Teamwork doesn't seem to work as stated... not sure if a bug or the wrong wording...
It says "Your character gains your characters' Defense bonuses and penalties for the duration of the fight".... however after the round it is used the defense reverts back to normal... maybe "the duration of the fight" is the wrong wording or this should be a permanent action card

Rathedan · 07-01-2011 05:09:07

Fights are considered turns I'm pretty sure.

I dont think it was meant to be permanent.

xyrgen · 07-01-2011 08:25:12

I just played against someone (I think it was Blacksun100) who had moira the witchblade. Anyway this card read "defense +2 if moira the witchblade is in play".
Shouldn't this card read "defense +2 if eglantyne the witchblade is in play"?

Dantesan · 07-01-2011 08:28:19

Hey guys, there has been a massive change of wording on the french side, nearly all texts have been changed to follow a certain continuity. I will let you know when this is done.

"The dazzler" event description is misleading. After testing the corect process of getting points i think it should be "Win 15 games with at least 2 multiclass characters in your decks. These 4 clases must be present in your deck: mage, warrior, marauder, priest"
Curent version makes people think you need to have all those clases in 2 multiclass chars, but testing showed you get points while playing 2 withcblades and mercenary priest.

Ok changed , thanks

hallaman3 · 08-01-2011 15:29:49

Expiation. is says an "alive" character, but it should say a "living" character.

Dantesan · 10-01-2011 08:40:08

Expiation. is says an "alive" character, but it should say a "living" character.

Yep this is one of many things that are changing this week.

Bear with me on that one.

magius · 10-01-2011 10:19:50

I am not sure when this happens. Aliskh (Fire-Version) Level 2 writes that "+2 to Fire Spells (Non-AoE)..." which should be only +1. I have tested this and indeed Alishk Level 2 only adds 1 to Fire Spell damage.

blackwaltz · 10-01-2011 20:49:57

On the card concentration there are two lines of "chain: theurgy" text

Dernière modification par blackwaltz (10-01-2011 20:52:01)

Santuros · 11-01-2011 01:22:19

When [card]Bomzar[/card] enter a fight you cannot see the turn bonuses he gains

pekpekkypek · 11-01-2011 04:48:14

I ran into a Perforator that said: Turns 4 or more: Activates immediately. AFAIK Perforator activates on Turns 5 or more.

Dantesan · 11-01-2011 08:55:59

Thanks guys! The full revamp of texts is nearly finished, I will keep you updated. I have modified most of what you have requested.

I ran into a Perforator that said: Turns 4 or more: Activates immediately. AFAIK Perforator activates on Turns 5 or more.

I double checked and it says the same on the french card, I will mention this to the dev team.

Thanks

Zurga · 11-01-2011 10:31:28

This was corrected in French, turn 5 is the correct one.

Dantesan · 11-01-2011 15:34:02

Ok, the change to text is finally finished, hopefully, you will have more a sense of continuity now

hallaman3 · 13-01-2011 00:30:35

splinter of the world tree
"One copy of this card per character only" should be "A character may only be equipped with one copy of this card at a time" to be consistent with other cards

Punch Line
the text of this card is very confusing, what exactly does it do?

p.s. why was last years wrong text deleted? I wanted to go back to refer to something said, figuring it would just be locked, but instead I found it was just gone...

Dernière modification par hallaman3 (13-01-2011 00:34:19)

Dantesan · 13-01-2011 08:32:33

splinter of the world tree
"One copy of this card per character only" should be "A character may only be equipped with one copy of this card at a time" to be consistent with other cards

All cards should now follow "One copy of this card per character only", I have checked a few times and can't seem to find " a character may only be equipped with one copy of this card at a time", let me know if you find this.

Punch Line
the text of this card is very confusing, what exactly does it do?

Punch line: Attack = X where X equals the Printed Low Attack of your character. Your character makes a magical attack instead of his next physical attack.

Your character's Attack equals his Printed (basic) Low Attack. Nex time he attacks, his physical attack transforms into a magical attack.

Dunno how to explain it better than that. What don't you get?

p.s. why was last years wrong text deleted? I wanted to go back to refer to something said, figuring it would just be locked, but instead I found it was just gone...

As it's a new year, we simply decided to remove the old topic, the errors reported where corrected on a very regular basis.

jspruill · 13-01-2011 08:55:45

just a thought but perhaps punch line should read like Self Confidence and say, your characters high attack equals his printed low attack. Your character makes a magical attack instead of his next physical attack.

or Your character deals magic damage instead of physical damage on his attack. Don't really think next is needed it almost sounds like next means the following turn. Everyone knows that if it is played on the current turn it will affect the current turn unless otherwise stated.

The only misconception with it might be that people might think armor still negates some of the damage where when using the card since it is magic damage it should go against the spirit score. I won against an abom deck that used this card, I guess he didn't realize his attack was going to suddenly drop from the like 24 it was at to as low as it did.

those are my only suggestions for improving punch line. I thought I was dead when I saw it come out until I saw how it worked.. so maybe its confusing for more than one person.

Dantesan · 13-01-2011 10:36:38

Your character deals magic damage instead of physical damage on his attack. your characters high attack equals his printed low attack

That's a lot better indeed for Punch Line plus it follows previous wording.

Thanks you

hallaman3 · 13-01-2011 12:40:21

okay, i understand it now, I wasn't understanding what was meant by magical attack or how it worked, but now I do

skinnyeddie · 13-01-2011 16:28:39

dantesan a écrit :

Your character deals magic damage instead of physical damage on his attack. your characters high attack equals his printed low attack
That's a lot better indeed for Punch Line plus it follows previous wording.
Thanks you

While we're on this topic. I'd like to point out "Oh, I'm Good!"

Each character gains Attack = X where X is the average of their printed Low and High )Attack).

The problem with that wording is that the card does not give gain in Attack. The way it is worded, you expect all characters to gain attack bonuses equal to the average of their low and high attack.

Here's my suggestion:

The low and high attack scores of each character become X, where X is the average of their respective printed low and high attack scores.

Though not a related mistake, I'll mention AntiMagic Glyph.

First, the card name shouldn't have a capital M in the middle of a word.

In the text, it says: Choose a character, the next spell aimed at your character is canceled, this card s then discarded.

I am assuming that you can only choose your characters for this spell. Based on that, here's my suggestion:

Choose one of your characters and attach this card. The next spell aimed at that character is ignored, and this card is discarded.

I used "ignored" because that is the word used in Counterspell and Magic Shield.

Dantesan · 13-01-2011 19:27:40

Here's my suggestion:
The low and high attack scores of each character become X, where X is the average of their respective printed low and high attack scores.

I like it skinny but I have to stick to the french version as much as possible especially as the whole wording was recently changed. However I changed "gain" to "has". I hope that clears things up. The wording is pretty straight foward that way in my opinion.

AntiMagic Glyph.

Absolutely right, been changed

Choose one of your characters and attach this card. The next spell aimed at that character is ignored, and this card is discarded.

yep i'm all for continuity so changed this too as requested, I also changed all the cards who had "cancel" in them to "ignore".

Thanks a lot for your feedback, much appreciated

magius · 14-01-2011 17:35:40

Hi,

I have noticed something about Spiritual Duel:

If your character's Spirit is superior or doubles the opposing character's Spirit, ...

This sentence does not really make sense. If your spirit doubles the opponent's spirit score, it is already superior than your opponent's spirit score.

If the effects of Spiritual Duel did not change, then it should be:

If your character's Spirit is at least double of opposing character's Spirit...

Magius

Dantesan · 14-01-2011 18:52:41

Hello,

Thanks Magius, the french description doesn't make sense either. I've changed the english version accordingly.

Take care

magius · 16-01-2011 01:23:41

Hi Dantesan,

Found another weird text on the seldom used card "Crackling Crown". It seems that the "chain" effect description for Witchblade is repeated twice

Magius

Dernière modification par magius (16-01-2011 01:23:54)

Eredan's World

Annonce

#1 06-01-2011 09:06:13

Wrong Text

#2 06-01-2011 21:09:58

Re : Wrong Text

#3 07-01-2011 04:25:31

Re : Wrong Text

#4 07-01-2011 05:09:07

Re : Wrong Text

#5 07-01-2011 08:25:12

Re : Wrong Text

#6 07-01-2011 08:28:19

Re : Wrong Text

#7 08-01-2011 15:29:49

Re : Wrong Text

#8 10-01-2011 08:40:08

Re : Wrong Text

#9 10-01-2011 10:19:50

Re : Wrong Text

#10 10-01-2011 20:49:57

Re : Wrong Text

#11 11-01-2011 01:22:19

Re : Wrong Text

#12 11-01-2011 04:48:14

Re : Wrong Text

#13 11-01-2011 08:55:59

Re : Wrong Text

#14 11-01-2011 10:31:28

Re : Wrong Text

#15 11-01-2011 15:34:02

Re : Wrong Text

#16 13-01-2011 00:30:35

Re : Wrong Text

#17 13-01-2011 08:32:33

Re : Wrong Text

#18 13-01-2011 08:55:45

Re : Wrong Text

#19 13-01-2011 10:36:38

Re : Wrong Text

#20 13-01-2011 12:40:21

Re : Wrong Text

#21 13-01-2011 16:28:39

Re : Wrong Text

#22 13-01-2011 19:27:40

Re : Wrong Text

#23 14-01-2011 17:35:40

Re : Wrong Text

#24 14-01-2011 18:52:41

Re : Wrong Text

#25 16-01-2011 01:23:41

Re : Wrong Text

Pied de page des forums