Should Poison Prevent Elemental Mastery?

[Guenwhyever]

EM is rewarded for having full health at the end of the game. If you do not have full health, you do not get EM.
It's as simple as that. The game is not doing stuff in the wrong order simple because you don't get what you want.

Just because you COULD have have gotten full health, doesn't mean you deserve EM.

SoG's are already far too powerful, this is a mechanic to the game that helps to make normal healing cards and bonds stand out.

[Delreich]

SoG's and Staffs are the only things that heal after your creatures attack. If that's such a problem to you, bring some other form of healing.
Moving the poison damage as you suggest would take Antimatter out of the EM equation instead, and would give Arsenic a buff it really doesn't need.
Actually, unless I completely misunderstood you, that's the only thing your change would do. The scenario you present would still be exactly the same.

If you really want something to change for the sake of consistency, we should have permanents act before critters and Bonds healing all at once.
This would screw over the Fahrenheit / Elite Firefly combo instead though.

[TheMadEvil]

SoG's and Staffs are the only things that heal after your creatures attack. If that's such a problem to you, bring some other form of healing.
Moving the poison damage as you suggest would take Antimatter out of the EM equation instead, and would give Arsenic a buff it really doesn't need.
Actually, unless I completely misunderstood you, that's the only thing your change would do. The scenario you present would still be exactly the same.

If you really want something to change for the sake of consistency, we should have permanents act before critters and Bonds healing all at once.
This would screw over the Fahrenheit / Elite Firefly combo instead though.

This is exactly what I've been saying, but it's not easy to explain...I'm sure many people still don't understand why changing when poison damage applies does not actually change anything...

[TheMonolith]

Mono/duo decks don't have the option to just "bring another form of healing". 

That's why this means more than just rule consistency, simplicity, ease of coding, or personal preference.  Taking EM away from poisoned people just because they are using a shard to heal is another way of disadvantaging mono/duo decks.

Rank = Score = Money, and EM = 2x the money.   This is a BIG DEAL.

[Wisemage]

Mono/duo decks don't have the option to just "bring another form of healing". 

That's why this means more than just rule consistency, simplicity, ease of coding, or personal preference.  Taking EM away from poisoned people just because they are using a shard to heal is another way of disadvantaging mono/duo decks.

Rank = Score = Money, and EM = 2x the money.   This is a BIG DEAL.

Said it before.  Score =/= Money.

I beat a god got 42 coins and got 83 score.

So its not even double, there is no formula with score = money.

[TheMadEvil]

how is poison different from an opponent laying down a dragon the turn before you kill them? or fire lancing you? or using any other spell or creature to do more damage than you can heal before you kill him? Mono decks are one element, which means that they do what the do really well. Without SoG, Fire has NO healing, meaning you have to kill them before they do ANY damage to get EM. If you win in 3 turns, and the only thing they got out all game was a Skelly on turn 2, you still don't get an EM, because you took 1 damage. Is that wrong? No, it's the way the game is made. You can't counter creatures before they attack, you can't stop poison before it takes effect, etc.
Is all this worthy of taking away EM? That depends on what you consider an EM. As it stands, it's based solely on health, not creatures, permanents, or whatever.
Example:
I have 1 life, no creatures, no Towers, only permanents are 2 hourglasses and a DimShield at 0, but enough quanta built up to play a 12/3 Dragon, a Miracle, and a Bond.
Chaos Lord has 12 life left, a field full of mutants (let's say 130 damage showing), and quanta enough to play his whole deck.
I draw a Dragon, HG a Miracle, HG a Bond.
I play the dragon, Miracle, Bond. EM.
Do I deserve this? Just because I got lucky to draw this?


I understand that EM is a big deal. But, it being how it is, bring Miracles and some way to get enough  . Rainbow almost guarantees EM when you win, but it takes forever. I could play a match for 10 min (I play slow cuz I play for fun, not to grind), but I EM almost every match I play. Fire, however, can play matches in 2 min, and win just as often...but not EM as much. So does it suck that Rainbow EMs more and so gets more money? They don't get more money, because they spend more time to win that money. Overall, it evens out, I think. And Fire EMs quite a bit, I hear, anyways...

[TheMonolith]

how is poison different from an opponent laying down a dragon the turn before you kill them? or fire lancing you? or using any other spell or creature to do more damage than you can heal before you kill him? M

The differences:
1. Poison is unblockable and uncurable unless you carry purify on the off chance that your opponent will have even ONE poison card in his deck.
2. We are not talking about your opponent doing more damage than you can heal.  We are talking about having PLENTY of healing to offset the damage, but having the healing not apply until after the match is over because your creatures killed your opponent BEFORE your shards could activate.

[TheMonolith]

Said it before.  Score =/= Money.

I beat a god got 42 coins and got 83 score.

So its not even double, there is no formula with score = money.

Perhaps score and money do not always work with a perfect 1:1 ratio, but winning money is the ONLY thing that increases your score.
To say there is no formula with score and money is to be obtuse.

Winning 2x the money is a BIG DEAL, even if it doesn't translate into 2x the score, because 2x the money means you can upgrade your deck 2x as fast.

I should accept someone being able to upgrade their deck at twice the rate as mine, just because they use healing bonds and I use healing shards?

[TheMadEvil]

My point is, you have to have a way to counter everything a deck throws at you to get EM.

Elemental Mastery - Mastery over the elements, having knowledge enough to overpower an opponent in all ways.

My point was, why should you get EM because you allowed an opponent to put 30 poison counters on you? Yeah, it sucks that I can draw a Miracle and get EM because I have a bond that gives me my 1 hp needed for EM, but if you're worried, splash for purify. EM means you can beat anything. At least, most of the time. You have gained MASTERY of the elements, not just full life. Basically, I think it sucks that I can get EM after losing an entire game just because I drew a lucky Miracle. But the same is true for poison. You should be able to balance your deck to be able to heal poison damage before you kill your opponent. Heal and Stone Skin are options, but if you don't want to splash, then you have to just not get poisoned, the same as mono-Fire has to just deal 200 damage BEFORE taking ANY damage.

[TheMonolith]

You should be able to balance your deck to be able to heal poison damage before you kill your opponent.

That's fine, but then people using Bonds, Heals, and Miracles should have to, also.

[TheMadEvil]

Wow...i had a whole post written up and then firefox crashed...poop on me i guess

What I said basically is that only 5 elements have access to instant-speed healing spells (Heal, SS, Miracle, Black Hole, Drain Life). Only 3 elements have access to permanent healers (not counting SoG - Antimatter, Vampire, Bond). This means that without SoG, exactly half of the elements have access to some sort of healing.
So yes, I believe that SoG's heal should be moved to before attack, but my point is that there are other ways around this issue, unless you are playing mono. Unfortunately for mono, a small card base is what kills this poor archetype.

I absolutely think that all healing should be moved to before attack, due to the fact that EM is such a bonus. But my original point is mostly about Miracle and SS...why should I be awarded an EM when I drew a lucky Miracle + Bond or 2 SS the turn before I kill you? Why does this mean that mono-Fire gets no EM when only 1 damage is done to it, even though it utterly destroyed its enemy?

[Delreich]

EM is not that big a deal. Yes, you get twice the cash and score, but you usually get almost as much cash from the cards won, or even more if it's FGs, and score doesn't matter much at all. You act like this issue causes you to lose the EM bonus in every game, or at least most of them. If that's the case it's a case of bad deck building, nothing else.
Also, why should a mono/duo deck that isn't of one of the healing elements get the same chance at EM as, say, light? All elements have their pros and cons; the ones without healing are usually faster instead.

It would be nice if you could clarify what your proposed change would accomplish, and how. As far as I can tell, it wouldn't do anything to improve your situation.