I’ve always interpreted it the first way. I see how you could read it the second way, but if that was the intended interpretation then Sirlin probably would have phrased it more explicitly (“same tech level or less and same cost or less”).
I think “less” must refer to cost only, in this case. When comparing costs, one is “less” or “more” than the other; when comparing tech levels, one is “higher” or “lower” than the other. For example, Circle of Life allows you to replace a card with one that’s “one tech higher”, not “one tech more”. If the second interpretation was intended, it would be “a unit of the same tech level or lower and the same cost or less”.
1 Like
If Rook with two lives is patrolling:
- Does he leave the patrol zone when he’s “killed” the first time?
- Does he hit back if he’s “killed” by a unit with swift strike?
No and yes.
1 Like
Fading’s reminder text is:
Fading 3 (Arrives with three time runes. Remove one each upkeep. When you remove the last, sacrifice this.)
Is the official rulebook version different? If not:
Does “you means you” apply to Fading? i.e. if I play a Seer and remove the last rune from an opponent’s Fading unit, does the unit get sacrificed?
Wow, that would be weird. I’d like to suggest the last sentence be Errata’s to “When the last time rune is removed, sacrifice this.”
1 Like
Does the Heroes Hall work immediately, or must you wait until next turn to gain an additional hero? If you have to wait, then why is it so expensive? It seems like you are always better off building a tech building instead?
Addons finish building at the end of your turn, so you will indeed have to wait.
Heroes’ Hall is usually built by aggro specs who want to close out the game before it gets to tech2 when a second hero usually becomes available.
It is also used to enably early inter-hero spell combos like Bird’s Nest + Two Step or Metamorphosis + any second hero.
I know I pointed out that in 2HD, Seer, Timkerer and Time Spiral can be used to keep your partner’s Fading cards from ever triggering the sacrifice clause of fading months ago.
Clarification: Does the player who plays Thieving Imp get to see the card that was discarded?
1 Like
No they don’t. The card moves from a hidden zone (the opponent’s hand) to another hidden zone (the opponent’s discard), and therefore remains hidden.
1 Like
Today i played for the first time ever Pirate gunship.(yay me :D)
My opponent had mox, and as i recalled correctly (since i re read ths topic) obliterate ovelooks mox.
He asked me why, but aside from the usual explanation, i could not give him a logic answer.
This is what i said to him:
[quote]GG. for simplicity consider that obliterate is “Sacrifice the opponent
unit of the lowest tech with the lowest attack”. Mox cannot be
sacrificed or killed. Obliterate requires killing, so since mox cannot
die, it gets overlooked by the effect, like for sac the weak (if u have
only mox and idk, argo on the field sac the weak will kill argo).
Remember that in case of doubts u can also ask in the rules thread.[/quote]
Can someone clarify the obliterate/indestruct interaction to me too? i always explain it as a sacrifice. ?__?
prob is, that if mox is already exausted, is like wasting an obliterate, and that would imho make indistructible stuff op. Also on the old forums the rule where clarified as in this one: Obliterate is killing, whatever can’t be killed get “skipped”. Is that right atm?
Except that I think targeted effects were still allowed to “kill” indestructible units to exhaust / sideline them.
well, let’s just give the short answer, imo:
AFAIK @sharpobject said that obliterate skips indestructibles, sharpobj can make rules, hence until an errata/clarification is made, this rule stand.
Right or not?
I thought @sharpobject had added it to the rulings document, but no, I didn’t see it.
Changing the word destroy to sacrifice fixes all the confusion for all the cards which currently say “destroy lowest tech unit”.
Blackhand Dozer, Death Rites, Hooded Executioner, and anything with Obliterate should all work the same as Sacrifice the Weak. The only functional change would be that Pestering Haunt would also get skipped, not just the indetructible stuff.
I would also like to submit that blackhand dozer should work the same for consistency with Death Rites, which is textually the same effect as what blackhand dozer does.
Targeting an indestructible thing is allowed, yes, whether it destroys them or not. Obliterate does not target.
2 Likes
Yes, @sharpobject has clarified that this is how it works, and yes, he makes official rulings, so yes this is the rule atm.
1 Like
Say I have a Gargoyle and I maxband Vandy, targeting that same Gargoyle. I activate the Gargoyle. I now have 2 triggers that would seem to both happen at my next upkeep; one that kills the Gargoyle and one that makes it indestructable. What happens?
1 Like
Technically, they don’t happen at the same time. Gargoyle only lasts until your next upkeep, whereas Vandy happens at your next upkeep. So the gargoyle becomes indestructible, and then Vandy exhausts it.
To be more precise, both effects happen during ur upkeep. So is the turn player (AKA you) who got to decide if gargoyle dies (masochism) or gets indestructible before vandy maxb causes its death