Shard of Wisdom | Shard of Wisdom

[Zso_Zso]

What happens to the SoW+reflective shield combo, if the other player also has a reflective shield ?
Does it start bouncing back-and-forth infinitely ? 

[~Napalm]

Reflectivity only affects a damage source once. So if your creature attacks and both have Reflective shields, you take damage and vice versa.

[Avenger]

...
There's a conflict of mechanics somewhere here.
...

Not really. Adrenaline makes your creature attack x more times.
Momentum makes your creature's physical attack bypass any shield.
Spell attacks are not physical attacks, that's the whole point of this effect.
But they are still attacks, so adrenaline keeps working.

[willng3]

...
There's a conflict of mechanics somewhere here.
...

Not really. Adrenaline makes your creature attack x more times.
Momentum makes your creature's physical attack bypass any shield.
Spell attacks are not physical attacks, that's the whole point of this effect.
But they are still attacks, so adrenaline keeps working.

It's not specifically stated on Momentum that it only applies to physical attacks in the same way that there's no note of this on Adrenaline.  I'm not seeing why it's not applicable to both.

[The Chosen One]

not bad..really

[~Napalm]

Well if you're going to try that argument, I want a note on Rustler telling me not to SoR it. Just sayin'.

[willng3]

Well if you're going to try that argument, I want a note on Rustler telling me not to SoR it. Just sayin'.

Which is a completely straw man argument.

SoR + Rustler is a unique interaction purposely designed to avoid the exploit of infinite quanta generation.  How does Momentum applying to spell damage cause anywhere near the same type of exploit to the game?
Furthermore SoR + Rustler yields an effect which you would never expect to occur just from reading the two cards separately.  Momentum however makes no indication that its ability is solely reserved for physical damage or spell damage.  Therefore I make the argument that Momentum should apply to both physical and spell damage, which requires no new note to be made on the card itself.  This note would however be warranted, based on your argument, if Momentum only applied to physical damage.  So in other words, your comment does nothing except to reinforce my argument.
That aside, I have another strange phenomenon I thought was worth mentioning.  Consider the following:
1.  Antimatter'd creatures do not receive additional damage reduction from shields.
2.  Antimatter'd creatures are not affected by the reflective status.
3.  Holy Light is not affected by the reflective status.
4.  Antimatter + SoW will cause a creature's attack to be affected by the reflective status, effectively healing their owners.

I list these facts to address the possible logical explanations for Antimatter'd attacks being affected by reflective shields.  It has been agreed upon that Holy Light is not reflected because it is healing the player instead of dealing damage to them.  Therefore the logical explanation for Antimatter'd SoW'd attacks being reflected would be that it is dealing negative damage (which is somehow different from healing the player I guess).  However, Antimatter alone does not receive damage reduction from shields meaning that the attack is no longer physical.  If the attack is no longer physical then it would be natural to assume that the creature is now dealing spell damage or is healing the opponent, thus bypassing damage reduction.  But then Antimatter alone is not reflected, which would cause my method of logic to conclude that Antimatter converts the attack to healing.  Therefore Antimatter + SoW would seem to be parallel to Holy Light such that it is not affected by the reflective status.

Is this not the case because SoW converts the "healing damage" into "negative spell damage"?  Really, the more I try to grasp the concept of physical versus spell damage, the more I seem to confuse myself :D

[Avenger]

Antimatter shouldn't really affect spell damage, yeah. But the fix wouldn't be to break momentum, which is correct.

Zanz usually fixes quirks like these only if there is an exploit.

[mesaprotector]

*snip*

There are other "exceptions" to SoW which also don't seem to make sense - Quint + a scorpion + SoW doesn't give the poison damage for a successful attack, and although I haven't tested it I suspect the same is true with vampires.

[Essence]

Right, because as Zanz has said, the creature stops attacking and instead stands back and casts nukes at the opponent.  So anything that would normally trigger on an attack (Momentum, Vampirism, Poison, etc.) doesn't. Right?

[willng3]

Right, because as Zanz has said, the creature stops attacking and instead stands back and casts nukes at the opponent.  So anything that would normally trigger on an attack (Momentum, Vampirism, Poison, etc.) doesn't. Right?

Eh, I guess that makes sense.  The only thing that wouldn't make sense to me is how a Spark or a Photon can be affected by those things considering that I can't see them ramming anything physical into the opponent, but a nuke, bolt of lightning, explosion, etc. is somehow unable to do the same.  However, being pure energy neither one should be affected by Momentum to begin with from a physics standpoint and yet they are so...so I guess I'll just have to accept that logic doesn't apply to this situation the way it should.

[Essence]

My only problem with this shard is that it seems like there's just not enough use for it outside of an (or at least -tainted) deck. I feel like it should be "target creature deals spell damage and if it is immaterial gains +4/+0." That wouldn't change the effect on Aether much, but would give it SOME use to other elements.