Cards that play: Auto-Cast vs Choice

Phillmoore

why do some cards auto play and others give you a choice.  Cast off for instance auto play s if I forget to shade it.  Whereas I'd like the choice not to play it and save it in hand on those occasions 

//Edited Title For Clarity -Brigby

Mainloop25

One of those baffling questions that have been asked many times, and never got a good response to. 

Ohboy

Mainloop25 said:

One of those baffling questions that have been asked many times, and never got a good response to. 

Yeah some cards are baffling that way. 

Cast out however isn't. It's a support, so it will never ask for confirmation before cast, like creatures. 

Mainloop25

That's true, I was thinking more about spells, and wasn't paying that much attention to translate "cast off" to Cast Out in my head... Thought for some reason he was talking about casting off spells. 

Tilwin90

While I can understand that programming is rather generic, from a usability perspective it's silly how supports like Cast Out and Trial of Ambition are auto cast even if there is no valid target. The number of situations when you would want to cast them anyway (say buff up via Starfield of Nyx) are so fringe they shouldn't impede the improved usability of the main use of these supports.
On the other hand Baral's Expertise for instance can't be cast (or couldn't last time I checked) if you didn't have a suitable card in hand for it to power up (and cast instantly), which again made little to no sense. The main thing of Baral's Expertise is that it's a bounce spell, everything else is a nice to have bonus. 

shteev

Because lazyness. You might as well ask 'why does the AI cast certain buffs at your creatures'. I imagine Brigby will show up in a bit and ask us if we can help collate some data so we can fix the problem, as if we haven't done it a million times before.

Volrak

shteev said:

I imagine Brigby will show up in a bit and ask us if we can help collate some data so we can fix the problem

D3 reaching out is a positive thing, and the existence of some other negative thing (bugs), combined with the lack of existence of a further positive thing (good QA practices) doesn't change that.

Ohboy

Volrak said:

shteev said:

I imagine Brigby will show up in a bit and ask us if we can help collate some data so we can fix the problem

D3 reaching out is a positive thing, and the existence of some other negative thing (bugs), combined with the lack of existence of a further positive thing (good QA practices) doesn't change that.

Yes, that's true and all, but you're forgetting one thing. 

We don't use logic here. No seriously, I've actually been told by a mod that pointing out logical fallacies is an offence. 

shteev

Volrak said:

shteev said:

I imagine Brigby will show up in a bit and ask us if we can help collate some data so we can fix the problem

D3 reaching out is a positive thing, and the existence of some other negative thing (bugs), combined with the lack of existence of a further positive thing (good QA practices) doesn't change that.

I'm not saying that we've told them about similar issues in the past and they haven't fixed them; I'm saying that we've reported this exact issue in the past and it they haven't fixed it. There are posts about it littered all over the bugs forum.

Volrak

Ohboy said:

Yes, that's true and all, but you're forgetting one thing. 

We don't use logic here. No seriously, I've actually been told by a mod that pointing out logical fallacies is an offence. 

Hah, but you see, I had never known such a thing, and so logic dictates that I could not have forgotten it as claimed!
Q.E.D.

As for the.. er.. topic.  I've actually reached acceptance that the exact implementation of any given card can never be known in advance.  So is there an upside?  I can think of a few:

• That glorious day when the cards are all reimplemented and reworded so that their behaviour can be fully predicted in advance remains something we can all look forward to.  And according to some psychological research I seem to remember reading a greatly simplified summary of once, most of the enjoyment of a thing is actually in the looking forward to it.
• Learning how each card works is like its own little easter egg.  Discovery awaits!
• I can theorize that this dangerous yet arbitrary touch of autocast is what tipped the balance against Crush of Tentacles being considered too overpowered, thus saving it from a humiliating nerf before its time.

Matthew

Ohboy said:

Yes, that's true and all, but you're forgetting one thing. 

We don't use logic here. No seriously, I've actually been told by a mod that pointing out logical fallacies is an offence. 

You can't be serious...

bk1234

Matthew said:

Ohboy said:

Yes, that's true and all, but you're forgetting one thing. 

We don't use logic here. No seriously, I've actually been told by a mod that pointing out logical fallacies is an offence. 

You can't be serious...

I believe this. 

I had a mod here tell me once that someone was not being passive--aggressive because she followed each of her rude statements with smileys -- which is the pinnacle of passive-aggression. 

To the point though -- maybe we should collect data. Why wait for Brigby to ask?

Brigby

Actually when it comes to the card Cast Out, there is a fix in 2.2 that will prevent it from erroneously casting when you select "Not Now."

I know it's not exactly the same scenario as @Phillmoore's original post, but it's similar and relevant enough that I figured I'd mention it

bk1234

Brigby said:

Actually when it comes to the card Cast Out, there is a fix in 2.2 that will prevent it from erroneously casting when you select "Not Now."

I know it's not exactly the same scenario as @Phillmoore's original post, but it's similar and relevant enough that I figured I'd mention it

I don't think that should be the case with a support - they should auto cast.

DaddyO

It bothers me that Days Undoing asks and Behold the Beyond auto casts. They are functionally very similar cards. Nahir's Wrath auto casts which makes it dangerous to play. This is a good topic for conversation. I would vote against auto casting spells. It seems fine for creatures and supports. 

Ohboy

Brigby said:

Actually when it comes to the card Cast Out, there is a fix in 2.2 that will prevent it from erroneously casting when you select "Not Now."

I know it's not exactly the same scenario as @Phillmoore's original post, but it's similar and relevant enough that I figured I'd mention it

And now I want to know lilianna's oath got changed too. 

It's the consistency that matters. This just makes things more unpredictable. 

bk1234

Ohboy said:

Brigby said:

Actually when it comes to the card Cast Out, there is a fix in 2.2 that will prevent it from erroneously casting when you select "Not Now."

I know it's not exactly the same scenario as @Phillmoore's original post, but it's similar and relevant enough that I figured I'd mention it

And now I want to know lilianna's oath got changed too. 

It's the consistency that matters. This just makes things more unpredictable. 

Don't forget Trial of Ambition. 

This could be a thing I don't like. 

Laeuftbeidir

Brigby said:

Actually when it comes to the card Cast Out, there is a fix in 2.2 that will prevent it from erroneously casting when you select "Not Now."

This is.. Really one of the priorities? Wow.
If you do that, I hope you change the card text also, because it behaves exactly as described. I - and most of the other players here - could easily come up with a list of cards that need to be fixed/balanced. Cast out is one of them, but it doesn't need to become idiot - proof (I forget disabling it myself from time to time), but balanced.

When it comes to spells, ops question is right, it doesn't make sense. Supports were at least consistent until now.

Corn_Noodles

bken1234 said:

I don't think that should be the case with a support - they should auto cast.

I completely agree with this. Spells should have confirmation buttons, but supports should not.

Outersider

I'm of the opinion that no cards should auto cast. If these were actual cards held in our hands we would control them. One of my irritants from one of my favorite decks is when drawing cards that gain mana at the same time, then t they cast without me having the ability to arrange the order played.   Auto cast should not be consideration when building a deck. But it is. 

madwren

To make both camps happy, we should simply have an option to turn autocast off or on for all of your cards.

Regardless, having some cards work one way, and some another way, is just silly.