enPump vs abPump

[friarsol]

Currently, we try to use similar names for similar keywords. In this example, I think enPump is misnamed.

abPump is the classic Shivan Dragon ability. It pumps the creature temporarily for the turn.

Code: Select all

K:abPump R:+1/+0


So one would think we would name the similar Firebreathing the same way.

Code: Select all

K:enPump R:+1/+0


Instead enPump gives a "permanent" boost, at least while the enchantment is on the creature.

enPump should be something like enBoost.

I'm considering renaming all of the enPumps to enBoost (or whatever is the general consensus) to make room for a true enPump that I'll start working on soon.

If you guys think that's not a good idea, I can just name the new ability enBuff. It'd be a bit weird, but wouldn't be so terrible.

[Sloth]

To make things complicated I have to throw in stPump which also gives a "permanent" boost to cards.

Since what you suggest would be an activated ability, I would name it something starting with "ab". For example: abPumpEnchanted.

[Rob Cashwalker]

There are some auras that grant an activated ability to their host, (Midnight Covenant) and others that have an activated ability that affects their host (Firebreathing) and still others that apply the pump effect continuously. (Dryad's Favor)

I think this will become easier to manage when we have an ability factory, so that we can easily "pump" a creature with the abPump ability. Either as a keyword parsed in real time, or simply adding an ability parsed by the ability factory. In this manner, enPump would still apply, it may not need to know any difference between granting the creature "Flying" vs "abPump B:+1/+1". (aside from parsing issues with ":")

Firebreathing really has two abilities. The first attaches it to a creature. The second is really abPumpTgt, except the Tgt is always the enchanted creature. So instead of Tgt, you can suggest some other nomenclature.... (as Sloth suggests)

In essence, Dryad's Favor also has two abilities. The attachment, and essentially "stPump:Forestwalk". (or whatever the exact syntax would be) I know I suggested not lumping enchantments into it, because the Aura ability needs AI, which stPump wouldn't have.

The AI for an Aura would need to know what kind of ability it is granting, and not to grant it twice to the same creature. (Flying, Flying)

[friarsol]

I guess it is the same as abPump.

Could this be handled with IsValidCard then?

abPumpTgtV R:creature.enchanting:+1/+0

I'm not sure what the syntax would be for this.

[Sloth]

I guess it is the same as abPump.

Could this be handled with IsValidCard then?

abPumpTgtV R:creature.enchanting:+1/+0

I'm not sure what the syntax would be for this.

No IsValidCard won't help you there. And abPumpTgt shouldn't be used since it is not targeted. Just add the option abPumpEnchanted to abPump and give the bonus to the enchanted card instead.

[friarsol]

I think that might have worked, but it looks like Enchant creature keyword doesn't do what I thought it would. I wasn't expecting this rabbit hole, so I'm going to see if I can get it working with Umezawa's Jitte and equipping. Otherwise go back to my other stuff.