Flesh of Marble and aggravated damage
LivesByProxy wrote: I mean, it should be clear that if Ankha is having to explain how FoM works by evoking steps and explaining words that aren't listed or explained, respectively, in the rulebook... that something is wrong here.
Edit: I guess I give up though. No point dying on the hill of clear and concise rules when we can just memorize and internalize how everything is suppose to work.
Oh, yes, something is deeply wrong with the current rulebook. Maybe you are not aware that the current rules people are updating the rulebook? So, I'm guessing that whatever Ankha is "evoking" is a preview of an eventual updated rulebook. If that is the case, this "wrong" is in the process of being righted.
LivesByProxy wrote: I just want consistency. Almost all the CCGs/TCGs/LCGs since Magic have a similar "Golden Rule". It is necessary in these kinds of games. Magic also has an important addendum to their Golden Rule:
101.2. When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can’t happen, the “can’t” effect takes precedence.
But that's an aside. The issue is that the rules are not being contradicted if the card is making up rules as it goes. There is nothing in the rules about this, and 1.4 does not cover this.
We are in agreement about the consistency. I have nothing against people demanding it to be increased as long as their demands keep the original design intents available. I hope I'm not someone who's killing anyone in rules hill when I'm trying to say that your viewpoint is valid and only requires refining.
Because in the end it's easy for me to say how nice it would be to have rulebook that goes hand in hand with the cards, but that doesn't make it true. Someone has to do that work and lord knows despite me spewing lot of words to a post, I don't have the time to spend in deep pondering for global game on wording changes and other subjects it might raise. I hope people keep providing suggestions as while they might receive notes like the earlier discipline + nos issue I raised the people who can spend the time pondering still receive those suggestions (and the raised issues) hopefully refining them in turn.
That's incidentally also why "mathematical outlaws" are allowed and encouraged in certain discussions to proceed "with 40 instead 19". Freedom sometimes gives us stuff like Riemann zeta function with it's universality that we're still in amasement. Or at least I am but then again I'm not mathemacian or physicist who has days upon days of time to ponder these things.
TL:DR Please keep on pushing for what you believe in, preferably with solid reasoning and don't become unnecessarily jaded.
Trust in Jan Pieterzoon.