This cannot prevent itself since Backlash doesn't "target" a card?

Example - you move Venemous Fiend to a planet, target an Elite, opponent plays Backlash, you could not also play Backlash to cancel theirs, right?

This cannot prevent itself since Backlash doesn't "target" a card?

 

Example - you move Venemous Fiend to a planet, target an Elite, opponent plays Backlash, you could not also play Backlash to cancel theirs, right?

​Correct, since the second part of Backlash doesn't state "target". The Fiend would be destroyed

Are we sure?

The Venemous Fiend moves and targets an Elite to do command hammers worth of damage. The Elite's owner plays Backlash (this damage effect would be cancelled and then destroyed). However, isn't Backlash itself a triggered ability now targeting an Elite? Couldn't you cancel it with another Backlash (although you wouldn't get to destroy the original target with the second Backlash, since the effect is from the card and not the unit, but you would cancel the effect and push damage through?)?

 However, isn't Backlash itself a triggered ability now targeting an Elite?

No, because it does not includes the word "target" on the... targeted part of the effect (" Then, if that ability was triggered from an army unit, destroy it. ").

A targeted effect is an effect that includes the word "target" when defining the effect. But Conquest have many cards with "targeted" effects but without the "target" word in, making them non-targeted, and so, unaffected by effects that affects "targeted" effects (jesus christ).

Anyway, for Backslash to work on Backslash, it should say: "Then, if that ability was triggered from an army unit, destroy that target unit". I know, it does sound weird, but rules, sometimes, have to be clunky to get specific. That is the reason why MTG cards tend to be a bit tricky to understand, as they have extremely precise rules because, you know, MTG environment and all that.

In general, it is an interesting design, as it mix both... "targeted" targeted effects and "untargeted" targeted effects, but it gets a bit confusing, not rulewise (the reference rulebook specify all this), but to new players, or at least it is open to confusion and misunderstanding.

I think some kind of "trait", or keyword, or specifying untargeted, or something like that, could at first solve the confusion, but that seems like a brute force solution than a correct one.

Alright. After reading over the rules, I see that 'target' has a special meaning that doesn't mean 'targets' something, but has an effect that requires you to choose one.

Since Backlash doesn't say to pick/target an effect, but instead says to interrupt an effect via canceling that effect when it happens, a second Backlash couldn't stop it.

Although the logic here isn't exactly correct. It would have to say to target a creature or ability that targets an Elite you control and THEN if that target is a creature, destroy it.

Magic is definitely more straightforward, but it's nice to have every term defined. (A definition of the word "then".)

In short, the English language either has too few words or people are too lazy to use new ones. If it doesn't say "target" then it doesn't target, it merely ..... ​selects, shall we say (at least until that becomes a designated word). This is why Backlash can't stop effects like Crushing Blow, or a second Backlash.

Backlash basically provides Land Raider-esk protection on demand, only with more explosions

My only issue with the wording, and maybe it's because I come from a star wars LCG background, is that rather than saying "when your opponent triggers an ability", I wish it said "card effect" instead of "ability", but again, that's probably because that's the terminology used in star wars. I was just under the impression that they were trying to make the terms and wording ambiguous among all their LCGs.

Both terms exist (in Conquest, I'm not familiar enough with Star Wars to say if it is the same here), and they mean slightly different things.

A triggered ability is, according to the RRG, an action, interrupt or reaction (or a battle ability). Something you explicitly decide to activate (or, in the case of forced reactions/interrupts, something that the game forces you to activate). A card effect is broader, and covers anything that happens as a result of card text, including "passive".

For example, Front Line 'Ard Boyz do not have a triggered ability, while Fire Warrior Elite do.

If it had said "card effect" instead, it would have changed the meaning.

So Backlash is the new Klaviex for the poor.

So now we non-elite players have to deal with both. Thank you ...

So Backlash is the new Klaviex for the poor.

So now we non-elite players have to deal with both. Thank you ...

just use nullify =)

So Backlash is the new Klaviex for the poor.

So now we non-elite players have to deal with both. Thank you ...

Well, if you can't beat them..

I don't like being forced to play Elites...

Nullify isn't always an option :/

I don't like being forced to play Elites...

Nullify isn't always an option :/

we are always forced to play something that satisfies the meta

we are always forced to play something that satisfies the meta

Pretty much. After giving Vezuel another chance (with horrible results), I came to the conclusion that it's either elites all day everyday, or a deck with multiple control options (so pretty much just Kith/Worr) for any future tournaments.

Pretty much. After giving Vezuel another chance (with horrible results), I came to the conclusion that it's either elites all day everyday, or a deck with multiple control options (so pretty much just Kith/Worr) for any future tournaments.

I think you have to maintain meta-awareness, for sure, but there's definitely other deck shapes that don't use either heavy elite (by which I mean a deck that finds room for STC fragment) or plentiful control options. 

For example, mid-range Mavros can do pretty damn well with a traditional SM build, with no control options at all and no elites save the 1x signature card. Shadowsun decks can go heavy vehicle or not, but their discounters not being dependent on Elites lets them play more in the 2-4 cost bracket and still present big enough threats to take down Elites. Zarathur decks can get by with light elite control (3 Archon's Terrors) because they have such good swarm control, and plentiful damage output. 

Right now though, I gotta say the meta is somewhat pointing in the direction you say, and it's my opinion that the #1 deck to beat is the deck that has both high control and lots of elite discounters: Kith/Chaos with Venomous Fiends, Possessed and Teleportaria.

Markis dies from backlash, right?

Markis dies from backlash, right?

Yes, since the effect that targets an Elite unit is initiated from him he is destroyed if his ability is countered by Backlash

we are always forced to play something that satisfies the meta

here is the light at the end of the tunnel gentlemen and ladies, 

The deathworld of Nectarvus will leave us with the following commander count. 

SM:4

TA: 3

E: 4

DE: 3

CH:4

O: 3

AM:4

TY: 3

NE:3

which means another full 6 pack cycle will come to give us the other 5 warlords and hopefully the other side of the coin to the elite meta we are now living in. 

Long live the Xenos cycle

here is the light at the end of the tunnel gentlemen and ladies, 

 

The deathworld of Nectarvus will leave us with the following commander count. 

 

SM:4

TA: 3

E: 4

DE: 3

CH:4

O: 3

AM:4

TY: 3

NE:3

 

which means another full 6 pack cycle will come to give us the other 5 warlords and hopefully the other side of the coin to the elite meta we are now living in. 

You are assuming we'll get another cycle lol