Deflagration should destroy 7 Bone Walls

[Malduk]

Its not that you just "said" card instead of permanent, you're basing your whole logic that deflagration destroys a card. Which is not true.

[guy_fawkes]

i like this forum because arguing about elements rules is so fun, but everyone remain with the original idea even after 20 pages of a thread

but no! this time i have to say: BP u convinced me!
your explaination makes somewhat sense (but it's still too much for me to accept "stacking" in a slot that is normally not stackable )

[BluePriest]

i like this forum because arguing about elements rules is so fun, but everyone remain with the original idea even after 20 pages of a thread

but no! this time i have to say: BP u convinced me!
your explaination makes somewhat sense (but it's still too much for me to accept "stacking" in a slot that is normally not stackable )

Ill take it lol

[dracomageat]

The shield slot states that it's one shield per player. Deflagration destroys a shield. The correct interaction is incredibly obvious. Why is that not the way it works?

[Innominate]

The shield slot states that it's one shield per player. Deflagration destroys a shield. The correct interaction is incredibly obvious. Why is that not the way it works?

Because the card bone wall also states "Summons 7 bone shields". So deflagration destroys one of them.

[dracomageat]

Because the card bone wall also states "Summons 7 bone shields". So deflagration destroys one of them.

7 shields =/= 1 shield. Read the rules.

[Innominate]

Because the card bone wall also states "Summons 7 bone shields". So deflagration destroys one of them.

7 shields =/= 1 shield. Read the rules.

Which part of the rules says "you may have no more than one shield at any time even if another card says you can"? Is this continuing in the long tradition of "you can only draw one card a turn not even if you use precognition, an hourglass or a sundial"?

Here's the scoop: the cards trump the rules. If the rules say no creature can have an attack greater than 12, and you play a ruby dragon, the ruby dragon just won. So when bone wall says "Summons 7 bone shields", it gets the casting vote.

[dracomageat]

"you can only draw one card a turn not even if you use precognition, an hourglass or a sundial"?

The rules only state that you draw 1 card a turn, they don't say anything about not drawing any more.

[sSethia]

Playing down a Bonewall is like playing down 7 shields . <-- a period

[dracomageat]

Playing down a Bonewall is like playing down 7 shields

And it shouldn't be as that breaks the rules.

[BluePriest]

Playing down a Bonewall is like playing down 7 shields

And it shouldn't be as that breaks the rules.

Lets just say for 1 moment, that I agree with you, which I dont.
I play a bone wall. Yay. I block one of my enemies attacks. Worst Shield Ever. Unless I play a RoF with it, but then to get any use I need at least a duo deck, and 5 + 5 so 10 quanta for a shield. Which makes it the most worthless card in the world.

[guy_fawkes]

i suppose dracomageat wants to say that the shield should be one , while the prevention from 7 sources is represented by some kind of counter that decreases after each prevention...