suggested spectral saber and sledgehammer ruling

[pjoe0211]

I was thinking you could change how the game works to be a little more consistent, currently you can cast abilities on sledgehammer to try and destroy it, even if they have no effect. However you cant try to summon weapons.

What if you could summon weapons, but because sledgehammer cant be destroyed, the new summoned weapon goes to the graveyard. I believe this would be a more consistent behavior and allow you to use spectral saber and any other future weapons with dual summoning possibilities

[Twio]

+1

[trevorJacobs]

+1

[ShrapnelFox]

+1

You should be able to play spectral sabre and use it's ability affect (while sledgehammer is in play), as you can use spectral sabre's ability now without 'replacing' the weapon currently in play.

Must be kept consistent either way.

[Daemon Rayge]

I think this was their bandaid to stop the double weapon. A very poor one may I add.

[pjoe0211]

bump to try and get response from GDC

[Gondorian]

bump to try and get response from GDC

I responded on the other thread just now, supporting the ruling, but I suppose there could be a better ruling that states:

Any time a player would otherwise have two weapons in play, one must be destroyed (selected from all destructible weapons in Standard Resolution Order).

This would still allow you to play Spectral Sabre, regardless of which weapon you have out. If you play a new weapon with Sledgehammer out, the new weapon goes to the graveyard. The pre-SF ruling where new replaces old would also still work.

We should have a similar ruling for armor, since Lythite Coating can create the same kind of situation.

Any time a player would otherwise have two armors in play, one must be destroyed (selected from all destructible armors in Standard Resolution Order).

[pjoe0211]

i fully understood how it worked so i didnt need more of an explanation. I was just suggesting a change in how the game works in the feedback and suggestion section.

[Gondorian]

i fully understood how it worked so i didnt need more of an explanation. I was just suggesting a change in how the game works in the feedback and suggestion section.

Well, you bumped for a response and I gave one. There was a ruling that I agreed with, but then I proposed a decently worded ruling that did what you had suggested. Not sure you saw all that or maybe you might have replied differently?

Mojumbo says he is on board with it, so I suppose we will see this in some future update.

[pjoe0211]

Well, you bumped for a response and I gave one. There was a ruling that I agreed with, but then I proposed a decently worded ruling that did what you had suggested. Not sure you saw all that or maybe you might have replied differently?

Mojumbo says he is on board with it, so I suppose we will see this in some future update.

i completely miss read what you typed lol, I fully apologize,

*Sticks foot in mouth* (im double jointed so i literally could do this :-P

thank you