Raika vs Layarian diplomat (not a bug)

Fortana vs StL Twistuh

I cast diplomat, removing passives from his ally.

I then attacked.

His damage was still reduced, and attack increased, by Raikas ability.

Is Raikas ability not considered granting passives to the ally?

Fortana

No, I don't think it does. I'm probably completely wrong and someone who has actually read the rulebook is going to come along and correct me

Layarian cancels ally abilities, Raikka's ability is not an ally ability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortana

Is Raikas ability not considered granting passives to the ally?

---

No. The effect is coming from her ability. If she gave out a keyword passive ability like haste or ambush then that would be considered to temporarily belong to them granted by her ability (and would be canceled by Layarian Diplomat), but she's doing all the increasing/decreasing herself.

So not a bug. Thanks for posting though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ganjamus

Layarian cancels ally abilities, Raikka's ability is not an ally ability.

---

Not necessarily.. I've used Diplo on an ally to remove the stealth it received from Moonstalker

edit: ninja'd by Gondorian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gondorian

No. The effect is coming from her ability. If she gave out a keyword passive ability like haste or ambush then that would be considered to temporarily belong to them granted by her ability (and would be canceled by Layarian Diplomat), but she's doing all the increasing/decreasing herself.

So not a bug. Thanks for posting though.

---

Gondorian could you please clarify this ruling for me please:

If Layarian Diplomat 'could' target heroes and targeted Raikka on summoning - would that therefore nullify her passive ability bestowed across all allies?

If Layarian Diplomat 'could' target heroes and targeted Moonstalker on summoning - would that nullify the passive ability bestowed across all allies or just Moonstalker?

Are all 'key words' identifiable by being bold? (To distinguish from other words that have 'shadow era' logic/meanings associated to them like 'gain' and 'have')

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShrapnelFox

Gondorian could you please clarify this ruling for me please:

If Layarian Diplomat 'could' target heroes and targeted Raikka on summoning - would that therefore nullify her passive ability bestowed across all allies?

If Layarian Diplomat 'could' target heroes and targeted Moonstalker on summoning - would that nullify the passive ability bestowed across all allies or just Moonstalker?

Are all 'key words' identifiable by being bold? (To distinguish from other words that have 'shadow era' logic/meanings associated to them like 'gain' and 'have')

---

Raikka's ability is an activated one, so LD would be pointless on her, even if he could target her.

If LD could target MS, then MS would not have stealth (it's a passive ability he gives himself via his activated ability) but the other allies still would.

All passive ability keywords are in bold, yes. We have other words that we try to use consistently such as "have" and "gain" but they are not considered keywords.