If you play shudderblock then play Kalimos, Primal Lord you can choose the invocation of fire 3 times to deal 18 damage to the enemy hero
1 Like
That’s because Kalimos battlecry is “cast an invocation”.
So it is the invocation, not the direct battlecry itself, which deals the damage.
This is not a bug.
it is a bug, since the exodar has the same kind of wording but deals no damage
show me the word damage on this card, i cant see it
In Kalimos’ case, the damage does not come directly from him.
In the Exodar’s case, the damage comes directly from it.
Yes, the wording is very similar.
Your just here to troll, the exodar does not have the word damage on it
1 Like
Its not a opinion, its a fact
The exodar is worded just like kalimos
One does dmg, the other does not
1 Like
that post is about kalimons not being abug
isnt about exodar bug
No it is not.
Kalimos says “cast an elemental invocation”. Exodar says “choose a protocol”.
In particular, the verbs are different: “cast” vs “choose”.
Different wording implies different behavior.
It’s still particularly stupid that shudderblock prevents the Exodar’s damage since you can’t triple its battlecry anyway
And Bru’Kan “Call Upon the power of two elements” which is extremely vague about which of the other two it fits the most. On a technical level, it’s the same effect than Kalimos, so it works the same and can deal damage
The rule was ok-ish as long as it was “if the battlecry reads that it deals damage, then shudderblock prevents it”, but now they break that rule for a card that would specifically not synergize with it anyway, which makes a terrible precedent of technicality forcing itself on accessibility, forcing players to make up excuses on why the old rule doesn’t apply anymore
If the miniset introduces cards whose battlecries read “awake your minions’ hidden strength”, “learn a world truth”, “embrace a Dark fate”… All with a face damage option, how are you supposed to know which ones will be prevented and which ones won’t ?
so this doesnt say cast or choose yet it deals damage
looks like you have no idea what your talking about
Way to move those goalposts.
Exactly what the Exodar is doing, it’s moving the goalpost
Before the Exodar, the rule was about dealing damage being written on the card; debatable but simple and easy to identify
After the Exodar, the rule is that you have to know the technical behavior of the card for whether or not the damage ability is a, sometimes non-collectible, separate card, or part of the actual minion, which makes it impossible to anticipate the expected behavior without being explicitely told so by the developpers themselves
That’s just how some cards are, unfortunately. They don’t say exactly what they do; you just have to play them a few times and learn their behavior.
For example, Sheriff Barrelbrim says
Battlecry: If you have 20 or less Health, open the Badlands Jail.
Well, what is the Badlands Jail? What does it do? What does “open” mean?
The Sheriff card itself does not say; you just have to play it and observe what happens.
And in the case of The Exodar, it says “choose a protocol”. Well, what the heck does that mean? What are the choices, and what do they do? There’s no way to tell, other than experimenting.
So basically your agument is “yes they broke a rule they installed, who give’s a sht ?”
A correct rule was in place, they broke it FOR NO REASON, and you just blindly defend them because “that’s their choice” ?
That’s only if you forget that the collection displays the related cards
You can know what these are before you queue a game, before you build your deck, before you craft your cards, before you spend your currencies.
This feature has been added to the game precisely because what you are describing has been an issue for almost 10 years
What rule are you talking about?
Are you saying there was an actual game rule concerning whether a battlecry effect specifically mentioned the word “damage”?
As far as I am aware, that was a shortcut used by players; it was never an actual rule.
What if I copy the card from my opponent, or discover it, or any of a dozen other ways where I would not have the opportunity to review how it works in my collection?
My point stands that there are plenty of cards that do not describe exactly what they do, and apparently everyone was fine with it. This is just one more instance. There is nothing new here.
that must mean there are other cards besides exodar not being able to deal damage and at the same time not having the word damage in the text
name them please
What? That doesn’t follow.
One counterexample is enough. Always has been. Why would I need two?
When you create an ecosystem that follows a specific logic, that’s a rule even if you don’t name it.
There has never been a rule for how “in X turn” effects should behave
I think there currently are 4 or 5 different behaviors for those effects
But they all follow a design philosophy : From the moment the countdown starts, your opponent has X turns to play/end to react before the effect hits the board. There’s only 1 exception to that rule that still respects that philosophy.
When the wheel of death got introduced, it behaved differently and broke that philosophy, the opponent had X-1 turns to react because the wheel was counting the turn it was played on as an elapsed turn. That was the biggest debate I’ve seen on this forum, where a lot of people were arguing 'that’s how they want the wheel to behave, so that’s how it should be". Turns out the community was right pointing it out since it got changed to not count its orignal turn anymore, to finally respect that philosophy and align with the other effects.
Breaking consistency for no reason can be avoided, I don’t understand why you don’t want to acknowledge it.
Past Technical limitations don’t justify Future Design Flaws
They have the technology to display related cards during the game. Titans will tell you what their abilities are, why couldn’t the Exodar ?
So you must have forgotten how frequent it has been over the years that people were complaining how inconsistent the game used to be. They did good recently making things as consistent as they could, that doesn’t mean the flaws can’t be pointed out.
Also you are mixing up “not telling everything” and “not behaving like similar wordings”, which is not about accessibility but consistency (the main topic, at least the main off-topic)
because that means exodar is bugged