Help me help you to help me with the rules

[a player]

I seriously believe that this line of questions could lead to a clear, concise and understandable explanation of the rule of the game. However, sometimes where I have asked several questions I have only discerned one answer.

Perhaps there is a way to express a series of Axioms that can be combined with a set of rules regarding the Order of Evaluation that would make everything clear.

1. Are the following axioms?

i Only allies that are summoned may have their on-summon abilities evaluated.
ii Only allies that are alive may have their in-play abilities evaluated.
iii Only allies that have just been killed can have their on-death abilities evaluated.

1b) What are the other axioms?

2. Are the following part of the Order of Evaluation?

i Each ally is evaluated in the order that it was played.
ii Allies' in-play abilities must be evaluated before their on-death abilities.
iii Allies on-death abilities must be evaluated before they are sent to their final destination.

2b) What are the other parts?

What I wish to avoid is the vague and fuzzy quality where it seems some cards are evaluated

A-in-play, B-in-play, C-in-play
A-on-death, B-on-death, C-on-death

while others appear to be evaluated

A-in-play, A-on-death,
B-in-play, B-on-death,
C-in-play, C-on-death.

If these are both held to be true, under various circumstances, this leads to:
3. What are the classifications of circumstances?
3b) What are their axioms?
3c) What are their orders of evaluation?

If each card was evaluated top-down, then Tidal Wave would kill an ally with Holy Shield, because Tidal Wave is the instigator of the evaluation. It clearly states that all allies are killed, it doesn't quantify an amount of damage equal to the allies' health, nor even suggest damage.

4. Are the details of the evaluation Wulven's secret Intellectual Property?

If so, I'll stop asking about them, but may lose interest in this inscrutable game.

[Mojumbo]

Heya,

Thanks for the questions. We actually do plan to have a rulebook update that will add in a lot more important information to make the subtle nuances of the game much easier to understand. The standard resolution order (SRO) is really the "holy grail" of sorts when it comes to answering these questions. That section of the rulebook will be much more descriptive for sure. Basically, cards of the same type resolve in the order they were played. If you are stuck trying to figure out why something resolves the way it does try and break it down in a step by step manner starting with whatever card was played first. For example, if resolving card A means that card B doesn't seem to be able to resolve anymore it probably shouldn't.

Thanks for your patience and understanding while we get the rules tightened up for you all!

[Gondorian]

I seriously believe that this line of questions could lead to a clear, concise and understandable explanation of the rule of the game. However, sometimes where I have asked several questions I have only discerned one answer.

Perhaps there is a way to express a series of Axioms that can be combined with a set of rules regarding the Order of Evaluation that would make everything clear.

1. Are the following axioms?

i Only allies that are summoned may have their on-summon abilities evaluated.
ii Only allies that are alive may have their in-play abilities evaluated.
iii Only allies that have just been killed can have their on-death abilities evaluated.

1b) What are the other axioms?

2. Are the following part of the Order of Evaluation?

i Each ally is evaluated in the order that it was played.
ii Allies' in-play abilities must be evaluated before their on-death abilities.
iii Allies on-death abilities must be evaluated before they are sent to their final destination.

2b) What are the other parts?

What I wish to avoid is the vague and fuzzy quality where it seems some cards are evaluated

A-in-play, B-in-play, C-in-play
A-on-death, B-on-death, C-on-death

while others appear to be evaluated

A-in-play, A-on-death,
B-in-play, B-on-death,
C-in-play, C-on-death.

If these are both held to be true, under various circumstances, this leads to:
3. What are the classifications of circumstances?
3b) What are their axioms?
3c) What are their orders of evaluation?

If each card was evaluated top-down, then Tidal Wave would kill an ally with Holy Shield, because Tidal Wave is the instigator of the evaluation. It clearly states that all allies are killed, it doesn't quantify an amount of damage equal to the allies' health, nor even suggest damage.

4. Are the details of the evaluation Wulven's secret Intellectual Property?

If so, I'll stop asking about them, but may lose interest in this inscrutable game.

You are seriously over-complicating it, man! Each ability that can be triggered mentions its own trigger and that's usually based on some other effect that happened.

There are many different trigger points (killed, dealt damage, dealt combat damage, summoned, entered play, destroyed, leaves play, end of the turn, start of the turn, etc, etc). Where two cards have different triggers, it should be easy to tell which should resolve first based on when each trigger happened.

Axiom: If two or more cards appear to trigger simultaneously on the same trigger then we use the SRO to decide which resolves first.

Axiom: A trigger for a card's ability can never fire for that card when it isn't in play (unless it is responding to its own discard, which is a hack to the rules for the sake of having a nice mechanic).

Axiom: Where two effects from the same trigger are in conflict (i.e. It would not be possible to resolve both) then only the first one in SRO is resolved.

If you have specific questions related to specific cards that do not fit with what I just said, please post them so I can attempt to clarify further. Many thanks!