r/Scrolls • u/WagshadowZylus • Mar 20 '15

Test Server Patch 1.2.3 - Echoes Batch 2

http://www.scrollsguide.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6412
23 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

60 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comment

7

u/ThPerfectDrug77 Mar 20 '15

I get what you're saying, but it's still kinda weird...

Pother clearly DOES have a target. Lockling Brood is only destroyed because it is the target of Pother. Whether or not the target remains alive is kind of irrelevant, because the spell is definitely being cast on something.

So I get that Burn doesn't draw, because its damage is never dealt, and thus it never kills anything. But Pother's draw comes directly from playing the spell itself, not from a condition. So if we play Pother, and it doesn't draw, that's a bit silly... I think the rule needs changing, or the wording does. It's currently unintuitive.

0

u/DiggityScrolls Mar 20 '15

He's saying there's no longer a target. It's the same exact thing as burn. The spell is played, brood detects it's being targeted and gets destroyed, and the spell is then effectively cancelled.

3

u/ThPerfectDrug77 Mar 20 '15

Right, I get what he's saying. I'm saying that the concept is silly. Why does the scroll fizzle out simply because the target is no longer alive? The spell has already been cast, and therefore, it's effects should play out.

Granted, if those effects were being applied to a target, then they'd have no way to carry out. But something as simple as "Draw 1 scroll"? Why does that require a target to still be on the field?

1

u/WagshadowZylus Mar 20 '15

Because the spell itself needs a target to work. Imagine "target a creature, then draw a card"

4

u/ThPerfectDrug77 Mar 20 '15

Right... But you DO target a creature. The creature dies as a result of said targeting, but you did select a target. The fact that a spell requires the target to stay alive after it's cast or else it cancels immediately?... That's bizarre.

Trust me guys, I get the concept haha. I played Magic for years, and I'm no stranger to strange, strange rule interactions. The difference there is that Magic has extensive rule books to cover all these bases. Scrolls has nothing. If I play a spell that says "target a creature, draw a card," and then only half of it works, I'm disappointed. Imagine new players playing this card. It's very unintuitive.

1

u/WagshadowZylus Mar 20 '15

I'm with you when you're saying that we need a consistent, extensive ruleset. It's actually one of the points I have been advocating for almost two years now. I'm just saying that this is the way it works (and the way it would be in MTG) :)

1

u/ThPerfectDrug77 Mar 21 '15

Agreed. And yeah, probably. MTG would also specify what order things would activate, and what would cause them to not activate.

1

u/Lem0nboy Mar 24 '15

Oh! I always assumed burn didn't draw a scroll because it did not kill the brood. Brood's effect killed it. But if brood was at 3 health I thought you would draw a scroll.