rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

[LSJ] Bonecraft Question

5 messages from 4 participants · 19 December 1997 – 22 December 1997
original thread on Google Groups

Joshua Duffin

I'm pretty sure I asked this before, but I've forgotten what the answer was. This time, I'm actually making a deck with the card, so I promise not to forget. ;-) Bonecraft has what looks like reminder text saying that its side effect (the minion hit by it has -1/-2 hand damage) doesn't affect the Strike Resolution step this round. Is it meant to be for the entire round, or only for the current pair of strikes that the effect isn't working yet? Thanks, Josh really bad at remembering the answers to my own questions

LSJ

Joshua Duffin wrote: > I'm pretty sure I asked this before, but I've forgotten what the answer > was. This time, I'm actually making a deck with the card, so I promise > not to forget. ;-) > > Bonecraft has what looks like reminder text saying that its side effect > (the minion hit by it has -1/-2 hand damage) doesn't affect the Strike > Resolution step this round. Is it meant to be for the entire round, > or only for the current pair of strikes that the effect isn't working > yet? Thanks, Bonecraft [SAB] - combat (vis) (1) * The "(This does not affect the Strike Resolution step this round.)" reminder text on Bonecraft is properly read as "(This does not affect the current pair of Strike Resolution steps.)". That is, any additional strikes after the strike that was annnounced with the Bonecraft strike will be affected. [LSJ 970224] -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. (*) - Subject to review by Rules Team

John M. Baker

LSJ wrote: > Bonecraft [SAB] - combat (vis) (1) > > * The "(This does not affect the Strike Resolution step > this round.)" reminder text on Bonecraft is properly > read as "(This does not affect the current pair of > Strike Resolution steps.)". That is, any additional > strikes after the strike that was annnounced with the > Bonecraft strike will be affected. [LSJ 970224] Okay, how about if Bonecraft is performed with First Strike? Would the opponent's first hand strike be affected by a FS Bonecraft? John Baker

James Coupe

In article <01bd0d67$1da09e20$268c...@PennState.cac.psu.edu>, "John M. Baker" <jm...@psu.edu> writes [ quoted text not captured ] I would have said that the opponent's hand strike (assuming that it was not also dealt with First Strike) would have been affected since it will occur in a later pair of steps. -- James Coupe (remove some crap to reply) Pah!! I hope it shits in your jogging suit!

LSJ

John M. Baker wrote: > > LSJ wrote: > > Bonecraft [SAB] - combat (vis) (1) > > > > * The "(This does not affect the Strike Resolution step > > this round.)" reminder text on Bonecraft is properly > > read as "(This does not affect the current pair of > > Strike Resolution steps.)". That is, any additional > > strikes after the strike that was annnounced with the > > Bonecraft strike will be affected. [LSJ 970224] > > Okay, how about if Bonecraft is performed with First Strike? > Would the opponent's first hand strike be affected by a FS > Bonecraft? Yes. The "pair" are assumed to be resolving simultaneously. If they are not (one is done at First Strike, for example), then they resolve in turn, as usual. Bottom Line: it's just reminder text. [ quoted text not captured ]