(Do not merge) [ICE] Implemented Kjeldoran Guard #8593
Conversation
|
Thank you so much! I have a Pre-Mirage Masters set project and I've been longing to get at least Kjeldoran Elite Guard in! Glad to see someone giving love to the old sets. |
|
I'm gonna hold off on merging this until I can get a more conclusive answer with regards to how "defending player" is determined but otherwise this looks good to me. We've got NEO previews starting tomorrow so there's gonna be plenty of easy stuff to help implement. Thanks for the contribution. |
|
Sounds good! Based on rereading it, I would assume it refers to whoever is being attacked in a round of combat, regardless of which player's gets targeted by the ability. EDIT: While you get clarification, I would assume Arcum's Sleigh would share the same interpretation? |
|
Yeah, the "defending player"...this card should be removed because of ambiguity. Or reworded to make some sense. For example, the target creature attacked the "defending player", etc. |
|
I'm sure that the intention of Kjeldoran Guard is that you're supposed to be able to use it either on offense or defense (to pump one of your blocking creatures), and if you use it on defense it cares about you controlling snow lands. That's unambiguously what the card's wording means in a two-player game, where "defending player" is defined by 506.2 and multiplayer-specific rules don't apply. Compare it to Snowblind, which (explicitly) uses the defending player's snow lands when the enchanted creature is attacking and the controller's snow lands the rest of the time. However, apparently there was a big discussion last year over Arcum's Sleigh which seems never to have gotten resolved, which means that even the MTG Rules Manager can't tell you how these cards work or whether they even work at all under the current rules. https://articles.starcitygames.com/select/snow-battles-a-new-way-to-play-commander/ |
|
Those are from over a year ago and still no resolution. Should I remove Kjeldoran Guard out of this PR, so that we can at least merge Kjeldoran Elite Guard in, and open a separate one for Kjeldoran Guard? |
Alex-Vasile
changed the title
|
From the Multiplayer section of the rules:
I think for that old card (and a few other, like [[Blaze of Glory]]), defending player means "opponent of the attacking player", limited to the combat phase. |
|
Blaze of Glory - (Gatherer) (Scryfall) (EDHREC)
|
| this.subtype.add(SubType.SOLDIER); | ||
| this.power = new MageInt(1); | ||
| this.toughness = new MageInt(1); | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Full text is:
// {T}: Target creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn. When that creature leaves the battlefield this turn, sacrifice Kjeldoran Guard. Activate only during combat and only if defending player controls no snow lands.
| // When that creature leaves the battlefield this turn, sacrifice Kjeldoran Guard. | ||
| // Activate only during combat and only if defending player controls no snow lands. | ||
| CompoundCondition snowLandAndCombatCondition = new CompoundCondition( | ||
| new InvertCondition(new DefendingPlayerControlsCondition(snowLandFiler)), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
replace the condition with one using the following predicate (in addition to checking for the permanent to be a snow land permanent): DefendingPlayerControlsNoSourcePredicate.instance
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
| public String getRule() { return "that creature left the battlefield this turn"; } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think something like "When that creature left the battlefield, sacrifice {this}." would be a little nicer on the delayed trigger message.
It could be done by setting setTriggerPhrase in the constructor for instance.
|
@xenohedron With the age of this PR, and without knowing if OP is still active, should I take over and make my own implem? |
|
Yeah, for any card implementation PR that's more than a couple months old, it's fine to make your own fresh one if adjustments are needed. (Do link the previous work for reference.) |
I am not active anymore, feel free to re-implement from scratch or to copy this to a new PR and make the changes you need. |
|
Thanks, sorry for the pings then! |
No worries, I left them on for the PRs specifically for reasons like this. |
No description provided.