Ben Swainbank#
Recently, the rulings on timing for additional strike declaration and
damage prevention were reversed. Playing those kinds of cards was
brought into line with the general priority-passing scheme used in most
aspects of the game.
The controversy around the blocking and deflection timing has me
thinking it might be valuable to apply the same principles, and remedy,
to the rules surrounding playing reaction cards and blocking.
The rules, as outlines in 6.2.2 don't restrict what kinds of reaction
cards can be played except to say intercept can only be played when it
is needed. This implies other kinds of reactions can be played, even
during a block attempt.
I would suggest a successful block occurs when:
1. A block attempt has been announced.
2. Intercept of the blocking minion is >= stealth of the acting minion
3. Priority, and the option play effects, has passed around as per
1.6.1.5. and everyone has passed
Is that just a restatement of the current rules? Would adopting that
definition bring blocking and reacting more into line with other
aspects of the game? Would it eliminate the need for some of the
current reaction rulings?
An acting player saying "you block" would translate to "I
pass". The reacting player would still get the opportunity to pay
effects (handing priority back the actor) - wake a different minion,
play deflection, etc... They couldn't announce a different block
attempt.
Traffic on the other thread suggests many players don't feel the
ruling on deflection timing is well-grounded in the rules. There does
not seem to be a similar objection to the ruling that you can't play
Deflection after you announce a block attempt (until it fails). But the
two rulings do seem equally well (or un) justified.
Should we do away with both?
-Ben Swainbank