Yes, you must target something if able. If you don’t want to, spend your gold first!
3 Likes
Very good question, I’m also curious about the answer. I could understand both solutions, the controller or the owner receiving the bonus.
(Just replying to put a highlight on this still open question)
1 Like
Based on how the interaction of Spirit of the Panda and Assimilate was ruled, along with the existing rulings on Insurance Agent, I’m inclined to believe that Insurance Agent would still see its insured target after changing control and that the insurance payout would go to the current controller rather than the original owner.
2 Likes
That would be my thought as well, I would think there’s an implied “you gain gold…” in there. Runes don’t have an owner, so nothing in the game state would remember who originally placed it.
2 Likes
This is also why putting a flagbearer in Lookout can be a bad idea!
1 Like
Hey All! Interesting conversation going on in this game here:
The rules question is as follows:
Does Ready or Not affect only units which are exhausted as you cast Ready or Not? Or all units which are exhausted at the time of the opponents’ ready step during upkeep?
Why this is relevant has to do with indestructible units, like Hardened Mox or Immortal. In this case, @thehug0naut has killed one Immortal with his own Immortal, used Ready or Not to ready his Immortal, and killed another Immortal of @zango 's .
So the specific question is, does @zango 's second Immortal ready as normal during his ready step (as it was exhausted after Ready or Not was cast)? Or does it stay exhausted (as it is exhausted by the time the ready step happens)?
2 Likes
I’m inclined to think Ready or Not creates a persistent effect that changes how the ready steps are processed rather than disabling the exhausted units at the time of casting because the wording doesn’t include “disable” when it would be more concise to do so if it were applying the effect to individual units whereas it could not if applying the effect to ready steps.
5 Likes
That’s a great argument @Nekoatl , disabled is right there to use of it was intended to apply to units at the point in time, rather than affect the phase of the turn
1 Like
Well disable often involves exhausting ready units, which is not the intention of ready or not, so maybe the lack of the word disable may have another meaning, but either way. Especially with the ruling of ferocity I would put my money on the intention being the phase affection rather than the point in time affection.
Interesting question I just formed in observing this game:
- A unit has BOTH flying AND unstoppable (Liberty Gryphon w/ a Reteller of Truths as another illusion)
- Opponent has a patroller with Anti-Air (Leaping Lizard)
When the Gryphon attacks, does it take damage from the anti-air? It’s unstoppable and wouldn’t take damage from a flying patroller… 
2 Likes
No, it does not. I remember this being ruled on previously but can’t be bothered to track down where.
2 Likes
It’s in the original “common questions” post by Barrelfish:
3 Likes
Makes sense! Just the word “can” irritates me. Could he fly over Primus and receive the damage? This could be interesting in some cases to bring him back to hand with reteller to create another copy and attack in one turn with 3
or 4 gryphons.
1 Like
Thinking about it, it would be too strong. So this unstoppable ability must be automatically triggered.
I think this is a very fair question. I think the issue is with the text
“Flying over” means that you had to use the Flying ability specifically to avoid the patroller (emphasis added)
How does this square with a Stealth + Flying unit attacking the backline? Can it choose to take Anti-Air damage by flying over or is it forced to Stealth past patrollers so it won’t take damage?
Presumably at the point of dealing damage it is still considered both a Flying and Stealth unit for the purposes of combat damage from the target and (expended) Tower.
If there was a second patroller with a similar ability to Anti-Air, but that dealt damage to Stealthed bypassers (“Anti-Stealth”) what would happen? If a unti with this made up ability were at the same patrol depth as the Anti-Air patroller (i.e. both on Elite/Scav/Tech/Lookout) what would happen then when a Flying and Stealth unit tries to hit the backline?
Evasion abilities are never optional. With or without flying, you can’t “turn off” stealth, even if you have a reason to want to.
In your hypothetical, the anti-air patroller couldn’t damage it because it has stealth, and the anti-stealth patroller couldn’t damage it because it has flying. This is because anti-air damage only procs on a patroller that would have been an obstacle for the declared attack if the attacker didn’t have flying.
4 Likes
Ahh ok I think I was getting confused with the use of “can” and the example having the two abilities used separately (it makes sense why, just makes it harder to see the general case)
So if I’m understanding it right, the reason that Unstoppable takes precedent is precisely because it grants perfect evasion and is also “always on”.
When you go to attack with an Unstoppable Stealthy Flyer, there is no way opt out of using Unstoppable so you never get to use Flying or Stealth to evade the patrol zone and you only use those abilities for their effects on combat / Tower damage.
2 Likes
What happens if a unit/hero swiftly breaks a tower? I assume it does not receive the tower damage. Is that right?
From codexcarddb.com:
If the attacker has swift strike, the tower still deals combat damage simultaneously as the swift strike. If the attacker has long-range, the tower still deals it damage to the attacker. If the attacker has flying, the tower still hits it as if it had anti-air.
— Sirlin, 03/14/16
Since it deals its damage simultaneously, it’ll still happen even with the attacker breaking the tower.
2 Likes
I know you can sacrifice tech buildings and add-ons, during your turn, if you don’t want them, but what about building (cards) heroes or units?