|
Post by saypin on Jan 13, 2009 5:45:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by wastelin on Jan 13, 2009 6:53:11 GMT -5
No.
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Jan 13, 2009 7:01:08 GMT -5
Saypin If you cast a mindspell, you cannot cast it (this very mindspell) again until you either cast two other mindspells, or until five turns without mind spells pass. So there is nothing wrong with Awall casting two different mindspells he has never cast before.
To avoid further misunderstanding, there very same in Russian follows: Если ты кастишь майндспелл, ты не можешь кастить _этот же_ майндспелл либо пока не скастишь два других, либо пока не пройдет 5 ходов, в которые ты вообще не кастил майндспеллов (направленных в кого-то, не являющегося nobody). В описанной тобой ситуации Awall сыграл два разных майндспелла впервые за партию, поэтому нарушения правила не было.
|
|
|
Post by saypin on Jan 13, 2009 10:56:31 GMT -5
OMG! Using an indefinite article - "A mindspell", to my humble opinion, shows an indefinite number of mindspells?
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Jan 13, 2009 12:54:48 GMT -5
Saypin Oh my. No, you're wrong here =) Indefinite article 'a' is used when you refer to some 'generic' item, that was not clearly described\mentioned before. So 'a mindspell' means 'any ONE mindspell', not 'any number of mindspells'. Refer to your English textbook or something like: homeenglish.ru/Grammararticle.htm
|
|
|
Post by Dubber on Jan 13, 2009 15:06:58 GMT -5
There are 6? mindspells: DPP,DSF,FFF,PSDF,PSDD,SWD (did I miss one?) "a mindspell" in this case indicates you may substitute any *one* of the above combinations for the entire sentence. This way the sentence is shorter (and supposedly clearer) A mindspell (e.g. DPP) may be cast by a player a second time only after: 1. Five turns of no mindspells at all, or 2. After two other (not DPP (and not two of the same mindspell, of course)) mindspells are cast by the player Does that help any?
|
|
|
Post by saypin on Jan 14, 2009 1:16:31 GMT -5
Hmm... unconvincing until you put a more accurate definition such as:
Once you cast a mindspell, you may not cast THE SAME MINDSPELL again until after (1) You have cast two other, different mindspells OR (2) Five consecutive turns pass in which you cast no mindspells.
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Jan 14, 2009 2:30:58 GMT -5
saypin I'm sorry to say this, mate, but there are no problems with Awall definition, which states: "Once you cast a mindspell, you may not cast it again until after:". It is very clear for me (and obviously to all other league participants other then you) that while 'a mindspell' refers to 'any one mindspell', 'it' clearly refers to 'the very same mindspell' previous passage was dedicated to. Here is an Russian equivalent for Awalls definition: 'Если ты скастуешь майндспелл, ты не можешь кастовать его еще раз пока не:'
I hope this covers this misunderstanding... and this English lesson as well =(
|
|
|
Post by Slartucker on Jan 14, 2009 7:08:16 GMT -5
Saypin -- I am extremely sympathetic to the language difficulty. Articles and pronouns are some of the most irrational and irritating parts of any language. But one thing confuses me. If one interpreted the rule as you have just suggested, the part about casting two other mindspells makes no sense whatsoever. Basically, you are suggesting the rule as written would be read as (ignoring the 5 turns clause for now) "Once you cast a mindspell, you may not cast any mindspell again until after you have cast two other mindspells." Which is blatantly logically impossible.
Bio's right about the use of language, but if that really was how you read it, didn't it occur to you that something must be wrong? Why didn't you ask about it before?
|
|
|
Post by saypin on Jan 15, 2009 7:02:31 GMT -5
Bio, thanks for a lesson, but I've no need of it. The only thing I want to state - for all later monthly rules they shoud be clear for all.
|
|
|
Post by boomfrog on Jan 16, 2009 23:33:36 GMT -5
Well, next time if it is not clear, ask questions earlier We all do our best to make the rules clear, I think.
|
|
|
Post by Dubber on Jan 19, 2009 0:37:19 GMT -5
Rats, I was soo close to getting points for losing... Dubber vs saypin games.ravenblack.net/warlocks?num=69737&full=1+1 in favor of saypin +10 for winning -1 for SWD (turn 3) -1 for DPP (turn 5) -1 for DSF (turn 8) -1 for FFF (turn 11) -1 for PSDF (turn 12) -1 for PSDF(turn 19) -3 for 6 in a row (turn 12)
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Jan 20, 2009 0:04:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by xade on Jan 20, 2009 1:05:00 GMT -5
Two para pluses and two fear minuses balance each other out... But yes, I agree with your interpretation. That force against Wider has got me raising an eyebrow though... *raises eyebrow*
|
|
|
Post by mikeEB on Jan 20, 2009 11:25:35 GMT -5
Yeah, I was under the impression that we were playing no-force except in extreme circumstances (e.g. QnanG leaving the league completely).
|
|