Close

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
  1. #1
    Senior Member AnAdolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    8,295
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    BUG: Dimension Ripper + 0 deck, v1.25 [not a bug]

    Just confirming what Melodia reported, in that if you have Dimensional Ripper and 0 cards in your deck, attacking your opponent will cause you to take 1 damage.

    If you have a full hand, you don't take damage from forced draws because you're not doing any drawing. So in Dimensional Ripper and a 0 card deck, your opponent is the one drawing from your library, not you, so he should be taking that damage instead of you.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    751
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AnAdolt View Post
    Just confirming what Melodia reported, in that if you have Dimensional Ripper and 0 cards in your deck, attacking your opponent will cause you to take 1 damage.

    If you have a full hand, you don't take damage from forced draws because you're not doing any drawing. So in Dimensional Ripper and a 0 card deck, your opponent is the one drawing from your library, not you, so he should be taking that damage instead of you.
    I disagree. That seems exactly like the expected behaviour. If a card must be drawn from your library, but you don't have any, it's you who should take the damage. It doesn't matter where the card goes. Why should your opponent be penalized because YOU ran out of cards. It doesn't make any sense IMO. And I say this as probably one of the few people that run Dimension Ripper in my main deck.

    Transference has the same effect btw and it's perfectly correct.

  3. #3
    Senior Member AnAdolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    8,295
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    You don't take damage because you're not drawing the card. Just like I mentioned, you don't take damage when your hand is at 7 because you're not drawing any cards.

    Here's the current wording of the rule applicable to this case:
    If you do not have any cards in your deck when you are required to draw, then your Hero will take 1 damage
    While this only mentions your deck specifically, one would think that if it was your opponent's deck instead, since "you are required to draw, then your Hero will take 1 damage". Because in this case, the opponent is not being required to draw, it is you that is drawing from his deck. He's simply required to draw from your deck.

  4. #4
    Senior Member jiminee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    sa iyong panaginip
    Posts
    1,199
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I added this to the issues list.

    Did I word it correctly though?
    Using Dimension Ripper and Transference against a decked opponent gives the opponent 1 damage instead of the user (bug or intentional?)

  5. #5
    Senior Member AnAdolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    8,295
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Wording sounds fine.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    751
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    If you do not have any cards in your deck when you are required to draw, then your Hero will take 1 damage
    Emphasis mine. It seems clear to me that since it is you who has no cards in your deck, it is you who should take damage if a card is required to draw from that library. Though I'll agree the wording on the rule needs to be clearer about that.

  7. #7
    Senior Member AnAdolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    8,295
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I don't know how many times I've had to rewrite the same thing. Maybe if I bolded it as well, you can better understand my point.

    If you do not have any cards in your deck when you are required to draw, then your Hero will take 1 damage.
    You are not required to draw from your deck when opponent deals damage with Dimension Ripper. He is required to draw from your deck. So by process of inheritence, he takes the damage.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    751
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AnAdolt View Post
    I don't know how many times I've had to rewrite the same thing. Maybe if I bolded it as well, you can better understand my point.



    You are not required to draw from your deck when opponent deals damage with Dimension Ripper. He is required to draw from your deck. So by process of inheritence, he takes the damage.
    Well I think you're wrong. Since it's you who has no cards in your deck it is you who takes damage. It's pretty clear this is the intended behavior of the cards and the rules. Transference was changed just recently and behaves this way. Plus really, from a gameplay point of view it makes no sense for you to take damage after casting Transference if your opponent has no cards. Also it makes little sense for your opponent to take damage if you play DR with no cards on your deck, it is you who should be punished from running out of cards, not your opponent. It would be completely unfair and frankly ridiculous.

    I really don't see the point in questioning a rule that:

    1) Works as intended.
    2) It's the fairest way to implement it from a gameplay point of view.

    I will agree the rules need to make this explicit in the case of drawing from another player's deck though.

  9. #9
    Senior Member AnAdolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    8,295
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Because it makes little sense for your opponent to deal damage with DR when you have no cards.. you should be punished and take damage for your opponent's folly?

    The rule currently states you take damage when you have to draw from your deck and it has no cards. If the rule stated you take damage whenever a card is drawn from your deck and it has no cards—then it would be working as intended. If they intended this, then the rule needs to be clarified. If it's not, then the outcome needs to be fixed.
    Last edited by AnAdolt; 05-07-2011 at 04:33 AM. Reason: typo

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    751
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AnAdolt View Post
    Because it makes little sense for your opponent to deal damage with DR when you have no cards.. you should be punished and take damage for your opponent's folly?

    The rule currently states you take damage when you have to draw from your deck and it has no cards. If the rule stated you take damage whenever a card is drawn from your deck and it has no cards—then it would be working as intended. If they intended this, then the rule needs to be clarified. If it's not, then the outcome needs to be fixed.
    It makes perfect sense for you to take damage if you have no cards and your opponent attacks with DR, since you'll be drawing cards from his deck. You want to draw his cards and also have him take damage? Sounds a little silly.

    If you do not have any cards in your deck when you are required to draw, then your Hero will take 1 damage.
    Clearly the rule needs a rewording to whenever a card is drawn from your deck. If they're not reworded the outcome shouldn't change in the way you propose though. It's clear the bolded does not hold true ever in the case of Transference or DR. Although strictly speaking, the rule is fulfilled in the DR case, since you do not have any cards in your deck and you are required to draw (it doesn't specify from which deck, it just says required to draw) your hero should take damage, so you're still wrong on that one no matter what.

    In the case of Transference (and let's say DR) the opponent has cards in his deck when required to draw, so he obviously can't take damage according to the rule. You are not required to draw so you shouldn't take damage either. You are proposing an interpretation of the rule that has no sustent in either gameplay fairness nor rule interpretation.

    Still I think the rules should be amended and the effect kept the same.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •