Bug with Larceny spell

Having issues running the game at all? Found a bug?
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 5:57 pm

Bug with Larceny spell

Postby weidox » Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:33 pm

Larceny spell does not trigger rune destruction effects like for example Smash does. That is, destroying runes like Major Damage or Major Power does nothing, except returning rune card back to hand. By the spell description, it has to destroy rune and then place a copy in hand, so as written it has to trigger rune destruction effects.
Referral code: MCSQK4E

Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 1:55 am

Re: Bug with Larceny spell

Postby Bigberg » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:50 am

Weirdex. Based on the wording of the card you may be correct. But that is not the intent. The card is intended to "steal" the rune. This is accomplished by removing the existing rune and creating a new one in your hand. its not a bug just a misleading card text. I believe the same type of thing happens with abduction too. Abduction does not trigger zombie health gain or cyclops buffing I'm pretty sure, because the creature isn't really killed it's removed from play and put in your hand. It's more similar to a bounce than a kill
Give a man a monster and he can play for a day.
Teach a man to play combat monsters and he can play for life!

Posts: 52
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 5:57 pm

Re: Bug with Larceny spell

Postby weidox » Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:01 am

Strongly disagree. If we're talking about the intention, let's look at the actual effect and the costs. Abduction, being black spell, costs 1 more than Exterminate, for gaining a card and a beneficial effect that it does not trigger destroy effect (usually you will be abducting enemy units). I call it fair, and I may take Exterminate or Abduction depending on expected free mojo (or a cheaper spell which returns monster to hand). Now Larceny, also black, costs 2 more than Smash, gains a card and does Not trigger beneficial destroy effect - that's just a poor card then, probably a Rare, and no way black and not even legendary, and I'd never take it over Smash. I call it needs a fix, one or other way.
Referral code: MCSQK4E

Posts: 52
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 5:57 pm

Re: Bug with Larceny spell

Postby weidox » Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:37 am

More, abduction does not trigger Grim Reaper which is not beneficial but little importance. By wording, monsters and grim reaper say "kill" while abduction says "destroy" so wording is acceptable (though could be just "remove"). Larceny and runes both say "destroy" and that is expected given the mojo cost.
Referral code: MCSQK4E

Posts: 52
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 5:57 pm

Re: Bug with Larceny spell

Postby weidox » Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:15 pm

Would be nice to hear a word from Rubicon to calm my tearful lamentings:)
Referral code: MCSQK4E

User avatarRubicon
Site Admin
Posts: 4314
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:13 pm

Re: Bug with Larceny spell

Postby Rubicon » Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:23 pm

tbh I can't remember the details and the code is too subtle just to look at quick.

But I do trust our established regular players as we've hammered these details out between us for months if not years. :)

</dodge>
Regards, Paul Johnson.

Posts: 52
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 5:57 pm

Re: Bug with Larceny spell

Postby weidox » Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:07 pm

No no, that's not an answer. As a paying customer (where did I say that before? ok, I spent $3 more since the last time I said that:) ), I feel let down that the ultimate long dreamed of blah blah high end prize is a cheap (actually costly) flop. Also I seriously doubt whether that card was tested enough as it is black so it is rare to have, and it's description does not match what it actually does (I also searched forums, this part of Larceny behavior was never discussed). As we say there, it's like written black on white (coincidence, card is white on black). When behavior contradicts wording, that needs.. a fix. Change wording (and feel sorry that it is colored black), or change behavior or at least mojo cost to make it look like black.
Waiting for another dodge. Better not. I want to be happy too:)
Referral code: MCSQK4E

User avatarRubicon
Site Admin
Posts: 4314
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:13 pm

Re: Bug with Larceny spell

Postby Rubicon » Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:38 pm

Larceny doesn't destroy the target rune. The clue is kinda in the name, so yes it's the explanation text that's wrong but it actually works correctly.
Will fix the text when we next update.

This is what bigberg said, which also serves to back up what I said. :)
Regards, Paul Johnson.

Posts: 52
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 5:57 pm

Re: Bug with Larceny spell

Postby weidox » Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:58 pm

Then, please anyone tell me why it is black. It is total crap card for 5 mojo. I'd think about it if it was cost 3. It would be like alternative to Smash which also costs 3 and is a Rare, and can trigger rune destruction effects, while Larceny then would steal rune which you most likely don't need as it's not thought for your own deck. And as I just said, at price of 3 it would compare to Rare card. Where's the black? All black cards are very unique or stronger than non-black counterparts. Only Larceny is an exception, and by a lot to the weak side. Am I missing something special which makes it strong? The only thing I could think about was as Rune of Runery, but even Smash is working on it (as it's targeted and not global).?
Referral code: MCSQK4E

User avatarRubicon
Site Admin
Posts: 4314
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:13 pm

Re: Bug with Larceny spell

Postby Rubicon » Tue Mar 21, 2017 10:26 pm

Black cards are meant to be different, not strong. Obviously some strength is implied, but it's not the main event.

It's real strength is in larger games. With 6P to pick from, you can usually bugger at least one team and score a good rune into the bargain, whilst also not triggering rune destruction events which some decks can be built around. Take a draw supremo from them and give it to and it could win the game right there.

This makes it more situational and a companion spell to abduction, and it may well be the weaker of the black cards, but then again one of them has to be. It's possible that both these "instants" cost too much to cast and as usual am welcome to feedback on that for next update. Having been away for a bit they do look kinda expensive tbh.
Regards, Paul Johnson.

Next

Return to Customer Service

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest