Molten destroyer vs venom flame archer (not a bug)

[Gondorian]

It's very weird that the source changes just because the original source dies - we can all see that, intuitively, that shouldn't happen.

Now, if that's the ruling, then this stuff should be written down - and there are lots of other odd mechanics that this game has that make new players really sad becuase you have to slog through pages of forum before you find out

Since your hero represents you in the game and you and your hero brought all the allies to the party, then you and your hero are responsible for what they do, ultimately, and should be considered the source when they are no longer around. Since you are not actually in the game, then your hero is the default source when there isn't otherwise one. I don't see how that's unintuitive. Fireball doesn't say your hero was the source of the damage, but people have no time handling that.

I did already agree it should be in the rulebook BTW. It's even added to my very long todo list!

[Buqs]

some answers to your questions

- item effects stop if the card leaves play (e.g. Gold-Laced Shield's last use does nothing) the CARD enforcing the bonus is no longer in play. no big deal
- DMT/FT damage to CoI doesn't kill him (still don't get the logic behind this, but hey...) have to summon the ally (DMT/FT) before dealing the summon damage, COI gets a bonus as soon as the opposing ally is summoned
- can't attach 2x same attachment attachments are unique to allies, just like artifacts to your controlling side
- your ally doesn't have to be ready to attack (e.g. Bone Sabre) doesn't say unexhausted ally, just the one with highest atytack value. and side note: the one closest to your hero in case of a tie
- what happens if you try to put a card into a full hand? (e.g. Darkwood Wraith) cant put a card into a full hand. DW would have no effect. Also, cards that die and might bounce to hand (Cryptspawn tormentor/derkan), just go to the graveyard instead
- your ally will still attack if, after starting the attack, it is reduced to 0 attack (e.g. Consuming Fear) attack value doesnt reach 0 (from consuming fear) until after you initiate the attack

[Gondorian]

It's very weird that the source changes just because the original source dies - we can all see that, intuitively, that shouldn't happen.

Now, if that's the ruling, then this stuff should be written down - and there are lots of other odd mechanics that this game has that make new players really sad becuase you have to slog through pages of forum before you find out

Edit: some of the things that i think fall into this category:

- killing counts as dealing damage (e.g. decoy trap stops Mind Control)
- your hero is considered the source of damage if it's not an ally (e.g. if it is artifact damage, it is still considered to be from the hero) [or, as above, THE SOURCE MOVES!]
- only one trap can go off at a time (e.g. Evil Ascendent cannot trigger multiple Decoy Traps if there is more than one ally out)
- item effects stop if the card leaves play (e.g. Gold-Laced Shield's last use does nothing)
- DMT/FT damage to CoI doesn't kill him (still don't get the logic behind this, but hey...)
- can't attach 2x same attachment
- Shard of Power health cap applies AFTER other modifiers etc. (e.g. interaction with Hunter's Gambit)
- Shriek of Vengance eats a used resource rather than an un-used one
- your ally doesn't have to be ready to attack (e.g. Bone Sabre)
- what happens if you try to put a card into a full hand? (e.g. Darkwood Wraith)
- your ally will still attack if, after starting the attack, it is reduced to 0 attack (e.g. Consuming Fear)

Someone suggested putting these as "waiting messages" when you're waiting for another player at the start of a game - this is a great idea, does not require a rule-book update, and would get these out to all players. Could include SRO in there as well, since this is the answer to loads of queries / "bugs".

I almost missed the edit. Thanks to Buqs for quoting it. Don't edit if you're writing useful new stuff please - make a new post instead. I think some of this would be useful to add to the rulebook somewhere (maybe Advanced Rules section).

[trevorJacobs]

some answers to your questions

Thanks for all this! However, i think you've missed my point: *i* know these are the answers, but they are (possibly) not intuitive / not covered in the rule-book, so many new players will be sad / confused / unable to self-help. My request was not for answers to these here (although i appreciate your effort ); rather, i was suggesting that these scenarios (and others) be explicitly covered in the book / "waiting" hints.

[trevorJacobs]

As an aside, and please tell me if i am wrong / should shut up / off topic...

"- DMT/FT damage to CoI doesn't kill him (still don't get the logic behind this, but hey...) have to summon the ally (DMT/FT) before dealing the summon damage, COI gets a bonus as soon as the opposing ally is summoned"

If this is correct, i would expect the following:
- I summon DMT
- COI gets +1 health (so shows 2 whilst DMT "hovers")
- I choose who to target with DMT ability
- DMT stops "hovering"

What actually happens:
- I summon DMT
- COI is shown at one health
- I target him with DMT ability
- He takes one damage
- DMT stops "hovering"
- COI is shown with one health

The first scenario gives me all the information i need to make a decision, and all cards behave intuitively

[trevorJacobs]

I almost missed the edit. Thanks to Buqs for quoting it. Don't edit if you're writing useful new stuff please - make a new post instead.

Apologies - right you are! Won't do that again

I think some of this would be useful to add to the rulebook somewhere (maybe Advanced Rules section).

Woop! This would be helpful. It's like you can play MTG knowing about 4 rules, but once anything complex happens you really need to understand fully the order of interactions, technical points etc. MTG's codification is super-strong, and always adhered to. I believe that SE has this codification "behind the scenes" and is usually only made explicit through questioning in the forum, so worth this Advanced Section as you say I know it's on the list now!

[maskee]

I would like to see rule section in Shadow Era wiki in each card page. So you can see how exactly that card works and how it interacts with other cards... that will be helpfull. (not sure if one page will be enough for Shard if Power :-)

[trevorJacobs]

I would like to see rule section in Shadow Era wiki in each card page. So you can see how exactly that card works and how it interacts with other cards...

Yes - this reminds me of the unofficial compendium for a board game called Agricola:

https://alavigne.net/Gaming/Agricola...comp-v9.0.html

If you scroll down past the links, you'll see each card listed as well as explainations for tricky interactions. For example:

https://alavigne.net/Gaming/Agricola...-v9.0.html#I73

I know these won't make sense unless you know the game, but you should be able to see what i mean. Nonetheless, it would still be a shame if players had to consult an external source to see how the game actually works!

[Shadaba]

Since your hero represents you in the game and you and your hero brought all the allies to the party, then you and your hero are responsible for what they do, ultimately, and should be considered the source when they are no longer around. Since you are not actually in the game, then your hero is the default source when there isn't otherwise one. I don't see how that's unintuitive. Fireball doesn't say your hero was the source of the damage, but people have no time handling that.

I did already agree it should be in the rulebook BTW. It's even added to my very long todo list!

The fact that so many people here point out that they find this unintuitive indicates that it is, in fact, unintuitive.

The problem isn't with cards such as fireball, or with artifacts dealing damage (which is not fully intuitive and could have been ruled differently, but seems fully justifiable). The problem is that there was a clearly defined source here: the ally. The fact that the ally died does not make it intuitive that then it stops being the source.

As an analogy: if I bake a cake, and then I sell you the cake, then I am still the baker of the cake. Even if I pass away, I am still the source of the cake. There is only one source of anything, and it is weird if that changes.

If the hero 'inherits' being the source of damage, then this begs the question whether other properties can be inherited as well. For instance, negative effects such as poison apparently are not inherited in the same way. I don't see why how transfer of one (being the source) can be intuitive, while at the same time the lack of the transfer of the other (e.g., poison) is.

Suppose in the future we would have an ally that states "any ally or hero that damaged this ally receives 1 damage at the end of the turn". What would then happen at the end of the turn if we damage this ally with a friendly ally, and then the friendly ally dies? I ask because I still do not know, and to me this indicates a deeper problem with the dynamics of SE. In many other games, I could predict precisely what would happen in all hypothetical cases, because the rules are clear consistent. In SE, it seems we are still uncovering hidden logics and unwritten rules.

That said, I think you're doing a great job Gondorian.

[a player]

Suppose in the future we would have an ally that states "any ally or hero that damaged this ally receives 1 damage at the end of the turn". What would then happen at the end of the turn if we damage this ally with a friendly ally, and then the friendly ally dies? I ask because I still do not know, and to me this indicates a deeper problem with the dynamics of SE. In many other games, I could predict precisely what would happen in all hypothetical cases, because the rules are clear consistent. In SE, it seems we are still uncovering hidden logics and unwritten rules.

Dropping a Furrion Terror into a Death Trap while you have a Molten Destroyer in play?