might be the case but i wanted to check
 
6) The Royal Archer is a High Elf, but the others listed are not. They are “humans”, but we are not using the human subtype in Mage Wars.

well the main reason i wanted to ask this is the wizard is listed with a human subtype....

 Important: In Mage Wars, the subtype is not a true “scientific classification” of creatures. It is used as a way to group spells we want to link to other spells and Mage abilities. For example, we will have future Legendary High Elves which give bonuses to other High elves in the arena, or in their zone.

ohhhhh sounds awsome.

There are way too many humans (most humanoid creatures without a race subtype are human), and we did not feel it was necessary to clutter every card with a subtype we had no plans to use. Note though that many “humanoids” have the Soldier subtype, which will be used for many special abilities of the coming Warlord!

again cant wait to try this! almost as excited for the warlord as i am for the forcemaster.

 7) The “barrier” subtype is being reserved for a series of enchantments, all of which have a beginning tile “Circle of…”. In coming sets you will see a Circle of Wind which pushes creatures away, a Circle of Fire, and a Circle of Frost which freezes.
 
hmmmm while i understand those enchantments would have the barrier subtype, i dont see why that would exclude the armor from also having it. but i respect the decision.  and cant wait for the new stuff.  november and the expansion cant get here fast enough.
Favorite Mage: The one I am using.

Mestrahd

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 0
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #7 on: August 30, 2012, 02:35:47 PM »
September and the GAME can't get here fast enough! Not all of us went to GenCon.

Klaxas

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 1092
  • Banana Stickers 1
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #8 on: August 30, 2012, 03:44:40 PM »
true, i wish everyone had a copy, i need more opponents.  but wouldnt you rather all these issues be resolved and confirmed before you know?
Favorite Mage: The one I am using.

Scarob

  • New Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 41
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2012, 11:10:42 AM »
Bizarrely at this stage I'm more interested in getting my own copy rather than having a copy with minor details sorted out  XD...I just want my copy soo badly

Quote from: "Klaxas" post=871
true, i wish everyone had a copy, i need more opponents.  but wouldnt you rather all these issues be resolved and confirmed before you know?

Oneig Atyff

  • New Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2012, 02:51:12 PM »
Quote
3) Temple of light. in the attack bar it says 9-10 Stun, 11+ Daze. shouldnt it be the other way around because stun is better? ie 9-10 Daze, 11+ Stun?

No. This was not a mistake. The Temple gets more powerful and adds more to the d12 roll as the Priestess gains temples in play. We did not want the chance for the STUN to increase as the attack gained power, just the Daze portion.


I don't really understand...
Does the result of the attack dices are counting with the D12 dice ?
The way you telling may be think of it.
"The Temple gets more powerful as the Priestess gains temples in play"
Ok if they have one temple the temple make 1 dice damage, if they have 4 temples it make 4 dices that's ok... but how it could "adds more to the d12 roll" this way ?

If I check the rulebook it's say :

Add or subtract all of these modifiers from the number of
dice listed in the attack bar.


okay for example the way I understand it is if you cast a fireball on a creature you will roll 8 red dices, but if the creature have flame - 2 you will subtract that, so roll only 6 dices.

Roll a number of dice equal to
the final, modified attack value.


Okay its clear I roll two 0 one critical 1 one 2 and two critical 2, yeah I'm pretty lucky today :)
So the creature will take 3 damage and 2 more damage minus it's armor.

If the attack has any possible
additional effects listed in the attack bar (always shown as
an additional effect box with a d12 icon), also roll the effect
die at the same time,


Ho yes it was a fireball after all, it could have burn the creature !
So I roll my D12 dice and make 11 It's a 2 burn !

and add or subtract any modifiers to
that roll.


Too bad, the creature have flame - 2 so it's only make 9 and a single burn.

That's how we playing actually, did it's right ? Did I have to my 5 damage to the D12 and make a 14 ? I this case if the creature have 2 armor did the 2 single damage count on the D12 result or not ?

FantasyTrope

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2012, 06:57:36 PM »
Quote from: "Oneig Atyff" post=4980

I don't really understand...
Does the result of the attack dices are counting with the D12 dice ?
The way you telling may be think of it.
"The Temple gets more powerful as the Priestess gains temples in play"
Ok if they have one temple the temple make 1 dice damage, if they have 4 temples it make 4 dices that's ok... but how it could "adds more to the d12 roll" this way ?

If I check the rulebook it's say :

Add or subtract all of these modifiers from the number of
dice listed in the attack bar.


okay for example the way I understand it is if you cast a fireball on a creature you will roll 8 red dices, but if the creature have flame - 2 you will subtract that, so roll only 6 dices.

Roll a number of dice equal to
the final, modified attack value.


Okay its clear I roll two 0 one critical 1 one 2 and two critical 2, yeah I'm pretty lucky today :)
So the creature will take 3 damage and 2 more damage minus it's armor.

If the attack has any possible
additional effects listed in the attack bar (always shown as
an additional effect box with a d12 icon), also roll the effect
die at the same time,


Ho yes it was a fireball after all, it could have burn the creature !
So I roll my D12 dice and make 11 It's a 2 burn !

and add or subtract any modifiers to
that roll.


Too bad, the creature have flame - 2 so it's only make 9 and a single burn.

That's how we playing actually, did it's right ? Did I have to my 5 damage to the D12 and make a 14 ? I this case if the creature have 2 armor did the 2 single damage count on the D12 result or not ?


The flame -2 only modifies how many red attack dice you roll. Any modification +/- to the yellow effect die will be clearly stated on the card(s) in question.

So the temple of light gets +1 on the yellow effect die roll for each other temple in play (I think) meaning it is always 2 outcomes (9-10, then 8-9, then 7-8 etc.) which result in a stun, but the number of outcomes that daze increases with each additional temple in play. (11+, then 10+, then 9+ etc.)

Hedge

  • Full Mage
  • ***
  • Posts: 174
  • Banana Stickers 1
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #12 on: December 05, 2012, 11:14:11 PM »
flame -2 certainly reduces the effect die,d12. melee and ranged modifiers to attack dice don't unless it states as much, like the temple of light.

Klaxas

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 1092
  • Banana Stickers 1
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #13 on: December 06, 2012, 05:33:38 AM »
agreed flame -2 (or flame +2) do add to the D12 roll.  however Melee +1 does not add to the D12 roll.
Favorite Mage: The one I am using.

Oneig Atyff

  • New Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: possible card errors
« Reply #14 on: December 06, 2012, 05:44:14 AM »
Ok thank you I understand now. :)