Bone Sabre not always functioning / consistent

[BlanketEffect]

I have played several games with Bone Sabre, and sometimes, even when the ally is just summoned, or exhausted, it still attacks per Bone Sabre's ability, as normal. Once, I had an ally that was just summoned, and it did not make the followup attack per the Bone Sabre ability. Now, I just played a game where my ally was not exhausted, I'd pinged the enemy ally with DMT, then attacked with the Bone Sabre, only to have my other ally, a 3/4, which was not exhausted, do nothing. Game was BEffect x JewYork

[Gondorian]

Was it the last durability of Bone Saber? It won't work on the last one because it's left play before the ally can react, which is why we added 1 durability to it to compensate.

[BlanketEffect]

Ah, I think that may be the case then, yes.

But if that's the standard for execution, let me ask you this: When I played Supernova, killing several allies, his Ogloth had 5 life. Although he should have died at the instant Nova went off, ergo, not being alive to benefit from his ability, he stayed on the board with 2 health.

However, if the idea is that the last durability being used, and thus the effect of Bone Sabre not working, is the intended design, why not leave it at 3 durability, as designed, and code the software so the attack triggers the effect and leaves one of those "tokens" behind for the system to process at the end of combat - rather than having a card whose use is otherwise very confusing in its design/execution?

[Gondorian]

Ah, I think that may be the case then, yes.

But if that's the standard for execution, let me ask you this: When I played Supernova, killing several allies, his Ogloth had 5 life. Although he should have died at the instant Nova went off, ergo, not being alive to benefit from his ability, he stayed on the board with 2 health.

However, if the idea is that the last durability being used, and thus the effect of Bone Sabre not working, is the intended design, why not leave it at 3 durability, as designed, and code the software so the attack triggers the effect and leaves one of those "tokens" behind for the system to process at the end of combat - rather than having a card whose use is otherwise very confusing in its design/execution?

The Oggy thing is a bug.

The latter is due to the global rule that a card can't have an effect on the board if it isn't in play. Negative effects are the exception to that. They stick.

[bobwei]

The Oggy thing is a bug.

The latter is due to the global rule that a card can't have an effect on the board if it isn't in play. Negative effects are the exception to that. They stick.

Then other weapons like DoU should not work during its last durability?

[Flycheung]

Then other weapons like DoU should not work during its last durability?

I suppose the logic is DoU and AB and etc have the words said "When blah blah.." thus the effect take place immediately while the weapon hasn't leave play. For Bone Sabre, the word say "After end of combat... ", which the weapon should have leave play, thus no effect take place..

Right GDC??!

[Gondorian]

I suppose the logic is DoU and AB and etc have the words said "When blah blah.." thus the effect take place immediately while the weapon hasn't leave play. For Bone Sabre, the word say "After end of combat... ", which the weapon should have leave play, thus no effect take place..

Right GDC??!

You are right. Because the timing is about end of combat, the weapon has left already. We can't have it sooner than end of combat since it would cause a second combat to start in middle of current one, which isn't possible either.

Hope that helps.

[bobwei]

Interesting... Thank you both!

[BlanketEffect]

The explanation does help, but can you direct us to the global rule to which you refer? And, after that has been illustrated, can you elaborate what you mean by {"negative effects aren't subject to this rule"}, please?

I ask for this, because as a physical card player, there'd be no way ANYONE would ever know to play the card like this, and therefore would be using it to attack and elicit effect four times, rather than attack four, effect three. (It just seems like a very clunky mechanic and not in line with common sense, even if there is some obscure rule making it otherwise.)

Also, can you name any other cards to which this rule applies (i.e., a card which would be destroyed before the positive effect it triggered went off)

Edit: After thinking on this a bit, I can think of an instance where a negative sticks around, even after its source is destroyed, and that would be Black Garb.

The question I have is WHY? Why make a rule which is completely obscure in the first place, and then have it only apply to positive effects?

[Gondorian]

I think you must have missed the incredibly long discussion about this about a year ago. I don't think I can add anything to that. The thread was started by Kyle in about July 2013. There was uproar about possible retrospective Jasmine nerf and "can't attack" became a negative effect as a result. Don't you remember any of that?

I'll see if I can find that thread for you.