PDA

View Full Version : Adamanthian Scrivener's ability needs to be re-worded! Currently misleading.



Willzyx
06-04-2013, 06:14 PM
Tonight's Twitch.tv stream showed off the Adamanthian Scrivener at 25:15, who has the ability to gain 1 health to your champion when a troop is played. As we saw in the steam, 1 health was granted when the Scrivener was played, which should have surprised a lot of viewers who are coming to Hex from Magic: The Gathering.

Both games follow a "last-in-first-out" resolution order for actions and triggers; any new action is placed on top of the stack and the action on the top of the stack is the first to "happen". This is what allows "QuickActions" or "Instants" as MTGers know them to interrupt actions before they resolve, and what enables a lot of the interesting combo play and combat tricks that make both games interesting.

The problem here is that the Scrivener is entering play and yet triggering his own ability--an ability that implicitly only resolves when the Scrivener himself is in already play. As we see, he is not in play yet but rather in the "action stack", which is what allows him to be countered with another card or ability.

Here's a wording that would be consistent with "last-in-first-out" action order:
"When Adamanthian Scrivener or another troop enters play under your control, gain 1 health."

This specifies that this ability not only triggers when the Scrivener is *in* play, but also when it *is* played--an important distinction. Such a wording would allow the Scrivener to behave exactly as he does in the current game build without any weird rule inconsistencies.

dogmod
06-04-2013, 06:19 PM
Tonight's Twitch.tv stream showed off the Adamanthian Scrivener at 25:15, who has the ability to gain 1 health to your champion when a troop is played. As we saw in the steam, 1 health was granted when the Scrivener was played, which should have surprised a lot of viewers who are coming to Hex from Magic: The Gathering.

Both games follow a "last-in-first-out" resolution order for actions and triggers; any new action is placed on top of the stack and the action on the top of the stack is the first to "happen". This is what allows "QuickActions" or "Instants" as MTGers know them to interrupt actions before they resolve, and what enables a lot of the interesting combo play and combat tricks that make both games interesting.

The problem here is that the Scrivener is entering play and yet triggering his own ability--an ability that implicitly only resolves when the Scrivener himself is in already play. As we see, he is not in play yet but rather in the "action stack", which is what allows him to be countered with another card or ability.

Here's a wording that would be consistent with "last-in-first-out" action order:
"When Adamanthian Scrivener or another troop enters play under your control, gain 1 health."

This specifies that this ability not only triggers when the Scrivener is *in* play, but also when it *is* played--an important distinction. Such a wording would allow the Scrivener to behave exactly as he does in the current game build without any weird rule inconsistencies.

Good call

Zomnivore
06-04-2013, 06:21 PM
I thought it wouldn't affect itself because of how inspire works.

Lord_Wrath
06-04-2013, 06:23 PM
I disagree. The wording on the card is "When a TROOP enters play under your control, gain 1 health."

The ability activated after he entered play and resolved. I believe the wording implies you will gain the 1 health from him, as well and doesn't need to be changed.

Lochar
06-04-2013, 06:25 PM
Yeah, but the troop wasn't on field to put the lifegain onto the stack. If you go by that methodology, then all Inspire troops should Inspire themselves as well.

Erebus
06-04-2013, 06:27 PM
Inspire specifically has the word "another"

dogmod
06-04-2013, 06:27 PM
Yeah, but the troop wasn't on field to put the lifegain onto the stack. If you go by that methodology, then all Inspire troops should Inspire themselves as well.

Er although the inspire ability specifically states that "As another troop enters play"... so their stack could feasibly work different.

Erebus
06-04-2013, 06:28 PM
http://hex.potion-of-wit.com/card.php?c=23

Xenavire
06-04-2013, 06:29 PM
Inspire specifically states "When another troop".

/thread? /thread.

stephenhii
06-04-2013, 06:29 PM
I believe it's a mistake from Crypto boys.

Since the wording is "When" it should not in anyway trigger its power. However, if the wording is "As Adamanthian Scrivener enters play" then it will trigger as shown.

Edit: As pointed out by stiii, this is how WoWTCG works. So it is irrelevant since Hex is probably using the magic rules.

alpha5099
06-04-2013, 06:29 PM
Inspire says "another troop;" a troop with Inspire could never be "another." But the Scrivener absolutely is "a troop."

But I don't know all the intricacies of Magic's timing structure. But of course Hex isn't beholden to follow Magic's every single rule.

Lochar
06-04-2013, 06:30 PM
*shrug* Alright.

Then we'll just have to be aware the stack works different from MtG. Which ain't bad.

Lord_Wrath
06-04-2013, 06:30 PM
Er although the inspire ability specifically states that "As another troop enters play"... so their stack could feasibly work different.

Thank you.

Xenavire
06-04-2013, 06:31 PM
*shrug* Alright.

Then we'll just have to be aware the stack works different from MtG. Which ain't bad.

Our main worry is letting the AI do it for us and we just learn what happens with each specific card. And that way we will learn how things interact - if wording needs to be changed, by that time we will know how and why. This is still too early for us to do that.

Lord_Wrath
06-04-2013, 06:33 PM
I think the wording on the card in question is intuitive and shouldn't be bogged down by MTG's rules.

How much do you want to bet this thread was started by an MTG judge? ;)

RECHiD
06-04-2013, 06:43 PM
While I am a long-time Magic veteran, I like how this card works flavor-wise; it just makes sense.

This guy is a cleric who gains life when friendly troops come into play. Why wouldn't he gain life for himself? In the HEX world, this guy has a spell that he casts, which gains health. It doesn't have any restriction; no payment of resources, no exhausting, it just happens every time. One would think he'd gain a life for himself, being that he is a guy who gains life.

Being a 15+ year Magic veteran, I was quick to notice that ability does not work the same way in HEX. While Magic is a great game, the rules and language used on cards has become convoluted and confusing in many circumstances. Sure, it works from a rules and mechanics standpoint, but Magic suffers from it's own complexity.

Hopefully HEX can take a simpler approach, like they have with this card.

Willzyx
06-04-2013, 06:54 PM
While I am a long-time Magic veteran, I like how this card works flavor-wise; it just makes sense.

I agree that it makes sense the card should be that way. However, the importance is clarity. You want to be able to read a card and know exactly what it does. If it doesn't act the way it's expected to, you'll have a lot of GM complaints and lost matches due to misunderstandings.

Furthermore, there's nothing convoluted about specifying that an ability triggers both on cast and as a passive while in play.

Xenavire
06-04-2013, 06:56 PM
I agree that it makes sense the card should be that way. However, the importance is clarity. You want to be able to read a card and know exactly what it does. If it doesn't act the way it's expected to, you'll have a lot of GM complaints and lost matches due to misunderstandings.

If you put a card in your deck and play a tournament without knowing exactly what it does, you are an idiot.

This is a digital game, you have plenty of ways to test your cards before brining it to a tournament.

Except for drafts, and you should just accept that not every card will behave the way you intepret it after skimming the text once.

Shivdaddy
06-04-2013, 07:06 PM
I am with OP, its worded wrong.

Grissnap
06-04-2013, 07:08 PM
Also agree with OP, the wording is wrong or the software got it wrong.

Willzyx
06-04-2013, 07:10 PM
you should just accept that not every card will behave the way you intepret it after [reading] the text once.

Why not? If you have a complete understanding of the rules then reading a card should tell you exactly what it does. The rules are rules, not suggestions. Firm logic and reason, not fuzzy intention and interpretation.

houjix
06-04-2013, 07:12 PM
It's only wrong if you compare it to Magic cards. Its wording makes it function exactly like a WoW card. "When enters plays" effect are active in time for the card to see itself enter play. Just because they are borrowing heavily from Magic, doesn't mean everything will be the same.

hacky
06-04-2013, 07:14 PM
Disagree with OP. HEX is similar to, but isn't MTG. It's likely drawing the chain (stack) nomenclature from WoWTCG. And in WoWTCG, "When a _____ enters play" would trigger from itself, if the card matches the descriptor.

"When another _____ enters play" and "As a _____ enters play" would be the wording to not allow that effect, but even these two phrases are subtly different. As is "When you play a _____".

Xenavire
06-04-2013, 07:16 PM
Why not? If you have a complete understanding of the rules then reading a card should tell you exactly what it does. The rules are rules, not suggestions. Firm logic and reason, not fuzzy intention and interpretation.

I'm sorry, but I have seen this logic fail bigtime, MANY times. I have seen pro's pick up a card, read it ONCE, rant and rave about how its so crap/amazing, then sit down later and re-read it, and realise they were wrong. And knowing the core mechanics goes a long way to mitigating this, but it will never stop it - jumping to conclusions will happen.

I don't see this as misleading at all - a troop is entering play, and you get a life. Clean and to the point.

And to the person who mentioned the game mechanics and card text were wrong, they are not - Ben said it explicitly that he would gain a life before playing it, and that is exactly what happanened.

Tyrfang
06-04-2013, 07:22 PM
"When a troop enters play" sounds fine to me. Not all mechanics have to work the same way as Magic...

stiii
06-04-2013, 08:06 PM
I'm pretty sure this card would trigger off itself under magic rules. It is just that magic cards aren't worded like this in the first place.

the OP is rather confusing and mentions a lot of things that have nothing to do with how this card works.

Redbeastmage
06-04-2013, 08:14 PM
Magic rules require a creature to be on the field for it's ability to trigger when "a creature" enters, unless it specifies itself.

Hex rules do not seem to have this requirement, cutting out the need for "When [cardname] or another creature enter..."

Moondancer
06-04-2013, 08:20 PM
We do have to accept too that the rules today will be different when alpha and different when beta hits and different in 2 years. Rules evolve to try and handle all situation in TCG and MMO games evolve in a not dissimilar fashion and this game is both.

Expect change i mean even wow doesn't really use a talent system anymore one of the core systems of that game for many years.

Skirovik
06-04-2013, 08:29 PM
I prefer it this way.

As a new player (although I'm aware of the MTG rules for the most part), reading this card's description "When a troop enters play..." makes sense in the way it works. This card is a troop. This card is entering play. The more confusing thing would be if it did NOT trigger it's effects.

"So you're telling me, it says when a troop enters play I get this bonus, and this is a troop, and it's entering play, but I DON'T get the bonus? Uh.. why not?!"

"Well, you see, in this other game, it works differently, so that's just how it happens."

"But that's not what the card says. It says I should get a bonus."

"It's makes more sense this way."

"No it doesn't. It makes more sense when the card does what it says it does."

*leaves confused*

The more I think about it, the more I prefer the card to stay written as is, work as is, and be as friendly to newer players as possible.

Let me re-iterate. This card is working as intended. The rules as written make sense. There is no need to change either the wording OR the mechanic behind how this card works. To change it would make the mechanic confusing for new players. Heck, it could make it confusing for ALL players. Do not change this. At. All.

stiii
06-04-2013, 08:39 PM
Or they could just print it like a magic card and say when this card is another creature enters play do.

houjix
06-04-2013, 08:41 PM
Or they could just print it like a magic card and say when this card is another creature enters play do.

Gotta save on that digital ink.

RobHaven
06-04-2013, 09:34 PM
"Well, you see, in this other game, it works differently, so that's just how it happens."

That would be a terrible way to explain it. The issue is that a card shouldn't be able to activate its effect/presence until it has cleared the stack.

Regardless of how you feel about the matter, there is no harm in wording it as the OP suggested. Writing "When X or another troop..." is definitely not LESS clear. No new players are going to call out the card for unnecessary wording. Whether you think it's needed or not, the most clear and absolute terms should be used on all cards in order to ensure a certain level of universal interpretation.

What I'm trying to say is that there are no drawbacks to wording it as the OP suggested, and some people may find it clearer. Might as well do it.

Malicus
06-04-2013, 09:50 PM
I have no issue with the wording and find the additional words a clumsy way to explain why it doesn't behave in the same way as a card from a different game would behave if you knew the rules for that game.

Someone said that if you know the rules you should be able to understand the card from reading and I agree, the issue was that they knew the rules of a different game and applied that logic. For me I think the card should be self explanatory even if you do not know the rules which this description covers.

larryhl
06-04-2013, 09:51 PM
Well, someone needs to come up with the comprehensive card rules for Hex then. As of now I don't see one. And until they come up with that, people will be taking their knowledge of rules from elsewhere to apply to Hex.

hacky
06-04-2013, 10:06 PM
That would be a terrible way to explain it. The issue is that a card shouldn't be able to activate its effect/presence until it has cleared the stack.

But it does, in WoWTCG's ruleset, which I assume Hex is drawing from. Here's how it generally breaks down:

When a card leaves the chain and is about to enter play, effects happen like this:

1) "As _____ enters play" effects trigger, and are put on the chain (stack) and are resolved.
2) The card enters play.
3) "When _____ enters play" effects trigger and are put on the chain and are resolved.

Adamanthian Scrivener's power is therefore in play (and in effect) when it would trigger from Adamanthian Scrivener entering play. For clarity, it could say "When this or another troop enters play...", but it is functionally equivalent if HEX uses the above nomenclature.

If the power was worded "As a troop enters play...", then the power would NOT be in play at the time the power would trigger.

(for reference, WoWTCG Comprehensive Rules, section 710: http://www.cryptozoic.com/sites/default/files/uploads/files/wow_cr_v7.31_130515.pdf)

Transparent
06-04-2013, 10:07 PM
Why are people so adamant to argue about how the card shouldn't behave as how it is stated. We have to remember first that Hex is it's own game, it does not follow in the footsteps of MtG or any other TCG, it is trying to make it's own stance on the genre. Making card rulings from other TCGs be evident in this game would just cause more call-outs to MtG. I believe it's worded perfectly as is. And besides, it's a digital game, there is no referees or judges observing matches, maybe spectators, but ultimately the game makes the call.

MattyTheSquid
06-05-2013, 05:37 PM
It seems like there's been a bit of a misunderstanding here. Hopefully I can shed some light on this issue.

Short version: Adamanthian Scrivener is working correctly.

Long version: Triggered powers on cards are active as soon as the card enters play. There's no separate power that needs to resolve before they become active. In fact, a card with a triggered power like the Scrivener's will "see" cards that would trigger it even if they're entering play at the same time, including itself. In WoW, we handle that with this handy rule:


703.3c If a triggered power becomes active or inactive at the same time as the trigger event itís watching for, it triggers.

So, the Scrivener should be triggering itself.

That being said, there is a reasonable argument that the card could be written as "when this or another troop enters play" for the sake of clarity. As this very thread illustrates, it's not that hard for people to misinterpret how the card works, whereas the other wording leaves little question. In fact, we tend to use the "this or another" wording in WoW to avoid that very confusion (Tribe powers are a good example of this). Functionally, though, the two phrases are pretty much interchangeable.

I hope that helped clear things up a bit.

KnowingCrow
06-05-2013, 10:22 PM
I will say that it is a little confusing coming from a Magics player perspective, because the current wording seems to imply that creatures' triggered abilities are active while the creature is on the stack. Changing the text to "this or another" would go a long way in making it less ambiguous.

jaxsonbateman
06-05-2013, 10:32 PM
As a Magic judge, this works perfectly fine. In Magic terms, "when a troop enters the battlefield under your control gain 1 life" is akin to "when this or another creature enters the battlefield under your control, gain 1 life". That lack of another is what makes it work - it satisfies the trigger condition when it itself enters the battlefield, so it triggers.

The reason this is confusing for some coming from Magic is that the majority of those Soul Warden effects are all 'another'.

A creature's triggered abilities are always active, and always go off when the trigger condition is met. Scrivener enters the battlefield - the game checks to see if any trigger conditions have been met, and sees that indeed a creature has entered the battlefield - and as such, trigger.

JoB3nder
06-05-2013, 10:48 PM
Thank you Matty, I do think that clears up the question.

I'm surprised nobody mention Uruunaz when debating this issue. The text on that card is exactly like what the OP's recommended text.

http://hex.potion-of-wit.com/img/cards/Uruunaz_Gear_Web.png

KnowingCrow
06-05-2013, 10:50 PM
One of the nice things about being a digital card game is that editing the text on the cards is the easiest thing to do.

Barkam
06-05-2013, 11:00 PM
One of the nice things about being a digital card game is that editing the text on the cards is the easiest thing to do.

I sure hope that we take the time during this beta to crisp up the language on the cards. No reason not to make them as clear as possible.

Willzyx
06-05-2013, 11:06 PM
I'm surprised nobody mention Uruunaz when debating this issue. The text on that card is exactly like what the OP's recommended text.

http://hex.potion-of-wit.com/img/cards/Uruunaz_Gear_Web.png

That's another compelling argument. Consistency makes the game look polished and professional.

Patrigan
06-05-2013, 11:31 PM
Perhaps they originally had it like Uruunaz, but decided to drop it in favour of the shorter (and functionally equal) version now.

People seem to forget that this isn't even in alpha, so things like these wordings most certainly aren't final. And as mentioned, non-functional erratas are easy to apply.

Brewdinar
06-05-2013, 11:56 PM
As a Magic judge, this works perfectly fine. In Magic terms, "when a troop enters the battlefield under your control gain 1 life" is akin to "when this or another creature enters the battlefield under your control, gain 1 life". That lack of another is what makes it work - it satisfies the trigger condition when it itself enters the battlefield, so it triggers.

The reason this is confusing for some coming from Magic is that the majority of those Soul Warden effects are all 'another'.

A creature's triggered abilities are always active, and always go off when the trigger condition is met. Scrivener enters the battlefield - the game checks to see if any trigger conditions have been met, and sees that indeed a creature has entered the battlefield - and as such, trigger.

Perhaps due to the "Warden effects are all 'another'" phenomenon, this seemed wrong to me, so I looked it up. Rule 603.6a on triggered abilities seemed pretty clear on you being right, and further thought makes it obvious this should be the case. After all, a card triggers its own "when ~this~ ETB" so it should trigger its own when ~type~ ETB".

So, thanks for highlighting this flaw in my intuition, and for inadvertently helping me find some silly new card interactions. For example, Opalescence turns Day of the Dragons into an infinite loop/drawn game!

To put this back on topic, while I like the clarity of "~this~ or another," I'm fine with Hex using a slightly different template for the same rule. Though they really should be consistent with the final template *cough Uruunaz cough*

:edit: Should have refreshed the stale tab before writing my reply. At least we have consensus.

Arbiter
06-06-2013, 12:04 AM
This card works exactly as it would under MtG. There are plenty of creatures that trigger an ability when they are successfully resolved and come into play. I think the confusion stems from different terminology. In MtG, the word "play" is commonly refers to casting a card, so a card with "as you play..." Would be referring to a card being cast - which could not be in play for itself.

I would rather not see additional wording as I think it could lead to confusion down the track, as there are so many potential card interactions. For example, if you have an artifact that gives life when troops come into play, you do not want to have to say when another troop or this card if it is a troop, just because there is a chance of there being a constant in play that makes all non troop artefacts troops.

I think it is just terminology mixup. People will get used to the terminology used in the game soon enough.

Rapkannibale
06-06-2013, 12:32 AM
I think the wording is fine. Coming from Magic I was surprised as well, but the wording is not wrong if that is how the Hex rules work. It may be "wrong" if you compare it to Magic rules, but just because this game has similarities to Magic, it doesn't mean it can't change up some of the rules.

You have to remember that because this game is digital cards can technically be affected in any zone (like some cards do). In Magic a creature is not a creature until it enters play (before it is considered a spell). In Hex I consider the troop already being a troop while it is in your hand or in your deck. Which makes the working make sense.

Oaka23
06-06-2013, 02:13 AM
edit: lulz nevermind

Arbiter
06-06-2013, 02:30 AM
The wording on the card is "When a TROOP enters play under your control, gain 1 health". In MtG, the wording would be "When a creature enters the battlefield under your control, gain one life". Were this to be resolved in MtG, the Scrivener would come into play, then trigger his ability. The confusion comes because "play" has a completely different meaning in MtG. Perhaps the best thing would be to say enters the board instead of enters play. In my dim memory I seem to recall that originally in MtG these cards were worded "When x comes into play..." and the wording changed to clear confusion when playing a card became putting a card on the stack.

Patrigan
06-06-2013, 02:31 AM
I think a lot of people saying that it should count itself based on the "When a troop enters play..." wording don't realize where the other side is coming from. In theory, the ability of a card should only be able to "see" a trigger occurring if the card is in play prior to said trigger (in this case a troop entering play) happening. When you play the scrivener (or any troop), it is put on the stack, priority to respond is given to the active player, then the other player(s) in turn. When all players pass the opportunity to play a response, the scrivener would resolve and enter play. The key there is that it is not considered to be "in play" until after is has fully resolved, meaning that its ability is unable to be triggered until AFTER the "enters play" event has happened.

These are the rules for magic, and yes, this is a different game, but the rules and wordings on cards in magic are there for a reason - they leave no room for interpretation. If the final wording (another thing people haven't really talked about is that this is pre-alpha and nothing's final) remains as is and it still triggers itself, then tell me what happens when someone plays a troop as a quick action in response to the scrivener (we've seen this as possible with sapphire gem socketing)? Does the scrivener, still on the stack, see the other troop enter play and trigger the life gain?

Two persons before you already showed using the actual rules that it works exactly the same in Magic as it does in Hex. It's easy though, why would "when this enters play" work and not "when a troop/ally/creature enters play" isn't "this" a "troop/ally/creature"?

As for your last example, the answer is no, because the scrivener hasn't entered play yet.

Fateanomaly
06-06-2013, 02:32 AM
I am fine with either as long as it is implemented consistently throughout the game.

jaxsonbateman
06-06-2013, 02:33 AM
If the final wording (another thing people haven't really talked about is that this is pre-alpha and nothing's final) remains as is and it still triggers itself, then tell me what happens when someone plays a troop as a quick action in response to the scrivener (we've seen this as possible with sapphire gem socketing)? Does the scrivener, still on the stack, see the other troop enter play and trigger the life gain?
If the Scrivener is still on the stack and they then cast a different troop in response, then that troop will resolve first. There won't be a Scrivener on the battlefield, and as such there won't be an applicable trigger to go off. Then the Scrivener resolves and enters the battlefield. The game checks to see if any triggers are applicable - and it sees that there's one that reads "whenever a troop enters the battlefield under your control, gain 1 life". It also knows that a troop did just enter the battlefield, and it gains one life.

I can find the MTG rule for you, but it definitely works like this (otherwise no creature with an enters-the-battlefield trigger would ever work).

TheWrathofShane
06-06-2013, 03:06 AM
Tonight's Twitch.tv stream showed off the Adamanthian Scrivener at 25:15, who has the ability to gain 1 health to your champion when a troop is played. As we saw in the steam, 1 health was granted when the Scrivener was played, which should have surprised a lot of viewers who are coming to Hex from Magic: The Gathering.

Both games follow a "last-in-first-out" resolution order for actions and triggers; any new action is placed on top of the stack and the action on the top of the stack is the first to "happen". This is what allows "QuickActions" or "Instants" as MTGers know them to interrupt actions before they resolve, and what enables a lot of the interesting combo play and combat tricks that make both games interesting.

The problem here is that the Scrivener is entering play and yet triggering his own ability--an ability that implicitly only resolves when the Scrivener himself is in already play. As we see, he is not in play yet but rather in the "action stack", which is what allows him to be countered with another card or ability.

Here's a wording that would be consistent with "last-in-first-out" action order:
"When Adamanthian Scrivener or another troop enters play under your control, gain 1 health."

This specifies that this ability not only triggers when the Scrivener is *in* play, but also when it *is* played--an important distinction. Such a wording would allow the Scrivener to behave exactly as he does in the current game build without any weird rule inconsistencies.


In MTG creatures can see themselves as well as other creatures enter the battlefield.

Soul warden clearly says whenever "another" creature. If it didnt you would in fact gain 1 health from soul warden.

TheWrathofShane
06-06-2013, 08:26 AM
Also guys, we can assume that "Play" means "enter the battlefield", rather then "cast". Because if play meant cast, 1 health would not be gained.

Ash-Prime
06-06-2013, 08:36 AM
Also guys, we can assume that "Play" means "enter the battlefield", rather then "cast". Because if play meant cast, 1 health would not be gained.

Well no, we can't do that because that is definitively wrong. Playing something and then something resolving are two separate things, other wise counter magic will have no place in this game (something they said exists).

Vorpal
06-06-2013, 08:45 AM
There are other games where if you play a card that says something like "Give +1 to all your troops" the card you played gets the +1 as well.

TheWrathofShane
06-06-2013, 08:47 AM
Well no, we can't do that because that is definitively wrong. Playing something and then something resolving are two separate things, other wise counter magic will have no place in this game (something they said exists).

Well, if play referred to cast, his ability would not activate in time to gain 1 health, and you would get 1 health while the next troop you cast was still on the stack.

Ash-Prime
06-06-2013, 09:08 AM
There are other games where if you play a card that says something like "Give +1 to all your troops" the card you played gets the +1 as well.
Well, if the card says, "Troops you control get +1/+1." That is something entirely different. There is no trigger as that is a state based action. The conversation here is regarding a triggered effect existing before it should. As in, the card coming into play is triggering the trigger that is also coming into play.


Well, if play referred to cast, his ability would not activate in time to gain 1 health, and you would get 1 health while the next troop you cast was still on the stack.

Hence the existence of this thread. The intent of the text on the card not being clear.

jfour
06-06-2013, 09:35 AM
There are no creatures in MTG that trigger off their own "whenever a creature enters the battlefield".

Reason is; its confusing, and not entirely clear how it works in the rules. So all creatures with this kind of effect are written "whenever ~this~ or another creature enters the battlefield" for clarity's sake.

I think that the same should be applied here.

Willzyx
06-06-2013, 09:53 AM
A purple (http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=24746&p=240347&viewfull=1#post240347) has replied to this thread already, and it looks like the issue of wording has been acknowledged--we can stop arguing over this now. =P

jaxsonbateman
06-06-2013, 10:01 AM
There are no creatures in MTG that trigger off their own "whenever a creature enters the battlefield".
Well I don't know if there are any creatures with abilities written like that in Magic - but if they were, I can tell you that by the rules they would trigger.

To use a similar scenario, if you have a Prismatic Omen on the battlefield (2 mana green enchantment that gives all your lands every basic land type in addition to their other types), you have 5 lands out, and you play a Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle (whenever a Mountain enters the battlefield, if you control 5 other Mountains, you may have Valakut the Molten Pinnacle deal 3 damage to target creature or player) it does trigger off itself entering the battlefield. After it enters, the game checks to see if any abilities should trigger. It sees that a Mountain just entered the battlefield (because of Prismatic Omen), and it sees that you controlled 5 other Mountains when it did, so it triggers. The fact that Valakut itself was the Mountain is irrelevant.

hacky
06-06-2013, 11:32 AM
Re: "play" (verb) versus "play" (zone)

In WoWTCG, to "play a card" means to add a link to the chain (add it to the stack). When it resolves, it then "enters play", and is now "in play". I'm assuming similar behavior for HEX.

Which means, "when you play a card" and "when a card enters play" are completely different.