Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41

Thread: LF Official word on procedure and timing or triggered effects and Resolving Damage

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    340

    Default

    Ok, so let's say a Seaside Raven attacks a living doll, which deals three wounds to it, which then in turn deals the final three to Saria, who then uses Sympathy Pain to do the final three to Jessa. Saria would win in this instance, just because it's her turn??!!!?

    You need to relook at this with Isaac. If you really want this game to be competitive, you need to stop taking the easy way out and make a decision. If Saria is allowed to play Sympathy Pain, it should be a draw. If she isn't, then she should lose. It's that simple.

    People don't want to play a game with bs rulings. This, alongside Transfering wounds to ready spells when the rule book never allows for it, make two already. Good luck attracting new competitive players with this type of stuff.
    Orc.....Elf.....Army.....One
    OrcElfArmyOne on Heroscapers, iOS, and Vassal as well.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    29

    Default

    I'm fine with using transfer to place wounds onto Ready Spells, but I'm not fine with this not being a draw. Currently the rules state that a Phoenixborn is destroyed. Destruction is considered a game effect in Ashes, and players decide how game effects trigger. A game should not give one player the ability to decide the winner. If anything this should be changed so that players lose when wounds are placed. This step is simultaneous and on damage triggers could go off as they normally would.

  3. #13
    killercactus is offline SW App Champion Summer 2015, but still do what he says.
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,309

    Default

    FWIW, I disagree with you guys pretty hard. The "active player / same time" rule is a very elegant way to resolve these types of timing disputes. Without it, you need a FAQ or errata for every same time situation in the game. In an expandable card game that will have thousands of card interactions, this really saves a lot of headache. It's worked very well for Summoner Wars, which has cards that get into this exact situation by the way.

    The only other thing out there that could be done is a rule / faq that says in two Phoenixborn ever die simultaneously, the game is a draw, but I don't see that as necessary at all.
    Latest Customs - KC's Customs

    I need to update this signature. While I do that, go listen to A Doug's Guide to Summoner Wars - the podcast!

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    340

    Default

    It's not that hard to just make it a draw.

    Fwiw, I thought PHG was going to try to make Ashes a competitive game. Have you ever considered that maybe these type of rulings are part of the problem and preventing SW from being a competitive game?

    I, for one, hope this game does not follow the same path to the same fate as SW. SW is a great game with no real competitive scene. Not having this a draw will alienate some players.
    Orc.....Elf.....Army.....One
    OrcElfArmyOne on Heroscapers, iOS, and Vassal as well.

  5. #15
    killercactus is offline SW App Champion Summer 2015, but still do what he says.
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,309

    Default

    I think what kept SW from being a competitive game was the lack of tournament prize support and an organized play system. I think Ashes will meet a similar fate unless there's exclusive content for winning tournaments or something more than PHG credit.

    But, that's just my opinion. Timing of actions isn't going to stop anyone from playing competitively. The answer is that both players should realize the situation and, if the Saria player gets themselves into that situation, they deserve to win.
    Latest Customs - KC's Customs

    I need to update this signature. While I do that, go listen to A Doug's Guide to Summoner Wars - the podcast!

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,429

    Default

    I think what kept SW from being a competitive game was the lack of tournament prize support and an organized play system.
    I partially agree, i think the other half was definitely how the game degenerates at higher level, and the lack of a presentation in part of PHG where they would show they would support such community and what they would do to support it.
    And it needs a bigger sell, because the dice made a lot of competitive players think it was a game not meant to be taken seriously. Itīs hard to sell the dice.

    But I agree its not the ruling, while WOTC eventually improved the rulings a lot, initially the rules of Magic were horrible, and didnt stop the game to take off.
    Lack and no promise of pc version, didnt help a bit.
    Last edited by Waterd; 08-10-2015 at 12:54 PM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orcelfarmyone View Post
    It's not that hard to just make it a draw.

    Fwiw, I thought PHG was going to try to make Ashes a competitive game. Have you ever considered that maybe these type of rulings are part of the problem and preventing SW from being a competitive game?

    I, for one, hope this game does not follow the same path to the same fate as SW. SW is a great game with no real competitive scene. Not having this a draw will alienate some players.
    I have to disagree, I think they made the correct ruling.

    Draws are an unsatisfying way to finish a game as opposed to winning or losing. Any card that encourages playing for the draw is bad for competitive play.

    Allowing Sympathy Pain to work the way you want would make the card too powerful. There would be no reason not to include 3 in every deck. It becomes an I can't lose close games card. You could not win when playing against SP unless you had 4 or more life left. That would be a really bad idea.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Ok, so let's say a Seaside Raven attacks a living doll, which deals three wounds to it, which then in turn deals the final three to Saria, who then uses Sympathy Pain to do the final three to Jessa. Saria would win in this instance, just because it's her turn??!!!?
    Sorry to go off the current topic, but I wanted to confirm something about the above example. Since wounds haven't been placed at the time that Sympathy Pain was activated, Jessa would be able to use Redirect to place the counters on her doll even though it has already received enough damage to kill it. The active player can't destroy the doll from the damage until after all triggers have completed and the wounds are placed, right?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tacullu64 View Post
    I have to disagree, I think they made the correct ruling.

    Draws are an unsatisfying way to finish a game as opposed to winning or losing. Any card that encourages playing for the draw is bad for competitive play.

    Allowing Sympathy Pain to work the way you want would make the card too powerful. There would be no reason not to include 3 in every deck. It becomes an I can't lose close games card. You could not win when playing against SP unless you had 4 or more life left. That would be a really bad idea.
    I'm not saying I want it to be ruled a draw. I'm saying that it was extremely dissatisfiying and discouraging for my dad when he lost to this ruling. It shouldn't matter who's turn it is.

    Imo you shouldn't be able to play Sympathy Pain in this instance, making it a loss for them. Either way, I think they should make a stand and rule it one way or the other. No other competitive game puts it up to the player whose turn it is, they create rulings to deal with the complex interactions.
    Orc.....Elf.....Army.....One
    OrcElfArmyOne on Heroscapers, iOS, and Vassal as well.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Vickery, OH
    Posts
    153

    Default

    I just want to say that this is not just a ruling, it was a design choice. Both of the issues discussed here were discovered over a year ago during the process.

    After much thought and debate it was decided that much more design space was left open if transfer moved any token from any card to any other card. There may be cards in the future that can make use of them, or that are harmed by them (living spell that has wounds and can be destroyed by damage?).

    The simultainious destruction also came up over a year ago. It was decided that the active player winning did at least 3 positive things for the game.
    1) A game never ends in a draw. Many players are very put off by any game that allows for a draw, and in fact many consider chess's largest flaw to be stalemates. With destruction being an effect and the active player deciding the order in which they resolve, a game of Ashes will never end in a draw.
    2) Action is incentivised. Since most of your actions are taken on your own turn, you are encouraged to take action rather than respond, since mutual destruction happens most often after action is taken. This means that if a chain happens as a result of actions you took on your turn that result in simultainious destruction, you are rewarded for that action rather than penalized for it.
    3) It makes the rules easier, more elegant, and more streamlined. Obiviously game play should not be sacrificed just to make the game easier, but combined with the 2 points above, designing the rules in a way that is easy to explain and adjudicate lowers the barrier of entry for players, and leaves far fewer questions about how things work in the end.
    Last edited by Phuzzworthy; 08-10-2015 at 10:30 PM.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •