TgtP

[slapshot5]

Please forgive me if this is a dumb question, but when I use Target, and specify TgtP, why am I prompted for a "planeswalker or player"? I would expect this to only target a player.

Target.java:

Code: Select all

else if (parse.equals("P")){
         valid = "Planeswalker,Player";
         prompt = "Select target planeswalker or player";
      }

-slapshot5

[Hellfish]

Isn't this to effectively implement the rule of "306.7. If noncombat damage would be dealt to a player by a source controlled by an opponent, that opponent may have that source deal that damage to a planeswalker the first player controls instead.". Ergo, if you can target a player, you can target a planeswalker.

Where's a lawyer when you need one?

[Rob Cashwalker]

What if I want to Shock my own walker? Rules-wise, can I do that?

[Hellfish]

I'm really the wrong person to ask, I just happened to have MagicCompRules.rtf handy

As far as I can tell, there is only provisions for when the opponent controls the damage source. So I guess you can't actually shock your own planeswalker?

Full rule:

Code: Select all

306.7. If noncombat damage would be dealt to a player by a source controlled by an opponent, that opponent may have that source deal that damage to a planeswalker the first player controls instead. This is a redirection effect (see rule 614.9) and is subject to the normal rules for ordering replacement effects (see rule 616). The opponent chooses whether to redirect the damage as the redirection effect is applied.

[friarsol]

TgtP was written at a time when it was only used for Damage. At this point, we really shouldn't be using it at all since ValidTgt is much more robust.

However, this is more shortcutting done by the program. You don't target a Planeswalker with direct damage spells. You target the player, and then redirect to the Planeswalker. And you aren't allowed to redirect damage you are dealing to yourself, only opponents. I'll put this in as an issue, and change TgtP to send in Planeswalker.YouDontCtrl for the Shock issue.

If you want to target a player do it like this:

Code: Select all

ValidTgts$Player|TgtPrompt$Choose a player to XXXX


[Snacko]

However if you have Empyrial Archangel and you apply Empyrial Archangel's effect, the damage is redirected to it. The planeswalker replacement effect is no longer applicable.
I think Forge wouldn't be able to reproduce it in the current state.

[friarsol]

Sure Empyrial Archangel creates a replacement effect, just like Planeswalkers do. But if the work was put in for Replacement effects on damage, it could easily be put on for things like Archangel, Pariah, Pariah's Shield. And then give the effected player a choice which replacement effect to take.

Probably the best way to break ground on this is to get the similar Prevention Effects working, and then branch off for Replacement Effects.

[Sloth]

Please forgive me if this is a dumb question, but when I use Target, and specify TgtP, why am I prompted for a "planeswalker or player"? I would expect this to only target a player.
-slapshot5

The problem is that some cards really only want to target a player. At the moment you can Ancestral Recall a planeswalker .
I would suggest changing the current "TgtP" to "TgtPP" for damage spells to target a player or a planeswalker and using "TgtP" for only players.

Do you agree?

[friarsol]

The problem is that some cards really only want to target a player. At the moment you can Ancestral Recall a planeswalker .
I would suggest changing the current "TgtP" to "TgtPP" for damage spells to target a player or a planeswalker and using "TgtP" for only players.

Do you agree?

Well, no. I think we shouldn't use them at all anymore. The only reason they were part of the Target object was for backwards compatibility. P and PP are not descriptive enough terms, neither is C for that matter. And I think it would be better if we stopped using them completely.

Sure we may not need the Robustness of ValidTgt for just targeting a player. But ValidTgt does work here without any additional coding. Especially if the coding is to just patch older code, that could be removed entirely once we stop using abilities dependent on them.

[slapshot5]

I like the shorthand notation that TgtP gives.

I'd much rather type

Code: Select all

Tgt$TgtP

than

Code: Select all

ValidTgts$Player|TgtPrompt$Select target player

behind the scenes, there is no reason this can't use Valid.

I would, in fact expand it to:
Tgt$TgtP - target player
Tgt$TgtOpp - target opponent
Tgt$TgtC - target creature
Tgt$TgtPW - target planeswalker
Tgt$TgtA - target artifact
Tgt$TgtE - target enchantment
Tgt$TgtPerm - target Permanent

those are all so common, that it seems silly to require typing all the Valid stuff. My $0.02

-slapshot5

[friarsol]

I didn't think the shorthand was so popular. If you really want to expand it, we should make sure it gets done clearly.

Firstly, drop Tgt from the Value. It's not needed anymore, just leftover from older code bases. If it's there it will just be stripped away, but if the goal is shorthand, typing less is the idea right?

Next we should make sure to put commas in between the different targets. If you want to have all those different types, then they shouldn't be just smashed together.

Disenchant would be: Tgt$A,E
Fissure would be: Tgt$C,L (i'm assuming you plan to do this for Lands as well?)

I still have one major issue. No card specifically targets Planeswalkers right now. However the way we have Damage setup is that if you can target a Player you also can target a Planeswalker (recently fixed to only target a Planeswalker you don't control). How do we resolve that? If someone uses the PW shorthand do we tack on the .YouDontCtrl automatically? What if a card comes up that can target any Planeswalker? I want to those slippery slopes to have giant warning signs before they become issues down the road.

If we have an elegant solution for that, the process isn't too hard:

The changes would need to go in
public Target(String parse, int min, int max)

Split the parse String, and then build Valid and Prompt strings simultaneously for each parse value.

Minor note, Opponent will need some additional changes into Target_Selection. There are enough spells that Target Opponents, so it's fine to have. Just informing you so you'll know there's extra work for that.

[slapshot5]

Firstly, drop Tgt from the Value.

agreed

Next we should make sure to put commas in between the different targets.

agreed

(i'm assuming you plan to do this for Lands as well?)

Yeah, I knew I was missing something easy. But it was late...

I still have one major issue. No card specifically targets Planeswalkers right now. However the way we have Damage setup is that if you can target a Player you also can target a Planeswalker (recently fixed to only target a Planeswalker you don't control). How do we resolve that? If someone uses the PW shorthand do we tack on the .YouDontCtrl automatically? What if a card comes up that can target any Planeswalker? I want to those slippery slopes to have giant warning signs before they become issues down the road.

Is that how Damage is supposed to work? Planeswalkers didn't exist when I played a lot of Magic, and I don't use them now either. So, I really am not up to date on these rules.
I think we need to make these distinct, and leave it up to the programmer to use Tgt$P,PW.
I'd like to get others' thoughts on this.

slapshot5

[friarsol]

Heh, I haven't collected in 10 years. But I keep up with the rules. Forge cheats when it handles damage and Planeswalkers. Forge lets you target Planeswalkers with direct damage.

Here's how it should work:

Code: Select all

212.9g If noncombat damage would be dealt to a player by a source controlled by an opponent, that opponent may have that source deal that damage to a planeswalker the first player controls instead. This is a redirection effect (see rule 419.6c) and is subject to the normal rules for ordering replacement effects (see rule 419.9). The opponent chooses whether to redirect the damage as the redirection effect is applied.


I put an Issue up for this the other day. But I don't see it being fixed anytime soon (replacement effects can get hairy in a hurry, and that's before we have to handle AI choosing replacement effects) So until it gets resovled, we need to deal with direct damage to Planeswalkers.

We definitely should keep Player and Planeswalker distinct. These changes would be pointless otherwise.

The real question is: how do you differentiate between targeting a Planeswalker with a direct damage SA and a non-direct damage SA. Since direct damage can't target your own Planeswalker, but non-direct damage can?

[Chris H.]

Shoot, I sold all of my cards a good 13+ years ago or so.

I do not have much to contribute except to say that I like names that are easy to see and remember. I find the new AF sa's with their key + value arrangement to be a move in the right direction. That combined with the spaces should help new people to check out the project and maybe get involved.

[slapshot5]

I was thinking about this after I posted, and now Chris just made the point. Since Valid uses the full names, perhaps Tgt should exactly match it.

So, Tgt$Artifact,Creature,Land instead of Tgt$A,C,L

-slapshot5