News Shop
Events Forums

Rules Questions thread


#2979

I wanted to clarify here, if I Sacrifice the Weak with nothing on board but a ready (but unactivated) Gargoyle (or anything that’s Indestructible) , does anything happen to the Gargoyle? I really don’t want to get it exhausted :slight_smile:

See here for specifics


#2980

Indestructible includes immune to sacrifice in its definition. It wouldn’t make sense for a sacrifice weakest effect to exhaust each thing it skips that can’t be sacrificed while looking for something that can.


#2981

Correct gargoyle is simply skipped.


#2982

How do I do a play-by-post of this game? I’m just curious. One more thing: do I need the actual cards to play over the forum?


#2983

You don’t need the cards to play on this forum. Please reference the collected resources thread for advice on playing by the forum and several tools to help the process.


#2984

I think there are. First, on page 2 of the Rulebook, the codex is defined as “2 copies of 12 different cards” and “In the 3-hero… you’ll have 3 times as many”, so the starter cards are not included in this definition. Second, on page 17, “Do As Much As You Can” states that if part of a card’s instructions can’t be followed, they’re skipped.

The word return means to reenter a state or location previously held. Since tech 0 cards were never technically part of a codex, it’s technically impossible for one to return to a codex, and therefore that part of the text should be skipped, per rules as written.


#2986

I understand that part of the rulebook on page 2 to be instructions about the starting zones of all the cards, not restrictions on which cards can go to which zones.

About “return”, I would expect Undo to be able to move units to the owner’s hand even if they have never been there.

(replaced a mostly identical other post with a post that properly replies to Nekoatl)


#2987

True, in the case of Undo and similar effects, whether or not a given unit had previously been in hand wouldn’t even always be public knowledge, so practically speaking, it can’t be used as a determining factor in how the spell functions. For consistency, then, treating “return to” as synonymous with “move to” is necessary. So, it all boils down to a matter of interpretation of the codex definition.


#2988

Hi, two questions that came up today:

  1. Pretty sure I know the answer to this one, but Reputable Newsman looks at the printed cost of the card, right? So e.g. if I name “3”, it will not block something of cost 2 targeting one of my units with resist 1, right?

  2. Here’s a weirder one – does Graveyard affect units you control that die or units you own that die? Normally “your units” means “units you control”, so I’m guessing it’s probably that, but that seems a bit unintuitive, so I figured I’d ask. (E.g., in the actual case in-game, I considered playing my Graveyard so that when the Glorious Ninja I’d Kidnapped died, it would go to my Graveyard – from which I wouldn’t be able to play it, not being specced into Ninjitsu, but at least could deny it to my opponent.)

Thanks!


#2989
  1. Correct, Resist doesn’t modify a spell’s cost, it just requires an additional payment.
  2. Units you control. “Whenever an effect doesn’t specify owner or controller, it means controller.” (p. 18)

#2990

When Maximum Anarchy destroys Scavenger/Technician patrollers, does Zane’s midband ability trigger? In other words, is Zane considered to be the killer because he’s the one casting the spell?


#2991

I suspect no, for the same reason why casting Scorch wouldn’t gain you that gold. Zane has to be doing the attacking.

And I just found the ruling:
“Zane’s middle ability requires ZANE to kill a scavenger or technician to get a bonus. If Zane himself kills them in combat or if Zane uses the damage from his max level ability, that counts. If another unit or hero kills them, or if Zane uses a spell to kill them, that does not count.”


#2992

Source? It is correct, I’m just curious who you attribute the quote to.


#2993

http://codexcarddb.com/card/captain_zane

First ruling on this page, comes from Sirlin.


#2994

Yeah it’s in the big rules document.


Bloodburn , Spore shambler
#2996

What happens when I use Injunction on my opponent’s Tech I, and then attack / destroy it?

Can I even attack it?

Can he rebuild it his next turn?


#2997

Disabling a unit or hero doesn’t make them unattackable, and I see no reason why disabling a building would make it unattackable. The spell disables the matching units directly, so I see no reason why they would stop being disabled if the building is destroyed.

I can see arguments both for and against being allowed to rebuild the tech building, which basically boil down to whether or not a rebuilt tech building is the same tech building as the one that’s destroyed. If the tech building retains its identity, then it seems to me that being disabled would prevent it from being rebuilt, but if each rebuilt tech building is a new building, then it seems there’d be nothing to prevent the player from building a new one. The fact that rebuilt tech buildings have a memory of their previous incarnations (in that they don’t require gold to rebuild and retain the spec choice in the case of Tech II) suggests to me that they are the same building, and should retain their disabled status. But, I think this calls for a ruling from @sharpobject.


#2998

I will agree on the asking for a ruling, but personally I see no reason why disabling a building would mean you can not rebuild it. If a hero was disabled and then Origin Storied, or a disabled unit bounced, then you could replay them, so why not a building?


#2999

Yes you can attack it.
Yes he can rebuild it.


#3000

Heroes and units are “cards” though. There are specific rules about cards leaving play area, i.e. “Cards have no memory”.

Tech buildings / Tech levels are not cards. Card-specific rules don’t necessary apply to them.

I.e. I can see logic behind
“Injunction makes inoperable not just Tech I building, but “Tech I” as a whole. You cannot do anything related to Tech I building at all while Injunction effect is active”.

Also please stop trying to draw parallels between “Disabling” units/heroes and “Disabling” Tech building via Injunction. Injunction makes building “not operational”, as clarified by italic text. It’s unique mechanic.

Yeah, I’d love to see @sharpobject 's take on this =\

I also suppose that a player can rebuild Injunctioned and destroyed Tech building, but not for reasons you state. Rather, for a reason that disabling a Tech building for two turns in a row with a single attack is probably too powerful.