Lifelink
by mtgrares
Moderators: timmermac, friarsol, Blacksmith, KrazyTheFox, Agetian, CCGHQ Admins
Lifelink
by gohongohon » 27 Jul 2010, 19:42
I have been playing for a little bit now and im sure it is a rule error but i was at 2 and he attack me with 2 2/2 fliers and i block with my Vampire Nighthawk and i still die im sure under the rules all damage goes off at the same time so i should not of took any damage i block 2 of it and gain 2 against him hitting me for 2 so.. i don't think i should die right. (i dont think it is a bug)
- gohongohon
- Posts: 46
- Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 01:18
- Has thanked: 0 time
- Been thanked: 0 time
Re: Lifelink
by Professor » 28 Jul 2010, 16:34
Lifelink has to see the damage happen first before it can add life back. Unfortunately, when that damage happened, you also went to 0 life. By the time Lifelink is added to the stack, the state-based effect of 0 life loses the game. At least that's how it happens IRL. I mean, Forge does have some unusual timing bugs, but this doesn't sound like one of them.
Sure, in the spirit of the game, you'd think that it should all offset, but the stack is the stack, and we live with it.
Anyone have a better explanation?
Sure, in the spirit of the game, you'd think that it should all offset, but the stack is the stack, and we live with it.
Anyone have a better explanation?
-------------------------------------
PostCount=PostCount+1
PostCount=PostCount+1
-

Professor - Posts: 172
- Joined: 27 Jul 2009, 21:02
- Has thanked: 0 time
- Been thanked: 0 time
Re: Lifelink
by Sloth » 28 Jul 2010, 17:27
Lifelink doesn't use the stack anymore, but forge didn't catch up with the M10 rule changes. This is indeed a bug that should be fixed one day (until then we will pretend to prefer the old rules).Professor wrote:Lifelink has to see the damage happen first before it can add life back. Unfortunately, when that damage happened, you also went to 0 life. By the time Lifelink is added to the stack, the state-based effect of 0 life loses the game. At least that's how it happens IRL. I mean, Forge does have some unusual timing bugs, but this doesn't sound like one of them.
Sure, in the spirit of the game, you'd think that it should all offset, but the stack is the stack, and we live with it.
Anyone have a better explanation?
-

Sloth - Programmer
- Posts: 3498
- Joined: 23 Jun 2009, 19:40
- Has thanked: 125 times
- Been thanked: 507 times
Re: Lifelink
by freestorageaccount » 28 Jul 2010, 21:36
If we do, Wizards will just Wrath of God our efforts and send us on the way to destruction with their next global rules rewrite. We have no chance to survive fix our bugs.Sloth wrote:This is indeed a bug that should be fixed one day (until then we will pretend to prefer the old rules).
-- freestorageaccount (= accurate forge notes) This is not a subliminal message. At least for the prosilver theme.
The Great Wall of Bugs. Gando, you will not be forgotten.
And a chip off the old block.
The Great Wall of Bugs. Gando, you will not be forgotten.
And a chip off the old block.
-

freestorageaccount - Posts: 246
- Joined: 21 Sep 2009, 01:42
- Location: Hilbert's Hotel
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 0 time
Re: Lifelink
by Professor » 29 Jul 2010, 16:09
Heck, back when I played in tourneys, Spirit Link used to be considered solid white removal. Blech, I'm old...
-------------------------------------
PostCount=PostCount+1
PostCount=PostCount+1
-

Professor - Posts: 172
- Joined: 27 Jul 2009, 21:02
- Has thanked: 0 time
- Been thanked: 0 time
Re: Lifelink
by lazylockie » 04 Aug 2010, 03:52
If Forge doesn't follow M10 rules, shouldn't multiple Lifelink instances be able to stack?
- lazylockie
- Posts: 508
- Joined: 13 Jul 2010, 22:44
- Has thanked: 74 times
- Been thanked: 15 times
Re: Lifelink
by Rob Cashwalker » 04 Aug 2010, 14:20
We pick and choose the rules we like...? No, it's more a matter of what it would take to revise certain parts of the game.
Around the M10 rules time, Dennis was working on the keyword handling code in the card object - adding and removing them from either the "printed" keywords or the "effect-applied" keywords. Until then, lifelink and all other keywords could theoretically "stack"... "Flying, Flying" would occur regularly. "Fixing" this problem killed the two birds.
Notice, we also don't have mana burn. The mana pool was only added a month before M10, but we decided not to bother with the burn.
The combat sequence is one of the dirtiest sections of code we have yet to tackle. I usually pretend we don't have the extra chance to change anything, and play my instants during blockers. Unless I accidentally forgot something or skipped past the intended step.
Around the M10 rules time, Dennis was working on the keyword handling code in the card object - adding and removing them from either the "printed" keywords or the "effect-applied" keywords. Until then, lifelink and all other keywords could theoretically "stack"... "Flying, Flying" would occur regularly. "Fixing" this problem killed the two birds.
Notice, we also don't have mana burn. The mana pool was only added a month before M10, but we decided not to bother with the burn.
The combat sequence is one of the dirtiest sections of code we have yet to tackle. I usually pretend we don't have the extra chance to change anything, and play my instants during blockers. Unless I accidentally forgot something or skipped past the intended step.
The Force will be with you, Always.
-

Rob Cashwalker - Programmer
- Posts: 2167
- Joined: 09 Sep 2008, 15:09
- Location: New York
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been thanked: 40 times
7 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 11 guests
