infinity wars game Community Forums

Infinity Wars => News and Developer Talk => Game Rules => Topic started by: Vyr1s on February 24, 2013, 10:01:57 PM

Title: Card rules vs card rules
Post by: Vyr1s on February 24, 2013, 10:01:57 PM
How is precedence determined with conflicting card rules?

Paladin of the Flame Dawn vs Mass Death (Paladin survives)
Call of the Crusade vs Shrine of Victory (cards are moved temporarily)

Seems currently its a mix, scenario one the specific card ability outweighs the global, while is scenario two the global outweighs the specific card rules.
Title: Re: Card rules vs card rules
Post by: Teremus on February 24, 2013, 10:42:44 PM
Paladin and mass death is an intended effect. There is no conflict here. Mass Death targets everything on the battlefield and kills it, paladin cannot be killed by such effects.

Call of the Crusade and Shrine of Victory is also a matter of no conflict once I explain it. You cannot manually move the tokens. They can be forcibly moved however.
Title: Re: Card rules vs card rules
Post by: Vyr1s on February 24, 2013, 10:47:25 PM
The wording probably needs to be updated on the Crusade then.
As we cannot assume a precedence.
Though I cannot think of a more elegant way of putting it atm. >.<
Title: Re: Card rules vs card rules
Post by: Viquel on February 24, 2013, 11:07:57 PM
interesting... shrine of victory can be used to force-exhaust characters prior to a mass death to get them into safe support anyways. working as intended too?
Title: Re: Card rules vs card rules
Post by: Zinqf on February 25, 2013, 01:33:19 AM
Quote
interesting... shrine of victory can be used to force-exhaust characters prior to a mass death to get them into safe support anyways. working as intended too?
Quote
You cannot manually move. They can be forcibly moved however.
Sounds like a legitimate tactic lol =)
Title: Re: Card rules vs card rules
Post by: WWKnight on February 26, 2013, 12:30:44 AM
In my militant slaughter deck (Verore/FD) I have long been using "Exhaust" to bring my creatures back from a Mass Death so I can do so with minimal loss to my characters without announcing the turn before that its coming.

I believe its more tactical gameplay than unintended bug, even if it is indeed, an unintended bug :P

But you can bounce those tokens to players hand as well, so this has always been like this.  Perhaps a wording change is in order from "locked to the assault zone" to "it's controller cannot move them from the assault zone".
Title: Re: Card rules vs card rules
Post by: Vyr1s on February 26, 2013, 12:48:25 AM
Yeah, I mean it is a cool tactic.

Just from a generalized design / rule standpoint. The scenarios conflict with each other.
Drills down to;
Specific singular deny is superseded by a global allow.
(a card may not be moved - exhaust/move all cards) [The latter overrides the prior]
Specific singular deny isn't superseded by a global allow.
(a card may not be destroyed - destroy all characters) [The prior overrides the latter]

To mitigate confusions as you cannot assume one method over the other, some cards just need to be a bit more specific.
Title: Re: Card rules vs card rules
Post by: Koey on February 26, 2013, 01:03:38 AM
So I am guessing currently its not the "combo" that people are upset with. But the wording of the cards.

I also agree re-wording the cards for a more proper approach would be nice. As currently there are a lot of cards that does the same thing but different wording or vice versa.