PDA

View Full Version : Ragefire escalates when played on illegal target



eimerian
04-28-2014, 01:04 PM
Name:
Eimerian

Description:
Opponent played Ragefire on my troop.
I responded by playing Arcane Shield on that troop.
Then the stack resolved.
Arcane Shield resolved, my troop gained Spellshield.
Ragefire did not damage my troop, but it escalated and was shuffled into my opponent's deck, as if it had resolved.

Escalation reads "As this Action resolves,...".
When a spell's target becomes illegal, it does not resolve, it is countered.
Ragefire should not escalate and go to the graveyard.

Reproduce:
Counter Ragefire with Arcane Shield.

Frequency:
Happened once.

dwebber88
04-28-2014, 01:08 PM
Arcane shield makes something untargetable. But doesn't stop the ragefire from hitting.

I believe this is working as intended.

Yoss
04-28-2014, 01:15 PM
Sounds like a bug to me.

eimerian
04-28-2014, 01:26 PM
Arcane shield makes something untargetable. But doesn't stop the ragefire from hitting.
No, im afraid you are confusing two things here. You probably think about how you can't click on a troop with spellshield, when you select the target of an action. But that is not the effect of spellshield, that is just the UI being nice. Spellshield does not prevent players from clicking on cards, it prevents actions from targeting cards.

Xenavire
04-28-2014, 01:28 PM
I think this would counter ragefire and sent it to the graveyard. Unless Hex has spellshield protect against the effects of a targeted ability, but not stop the resolution of the effect, in which case this would be correct.

Going with bug unless a dev says otherwise.

Piecetinker
04-28-2014, 03:17 PM
I feel like this is intentional. Arcane Shield does not specifically say "Counter _______ spell." It says, "spells can not directly target the card with Spellshield". This does not in any way prevent the card from ever following through. The card does its thing and resolves perfectly fine. However, if you were to use Countermagic, that is specifically countering the card. Using Stoneskin, that is specifically countering the card.

In the end, Ragefire should still resolve normally because it was targeted before you placed Spellshield on it. All spells resolve normally under this stipulation, why should Ragefire be an exception to it?

Once again, you aren't preventing a card from being played, you just stopped the ability for a player to target that card with a spell.

Xenavire
04-28-2014, 03:25 PM
But the issue with resolving an action is that if there is no legal target/the target is no longer legal, it fizzles. With Spellshield, it stops being legal.

It is possible it works the way you have described (as I mentioned above) but signs point to this being a bug.

mach
04-28-2014, 03:28 PM
But the issue with resolving an action is that if there is no legal target/the target is no longer legal, it fizzles.

Source for this rule?

Xenavire
04-28-2014, 03:33 PM
Source for this rule?

Well, normally I would cite sacrifice effects, but thats currently an iffy area, so lets go with time ripple. A murder will fizzle if you time ripple the target. I assume the same should be true for ragefire in that situation, meaning it shouldn't resolve.

mach
04-28-2014, 03:35 PM
Well, normally I would cite sacrifice effects, but thats currently an iffy area, so lets go with time ripple. A murder will fizzle if you time ripple the target. I assume the same should be true for ragefire in that situation, meaning it shouldn't resolve.

Does it actually fizzle, or just do nothing because there's no secondary effect?

Xenavire
04-28-2014, 03:39 PM
Well, I assume it fizzles because of the rulings on things being sent to the hand (I think Totem bounced with a self buff on the stack still resolves, yet an Atrophy wont).

I think we need Oss in here, he can explain this better than me.

JakeFreedom
04-28-2014, 03:58 PM
Since Spellshield(already on a card) prevents a card from being targeted, I would think this is normal action... RageFire targets the card. Then it is sent to the stack for the damage. At this point Ragefire is already in motion. From my understanding you can't stop a card in motion unless it is interrupted. SpellShield doesn't do this. Applying Spellshield to the targeted card would only prevent the damage being dealt. Ragefire still fires its shot and since it completed,(Ragefire doesn't care it didn't do damage, all it cares about is that it wasn't interrupted) it escalates as it should.

Xenavire
04-28-2014, 04:07 PM
OK, think of the targeting like this: it is a wire with an electrical current. When the switch is flipped, the target is hit. Suddenly the target is encased in glass, and the wire is disconnected (because it isn't a legal target anymore). Then the switch is flipped - the electrical charge goes nowhere.

This is why ragefire should fizzle completely, and not get shuffled back in.

The only catch here is the escalation part of the effect doesn't rely on the damage part as part of the resolution. So this could go either way - it should fizzle, but if it only partially fizzles, there is the chance that the escalation portion would still activate. So is it a full fizzle, or a partial fizzle?

I think the answer would probably come from Mutate vs Arcane Shield. If it still draws a card, then it is likely that Ragefire is intended to work this way.

Yoss
04-28-2014, 04:24 PM
A spell whose target becomes invalid should be countered completely and none of its effects should resolve. I do not remember if we've had an official ruling on this. We certainly don't have a rule book to refer to. :( Did anyone check the FAQ?

Xenavire
04-28-2014, 04:32 PM
A spell whose target becomes invalid should be countered completely and none of its effects should resolve. I do not remember if we've had an official ruling on this. We certainly don't have a rule book to refer to. :( Did anyone check the FAQ?

I don't remember seeing it in the FAQ, and I was reading it last night.

The issue though, is whether Hex counters the whole action when it no longer has a legal target, or only the portion that would have affected the target. I would say it makes sense to counter the whole thing, but it could easily work the other way for cards with a secondary effect.

cavench
04-28-2014, 04:35 PM
I agree with all who says rage fire never resolves, escalation never took effect, and the card goes into graveyard.

cavench
04-28-2014, 04:40 PM
The issue though, is whether Hex counters the whole action when it no longer has a legal target, or only the portion that would have affected the target.

Escalation takes effect as the basic action resolves. So the whole card is countered.

Link: https://hextcg.com/keywords/
(read Relentless Corruption card text)

Xenavire
04-28-2014, 04:43 PM
Well, that should be our answer right there. Just as most people thought, it should simply fizzle.

Assuming no genuine changes. Escalation did get nerfed after all.

Piecetinker
04-28-2014, 04:46 PM
A spell whose target becomes invalid should be countered completely and none of its effects should resolve. I do not remember if we've had an official ruling on this. We certainly don't have a rule book to refer to. :( Did anyone check the FAQ?

Why should a card not resolve if played, unless a card is specifically countered? Regardless if a card being targeted is invalid, it should not magically change how a card should function, especially if it is worded that way.

Xenavire, you are absolutely correct. Since Mutate still allows the draw of a card, it resolves. It just stops the targeted card's conversion. The card still resolves either way. Unless Arcane Shield specifically said "Counters target card AND gives Spellshield on target", there should be no reason why those cards aren't resolved.

Same thing with Burn, Burn to the Ground, Time Ripple, and any other targeted action. They ALL resolve even if Spellshield is put on the target. The activated effect will not do any damage or bring the card back to the hand, but it still resolves.

Piecetinker
04-28-2014, 04:49 PM
Escalation takes effect as the basic action resolves. So the whole card is countered.

Link: https://hextcg.com/keywords/
(read Relentless Corruption card text)

Where does it say that Spellshield counters a card? You are confusing Countered with Spellshield's effect.

Yoss
04-28-2014, 04:52 PM
Easy to test this.

Make a deck with 4 Arcane Shield, 4 Mutate, and a bunch of cheap creatures. Cast a Mutate and interrupt it with a Shield. See if you get to draw a card. Can also test with Atrophy in place of Mutate.

EDIT:
Removed Stoneskin as an example; it's not the same thing.

Xenavire
04-28-2014, 04:54 PM
Piecetinker, removing the legality of a target typically counters anything that was on the stack targeting it. That is why people are saying fizzle and counter.

The two terms are subtly different, but I think the difference is moot in this case. If the effect would fizzle and the card would be sent to the graveyard, only effects like Skarn etc would trigger, unlike with a counter, but the Ragefire would still fail to escalate.

That is why it is iffy - did they change the rules on the card?

So does anyone know how mutate + arcane shield interact?

Xenavire
04-28-2014, 04:55 PM
Actually, stoneskin wouldn't work, it specifically interrupts the whole action. Subtly different from loss of target.

cavench
04-28-2014, 04:58 PM
Where does it say that Spellshield counters a card? You are confusing Countered with Spellshield's effect.

At this point this is all speculation that Hex will follow Mtg's ruling in this regard.

Per Mtg rules: "... it never resolves (i.e., something counters it or it fizzles against all of its targets)"
Link: https://www.wizards.com/magic/expert/tempest/Tempest_FAQ.asp

So if a card's target becomes invalid, then that card is never resolved.

cavench
04-28-2014, 05:17 PM
So does anyone know how mutate + arcane shield interact?

This one is tough, but here is my thought process. I asked myself these:

1. "Does this card require a target?" A: Yes (I would say you cannot cast Mutate without a target)
2. "What happens if the target becomes invalid?" A: the card fizzles (aka countered on resolution)

Therefore, my interpretation is Mutate fizzled and "Draw a card" does not take place.

Xenavire
04-28-2014, 05:21 PM
This one is tough, but here is my thought process. I asked myself these:

1. "Does this card require a target?" A: Yes (I would say you cannot cast Mutate without a target)
2. "What happens if the target becomes invalid?" A: the card fizzles (aka countered on resolution)

Therefore, my interpretation is Mutate fizzled and "Draw a card" does not take place.

Yeah, we know how it is meant to work, we need a playtest. :p

cavench
04-28-2014, 05:33 PM
Yeah, we know how it is meant to work, we need a playtest. :p

My bad, I thought the question was a continuation on ruling topic. I applaud those who has the guts to open enough packs to do this kinds of play tests.

Piecetinker
04-28-2014, 05:42 PM
Well in this case Ragefire should also cancel if someone Time Rippled the targeted card, correct? Rage fire still escalates and does not go to the graveyard even in this case. Ragefire never said "if" the card resolves. The second effect of this card begins after it deals two damage. Also there are lots of differences between this and MTG, remember the Flock of Birds vs Crush scenario? Works way different in MTG.

Xenavire
04-28-2014, 05:55 PM
Well in this case Ragefire should also cancel if someone Time Rippled the targeted card, correct? Rage fire still escalates and does not go to the graveyard even in this case. Ragefire never said "if" the card resolves. The second effect of this card begins after it deals two damage. Also there are lots of differences between this and MTG, remember the Flock of Birds vs Crush scenario? Works way different in MTG.

The issue is, should it shuffle in if it never dealt damage? (Well, that isn't quite right, because I know if you target a Bird of plenty with ragefire, it will resolve and shuffle in, even though the damage itself was prevented.) But it has no legal target when it tries to resolve - should it fizzle before reaching the escalation effect?

I wonder if Ragefire is bugged or not... Mutate testing is needed to verify I think.

mach
04-28-2014, 06:05 PM
I wonder if Ragefire is bugged or not... Mutate testing is needed to verify I think.

I think either way is a sensible way of doing things. In a case like this, I wouldn't consider something bugged unless you can find an inconsistency. Or we get the rulebook.