fwiw (and I’m aware this is irrelevant to a lot of players), this is the same as in MtG. Briar Patch has a triggered ability that happens when you are attacked, so it has to specify a duration to get the -1/-0 to end. Watchdog does not have a triggered ability, its -1/-0 just stops applying to a creature once that creature stops attacking you.
My thought process was considering the (add-on building) tower. Tower seems like it works similar to D.Alpha in that its something triggering/occurring/etc during the attacking process. Tower damage (as I’ve been playing it) is permanent. I haven’t been removing the damage dealt by the Tower at the end of the attack (if the attacking unit lived) so I didn’t see why I would return the 1 attack power lost either.
This continually confuses me. Its difficult to refer to another game, unless the two games share the same rules (which I think would make them the same game). I don’t know much about those cards, or rules of that other game, nor am I interested in the “that rule applies, this one doesn’t, that one doesn’t, obviously that one does, etc”. Its very confusing to try to go learn about another game to understand this one.
I’m pretty new at Codex, so trying to learn it is complicated enough.
If he’s referencing MtG, just ignore it. He’s not saying you need to use that as a reference, he’s just making a comparison for people who have played both to relate to.
3 Likes
I also considered the wording of Safe Attacking, which clearly states when the altered attribute is returned to its unaltered state. This wording is nowhere to be found on De.Alpha.
Unfortunately the tower doesn’t really work like anything else in the game.
The part of the tower’s abilities that work during your opponent’s turn are something like this: “The first unit or hero with stealth or invisible that attacks you each turn cannot use its stealth or invisibility to bypass any patrollers. Tower deals 1 combat damage to each attacker at the same time as the attacker deals combat damage. Tower does not deal any damage to attackers with stealth or invisibility beyond the first each turn.” Instead of reading all that stuff, you could read a different bunch of stuff that says the same thing at Codex Card Database | Tower
3 Likes
Coiser, I don’t think anyone here is trying to insult you. Sharpo comes off a bit blunt sometimes, but he’s been doing that for years. It’s just how he talks.
Now, I want to encourage you to relax and understand that this game is imperfect, and not all the internal logic is consistent. But that’s ok, a lot of things aren’t internally consistent. It can be confusing, and I definitely understand that.
Asking questions here is great, it’s a good way to find out the answers to stuff, and even for other people to sometimes realise how they’ve been playing things wrong.
However, sharpobject is the official rules guy for Codex. He says what the rules are and what the rules aren’t. Sometimes they’re really confusing and he doesn’t like them, but he tries to make the best rules based on Sirlin’s intentions.
So I encourage you to accept that what he says is “right”, even if it isn’t the same path of logic you might’ve used. It’s ok to clarify, but to argue is… well, pointless.
But most of all, I encourage you to remember that at the end of the day, this is just a game with complex rules. It’s ok to not understand, it’s ok to be wrong, and that we’re just here to have fun.
Please, enjoy yourself here. Codex is fun. It just takes time to get used to.
9 Likes
I thought the atk/hp modifications rule was as easy as being always temporary except when the atk/hp modification is said to be by runes.
Put -1/1 rune. Always permanent.
Get -1/1. Always dependent. (Eg Abomination)
Is there any card that would contradict wih this simplification?
1 Like
That should also work. I guess my post was unnecessarily confusing because it included an ability that granted a buff permanently but had no way of tracking it, and the game doesn’t include anything like that.
2 Likes
@Coiser: consider debilitator alpha’s effect like a reverse frenzy, that takes place as long DA is in SQL and units are targeting it. So if an invisible/stealth/unstoppable attacks something else the atk does not drop.
2 Likes
The best argument for it not to be permanent is that the game has no way to track -1/-0s. If it were intended to be permanent, the game would have included some way to do that.
I have played MTG before, and quite extensively, and I can definitely say that “When” in that game indicates a triggered ability. You will note that the above Watchdog card is written “As long as” and not “when”. If we are applying MTG rules, then that would be a point in favor of Debilitator being permanent.
“As long as” is definitely time sensitive wording. “While” is also time sensitive wording. “When” does not have the same connotation as either of those two other words/phrases. “When” is a one time and done word.
My understanding of MTG rules and the constant “In MTG it works like this” are part of the reason I get the Codex rules wrong, because Codex doesn’t work like MTG as often as it does.
One thing MTG certainly gets right is templating, I think it wouldn’t hurt to come behind after the fact and add some templating to be applied to future print runs of the physical cards, to the tabletopia version, and to the CodexDB. It shouldn’t take that many hours and it would pay a lot of dividends down the road as people are less confused about how things are supposed to work.
The above is not a “plain language” thing either. Both “When” and “As long as” are plain language words.
2 Likes
Based on the De.Alpha discussion, I clearly do not understand this game.
Does anyone have an order of operation for how an attack works?
I found this:
At the time the attack declaration is made, Steam Tank (and Rambaster) are not getting the attack bonus from their own ability, so Behind the Ferns might give them Stealth (depending on what other bonus are in place). When damage is dealt, they do have their attack bonus, so they will not have stealth, but that only matters in the case of a tower that has already detected something being able to damage them.
But otherwise cannot find much written about what an attack is, or what occurs/triggers/begins taking effect during an attack. I’ve learned not to say what I think it is, (as that apparently comes across as arguing?) so all I can say is that I feel that quoted statement is either incorrect, or incomplete.
The most basic question:
What are the steps to take on your turn just to ‘attack (something)’? As in just to ‘start an attack’, what steps do you follow?
The more advanced question:
What are all the steps followed, to take an attack from start to finish?
My response to that would be:
Under no circumstances would I say some of the things people have said to me, unless my intention was to insult them.
I’m confused soul stone and spirit of panda both say attach to unit so why would u be able to play these spells with no units in play.
Because technically you can play spells without having legal targets for them. The issue is “what then happens with an ongoing spell that usually leaves play only when the thing it’s attached to is destroyed or on a specific triggered event.”
I think the simplest fix would be a clarification on all the “attach to” spells that say “if there are no legal targets, this is discarded immediately after it is played” or something.
2 Likes
There’s a detailed writeup of how combat works in this post, which should hopefully help.
As a general comment, I think Codex is one of those games where it is better to learn in stages, rather than trying to understand every rules detail before you start. Read the starter rulebook, and play a couple starter games to get the basic flow down. Then read the full rulebook and start playing 3 vs. 3 games. Refer to the codex db and the FAQs on this thread when you are considering a play and want to know if / how it would work.
It might feel like you don’t really understand the rules if you can’t derive every interaction, but my advice would be to not let that feeling keep you from getting started with the game. There are a lot of detailed interactions that you could in theory learn, but the majority of them are vanishingly rare. For the most part it’s wasted effort to figure out e.g. what happens when you play an attachment wihtout a legal target, because the game situation where you would want to spend your gold on that is extremely unlikely to come up
5 Likes
Here are the attack steps between two units with no abilities on an otherwise empty board.
- Choose a ready unit that did not arrive or come under your control this turn.
- Exhaust it, and declare a legal target of its attack. For example, if the opponent’s unit is in their patrol zone, I must declare that unit as my target.
- Attacker and defender simultaneously deal their attack value to the other in damage counters. Damage is prevented by any points of armour either may have first.
- If damage exceeds a unit’s HP value, it is moved to its owner’s discard pile.
- The attack is now over.
This basic set of steps is modified by countless theoretical factors. In order to understand how, best bet is reading the card and any clarifications made on codexcarddb.com.
That said, nothing is going to help you better understand why Devilitator Alpha’s effect doesn’t persist. That’s just how that card works. There’s no rules text or philosophical underpinning to refer to; it’s just not written as clearly as it could be.
2 Likes
By the way, I sympathize with your frustrations regarding Codex. I’ve definitely felt the feeling of “how can i play this game if I’m constantly second guessing whether I have correctly assessed how [Card X] works?”
What helped me was that I love playing the game so much that I’m okay with putting up with getting cards wrong and then later correcting my understanding later. codexcarddb.com is really helpful for that. I’ve been looking for “something like MtG that is more fun, more rewarding, and less expensive” for so long that the learning curve and occasional confusion about the rules is worth it.
If you’re unsure about spending any amount of money or effort on the game, that’s not going to mean anything, of course. If you’re interested in played for free, I’d happily set up a game on Tabletopia with you some time. It can help significantly to play with someone who’s familiar with the rules and you can just ask questions right in the moment.
4 Likes
Thanks for your comments mysticjuicer.
Can you please help me understand at what stage of this process an attack ‘begins’? There are a few cards related to this topic; I’ll talk about Stalking Tiger (and its ability to have Stealth).
If he’s not attacking a unit then he doesn’t have stealth. If he’s attacking a unit, then he has stealth. Easy
Main phase - Tiger does not have stealth
I want my Tiger to attack a non-patrolling unit, lets say its an exhausted Tenderfoot.
There are patrollers
Tiger does not have stealth, so I have attack taunt if able, or another patroller if able. Lets say they have older brother as squad leader. I have to attack squad leader, as Tiger is not attacking, and therefore does not have stealth.
I attack squad leader. Tiger now is ‘attacking’ and therefore has stealth (but the ability is kind of ‘wasted’).
This doesn’t seem right.
So there must be some situation where the Tiger has stealth when he is not attacking in order for me to be able to ‘effectively’ use its ability, while also declaring a ‘legal attack’.
How can we write a set of steps for the ‘steps of starting an attack’ in a logical fashion to where the Tiger can attack Tenderfoot?
My idea is to allow any ‘attack to be declared’, then, apply all attack modifiers (like tiger gaining stealth if attacking a unit), and then go back and perform the ‘is this attack legal’ process. I’m trying to list out what else this ‘messes up’, but it at least fixes the ‘declaring an illegal attack, and then gaining abilities that make it legal’.
Other cards are worded similarly, where they gain abilities while attacking, but need those abilities in order to attack.
Any thoughts?
3 Likes
I have no issue with this, which is why I keep asking about particular cards, to see if they work as written, or if there is another interpretation being used which I don’t see in the card database. (As best I can tell I haven’t recently asked a question that is clearly answered in the database or ability/card rules log. I try to review it prior to asking each question. Please forgive me if I ask something clearly answered there!)
2 Likes