Jump to content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Card: Squiggoth Brute - all interactions

Squiggoth Brute

Best Answer Kaloo , 02 September 2016 - 09:53 PM

Ok, after 6 pages it looks like we're finally in a position to have a "best answer". Here it goes:
 

1:- Does it remove acquired keywords, such as from attachments or card effects?

Yes, since the text does not state "printed keywords"

 

 

2:- Does it remove all keywords gained after the combat phase has begun, even if it already had a copy of said keyword (such as Ranged on a Ratling Deadeye after being targeted by Preemptive Barrage)?
It removes exactly 1 instance of all keywords, irrespective of whether or not the unit had it at the beginning of the combat phase. Effectively, all keywords are treated as a modifier to which the Squiggoth applies "-1" to, meaning that should a unit acquire 2 instances of a keyword (such as a Ranged unit benefiting from a Preemptive Barrage) it would effectively lose 1 instance of the keyword, resulting in 1 instance remaining.

 

 

3:- Does it remove Area of Effect completely, or merely reduce it by one?

The Area of Effect keyword is removed in its entirety. However, should a unit benefit from multiple instances of Area of Effect, a single instance of Area of Effect is removed, but the numerical value of the Area of Effect remains the same.

 

Example 1: A Vicious Bloodletter (AoE (3)) is at the same planet as a Squiggoth. After the combat phase begins, it will lose the AoE keyword entirely, and as such will only be able to perform a conventional attack

Example 2: A Tactical Squad Cardinis (AoE(1)) with a Gun Drones attached (AoE(2)) has 2 instances of AoE, with an effective combined numerical value of 3 (as per the rules reference guide, AoE (1) + AoE (2) = AoE (3)). Following a Squiggoth, it now has 1 instance of AoE, with a numerical value of 3, effectively resulting in no mechanical change (it keeps AoE (3)). However, should there be 2 Squiggoths it would lose 2 instances of AoE, effectively resulting in the loss of the AoE keyword entirely, thereby limiting it to conventional attacks.

 

 

4:- Does it affect Specialisations, such as Unstoppable?

No, since specialisations are not keywords

 

 

5:- Does it prevent Deep Strike or Ambush?

No. Cards in reserve are not units until they are deep struck, and as such are not army units to lose their keyword at the point of the reaction firing. Similar, cards in hand are not army units at said planet, and as such are also not able to lose Ambush.

 

 

6:- Does it remove Mobile?

Yes, but it doesn't stop it happening. Given that the Reaction starts just after mobile has concluded any units with mobile can move before their keyword is removed, which in effect means that removing the keyword is pointless. Currently, it would only matter should Baharroth's attachment, The Shining Blade, be attached to a mobile army unit opposite a Brute since it would cause it to be discarded.

Go to the full post »


  • Please log in to reply
113 replies to this topic

#41
ktom

ktom

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1463 posts

The Brute is a lasting effect, which means it is an effect that continues to act upon the game state beyond the resolution of the card ability.

 

Once triggered, a lasting effect behaves the same as a constant effect over the period of its duration. This is why, for example, you can combine the "gets +1 ATK/+1 HP" from something like Empower (a lasting effect) with the "gets +1 ATK/+1 HP" from something like Autarch Powersword (a constant effect).

 

So the "until the end of the phase" text on the Brute makes it a lasting effect which, once triggered, acts like a constant effect until the phase ends. This is why FFG has ruled that gaining/losing keywords "until the end of the phase" acts the same way numerical modifiers do, instead of the way "instant" effects (like exhausting, moving or discarding). An exhaust, move or discard cannot "wear off" after a certain time (the way losing a keyword can). You can only ready or move the game element again at a later time.



#42
honorsadam

honorsadam

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts

Alright, so lets see where everyone is then on the following statement(which I believe to be fully accurate):

 

The Brute will remove all instances of all keywords on the enemy units at the time of resolution, and then will have no further effects until the end of phase when each of those removed instances are restored. 



#43
steinerp

steinerp

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 833 posts

If you are getting at the fact that only units present at the time of resolution are effected and units coming to the planet later are not.  You are correct as that is explicitly stated in the rrg



#44
honorsadam

honorsadam

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts
I was trying g to highlight that the brute can only remove keywords that units have at the time of resolution. Although I also agree that units that move in after are not effected

#45
Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1052 posts

No one should doubt that units not present when the reaction was triggered are not affected, the FAQ says triggered abilities engage the game state at the time they are triggered. On the other hand, it is not correct that Squiggoth Brute only affects keywords that were present at the time it was triggered. Keyword modifiers function exactly like numeric modifiers, so a card can have -1 Ranged (which the game treats as 0 Ranged); if such a card gains Ranged later, it will have 0 Ranged, so it still won't have the keyword.



#46
ktom

ktom

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1463 posts

The Brute will remove all instances of all keywords on the enemy units at the time of resolution, and then will have no further effects until the end of phase when each of those removed instances are restored. 

 

Let's remember that FFG confirmed the following for steinerp at Gencon:

 

1. Keyword modifiers work the same way that numeric modifiers work.

2. When the Brute says "all keywords," it means "all keywords in the game."

3. Taking #1 and #2 together, the Brute works by applying a "-1" modifier for every keyword in the game to the affected units, not just for the keywords that the unit has more than 0 of at time the ability resolves.

 

So, contrary to honorsadam's statement, The Brute will apply a "-1" modifier for each and every keyword in the game when it resolves. That "-1" modifier continues to apply for the rest of the phase and will have to be included in any check/calculation for any keyword on that unit until the end of the phase.

 

These are official FFG answers, and as such, we have to live with them whether we agree with them or not.

 

 

The only thing related to the Brute that we are still waiting on from FFG is how you remove "1 instance" of Area Effect (X), given that X is variable.



#47
honorsadam

honorsadam

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts

I'll back down on this for now on this forum, and if I need to play in a tournament I will work with this. 

 

Let's remember that FFG confirmed the following for steinerp at Gencon:

 

1. Keyword modifiers work the same way that numeric modifiers work.

2. When the Brute says "all keywords," it means "all keywords in the game."

3. Taking #1 and #2 together, the Brute works by applying a "-1" modifier for every keyword in the game to the affected units, not just for the keywords that the unit has more than 0 of at time the ability resolves.

 

So, contrary to honorsadam's statement, The Brute will apply a "-1" modifier for each and every keyword in the game when it resolves. That "-1" modifier continues to apply for the rest of the phase and will have to be included in any check/calculation for any keyword on that unit until the end of the phase.

 

These are official FFG answers, and as such, we have to live with them whether we agree with them or not.

 

 

The only thing related to the Brute that we are still waiting on from FFG is how you remove "1 instance" of Area Effect (X), given that X is variable.

However, reading in between the lines ktom, it seems like you are not particularly happy with what came out of GenCon.

 

I personally would never consider anything that came out of a representatives mouth at a conference as an actual ruling. But then again I am more used to Magic the Gathering that has a very tightly controlled comprehensive rules file that is updated on every card set release. Ruling from judges during tournament play are recorded in the online database maintained by wizards of the coast and open for any other judge or player to reference. sadly the closest we have here is an update to the FAQ. 



#48
tdnordine

tdnordine

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 364 posts

I personally would never consider anything that came out of a representatives mouth at a conference as an actual ruling. But then again I am more used to Magic the Gathering that has a very tightly controlled comprehensive rules file that is updated on every card set release. Ruling from judges during tournament play are recorded in the online database maintained by wizards of the coast and open for any other judge or player to reference. sadly the closest we have here is an update to the FAQ. 

 

It wasn't just a judge at a tournament that provided the ruling to steinerp at GenCon.  It was Brad, the developer and the person who provides all the official rulings quoted as coming from FFG in this rules forum.



#49
ktom

ktom

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1463 posts

It wasn't just a judge at a tournament that provided the ruling to steinerp at GenCon.  It was Brad, the developer and the person who provides all the official rulings quoted as coming from FFG in this rules forum.

 

Yep. While I would agree that you never take what a judge says in the heat of the moment at a tournament as the final, official ruling, I think that when you see the developer at an event and the conversation effectively starts with, "Hey, did you get my email? No? Well, can I ask you the questions now anyway?", you have to take the answers seriously and somewhat more officially. This is apparently what steinerp did with Brad.



#50
honorsadam

honorsadam

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts

Alright, thanks for giving more of the backstory on how those comments came out of Gen Con. It does help give it validity.



#51
steinerp

steinerp

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 833 posts
Ktom, not quite. I never sent Brad the email because I knew I would see him in a day or two and assumes he was busy. But same effect. And I am still waiting on the followup regarding AOE as an FYI. Also brad indicated this was a topic that he had discussed in detail with nate French as well.

#52
Veetek

Veetek

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 172 posts

Scratch this, I asked a question that's already answered in Kaloo's original post.



#53
palpster

palpster

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 501 posts
This thread is making my head hurt. Having a unit that has -1 Ranged keyword?

"Hey, does your unit have any keywords?"

"Well, it didn't have any...but apprently now I have...uhm negative 1 Ranged"

"So what does that do?"

"..."

"Alright, what does that even mean then?"

"..."

"Wait, there's more"

"...seriously?"

"I also have -1 Brutal"

"I'm afraid to ask"

"Better you didn't"

I assume this will get clarified in the pre-worlds faq, it seems necessary from all the reactions here.

#54
palpster

palpster

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 501 posts
And for the record: intuitive in this case for me would be to check at start for keywords, you lose all of those so you are effectively blank as far as keywords go. Now if any get added by a card effect later you should benefit from those.

I guess I'll have to accept it if it's ruled otherwise, but that would be counterintuitive to me.
  • Gosgosh likes this

#55
Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1052 posts

This thread is making my head hurt. Having a unit that has -1 Ranged keyword?

"Hey, does your unit have any keywords?"

"Well, it didn't have any...but apprently now I have...uhm negative 1 Ranged"

"So what does that do?"

"..."

"Alright, what does that even mean then?"

"..."

"Wait, there's more"

"...seriously?"

"I also have -1 Brutal"

"I'm afraid to ask"

"Better you didn't"

I assume this will get clarified in the pre-worlds faq, it seems necessary from all the reactions here.

 

Do you agree that, when a unit with 1 printed ATK gets -2 ATK, then +1 ATK later, it has 0 ATK? What -1 Ranged means is that, should the unit gain Ranged once later, it still would have 0 Ranged (in addition to not attacking during the Ranged Skirmish). That's what "keyword modifiers are numeric, just like ATK or HP modifiers" means; regardless of the order modifiers are applied, the end result is the same. You just count the number of times a card gains and loses a keyword (including by having it printed); if the end result is 0 or less, it doesn't have it; if the end result is 1 or more, it has it.



#56
palpster

palpster

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 501 posts

Do you agree that, when a unit with 1 printed ATK gets -2 ATK, then +1 ATK later, it has 0 ATK? What -1 Ranged means is that, should the unit gain Ranged once later, it still would have 0 Ranged (in addition to not attacking during the Ranged Skirmish). That's what "keyword modifiers are numeric, just like ATK or HP modifiers" means; regardless of the order modifiers are applied, the end result is the same. You just count the number of times a card gains and loses a keyword (including by having it printed); if the end result is 0 or less, it doesn't have it; if the end result is 1 or more, it has it.

If they are numeric, the card should have said something along the lines of: "...is counted as having 1 less instance of every keyword". For attack it doesn't say "a unit loses attack" it specifies the amount of attack it loses, which is the logical thing when we're talking numeric. I get what you're saying and you're probably right in that is how it will be ruled, but I still feel that it's rather weird.


  • Gosgosh likes this

#57
honorsadam

honorsadam

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts
Everyone agrees this was a templating fail. Then again if there were no templating fails, the rules forum would be a lot less used.

If they are numeric, the card should have said something along the lines of: "...is counted as having 1 less instance of every keyword". For attack it doesn't say "a unit loses attack" it specifies the amount of attack it loses, which is the logical thing when we're talking numeric. I get what you're saying and you're probably right in that is how it will be ruled, but I still feel that it's rather weird.



#58
ktom

ktom

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1463 posts

Of course, it is the same template and methodology that FFG uses for gaining and losing (non-variable) keywords in all of its LCGs (other than ANR, maybe; as the only LCG not ultimately based on an Eric Lang design, it tends to be the one most likely to have template differences).



#59
Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1052 posts

ANR doesn't have keywords at all (which is also unlike the other big game by Richard Garfield). And, unlike the other LCGs, it has subtitles (which AGoT would benefit from to distinguish versions of unique cards) and subtypes (which are like traits in the other LCGs).



#60
honorsadam

honorsadam

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts

Alright, ktom, i can acknowledge that the brutes text might be the same templating as other lcgs by the same designer....but was this situation as confusing as before. Has the designer recieved this feedback before and not changed his templating to improve the accessibility of future games to a larger audience.

 

"the other big game by richard garfield" strictly speaking isn't being played anymore.  The rule set, and templating conventions have changed so very much since 1995 that the games if played side by side would seem similar, but have drastically different rules under them. The reason why that big game is still around is because the designers  chose to listen to feedback and improve their design.  

 

Ask a judge of that game how big the comprehensive rule file is for that game, then ask how big it would need to be if they only needed to cover cards made in the past 4 years. It would shrink by half, or more. Because alot of the things done in the early years of that game were abandoned because it wasn't working well and a better rule structure was needed.