Gruul Beastmaster

QuiksilverHg

This isn’t a bug... but seriously if this guy is number 2 or 3 summoned he buffs a guy that has already attacked? Do they not test this at all?

Easy fix “Whenever this creature attacks” -> “At the beginning of combat”

This works fine in paper or MTGA where all attack triggers happen before damage, but that’s not how MTGPQ works. I know this isn’t the only case like this, but it’s a good time to take a look at it.

wereotter

This is an issue with myriad creatures.

Captain Lannery Storm will buff pirates that already attacked if she's not the first creature. Counsul's Lieutenant has the same problem. Mavren Fein wants to attack before your stack of vampire tokens, and if you're pairing the two together, Dream Trawler wants to attack before Faerie Vandal.

I've been advocating that they either need to let players rearrange the order of creatures they have in play, or need to change these to start of combat triggers rather than on attack.

Mburn7

Yeah this issue was introduced at some point in the Ixalan Block (before that all "when attack" abilities triggered together at the start of combat).

We've been complaining ever since, but to no avail.  So many great creatures are now useless because of it.

Tilwin90

Mburn7 said:

Yeah this issue was introduced at some point in the Ixalan Block (before that all "when attack" abilities triggered together at the start of combat).

We've been complaining ever since, but to no avail.  So many great creatures are now useless because of it.

I don't mean to sound mean (unintentional pun), but that's the first Oktagon set. Perhaps it sounds like a cool quirk (hey, let's implement an "on attack" trigger), or in some situations it actually makes perfect sense (especially if it should not trigger if the creature is unsable to attack), but when affecting other attacking creatures this effect should be written as one of the following:
- Whenever a creature you control attacks, ....
- At the beginning of your combat step...

This is one of the biggest differences between MTGPQ and MTG, namely that creatures don't all attack at the same time. Therefore translations should be adjusted accordingly.
Most often creatures are not able to attack because they are disabled anyway, and in that case their triggered abilities don't trigger anyway.

FindingHeart8

Yeah, it's also possible (if you have a creature that summons creatures during attack, gives them haste, and attacks last) to have that creature deal combat damage as well, resulting in you getting to attack with 4 creatures in 1 round.  This wouldn't work in paper mtg, because the attack phase is already declared when attackers are brought into play (exceptions being the Kaalia trigger and the few others similar).

Stormcrow

Yeah, Fervent Champion has this problem too (in addition to needing both another Knight in play and an Equipment in your hand to trigger his ability). On the plus side, Tenth District Veteran will enable a disabled creature (like Etrata) that's in a slot in front of the Veteran and it will still attack afterwards.

Definitely an area where this game could use consistency but there are so many areas like that. I'll never understand why Hibernum when they set out to make the game didn't just build a framework with all the same steps to a turn that are in a turn in paper MtG but they didn't, and so here we are.

Mburn7

Tilwin90 said:

Mburn7 said:

Yeah this issue was introduced at some point in the Ixalan Block (before that all "when attack" abilities triggered together at the start of combat).

We've been complaining ever since, but to no avail.  So many great creatures are now useless because of it.

I don't mean to sound mean (unintentional pun), but that's the first Oktagon set. Perhaps it sounds like a cool quirk (hey, let's implement an "on attack" trigger), or in some situations it actually makes perfect sense (especially if it should not trigger if the creature is unsable to attack), but when affecting other attacking creatures this effect should be written as one of the following:
- Whenever a creature you control attacks, ....
- At the beginning of your combat step...

This is one of the biggest differences between MTGPQ and MTG, namely that creatures don't all attack at the same time. Therefore translations should be adjusted accordingly.
Most often creatures are not able to attack because they are disabled anyway, and in that case their triggered abilities don't trigger anyway.

I take it you didn't play much before then, since if you did you would remember that creatures that could not attack (because they were disabled or 0 power or otherwise unable) would not trigger "on attack" abilities.

Basically, at the start of combat all of your creatures would trigger any "on attack" abilities, starting with the first creature, then the second, then the third.  Then attack damage would be calculated, with any "on damage" abilities triggering as they happened.

The easiest way to see this would be with Sorin's second or Campaign of Vengeance; with 3 creatures you would see 3 drain (damage+lifegain) triggers go off one after the other, with any lifegain triggers going off each time, and then creatures would attack.  You'll note these are both from the old devs, there were a lot of cards designed to go off at the start of combat that retroactively became useless once Oktagon implemented the change.

Tilwin90

Mburn7 said:

I take it you didn't play much before then, since if you did you would remember that creatures that could not attack (because they were disabled or 0 power or otherwise unable) would not trigger "on attack" abilities.

Oh I used to play quite a bit Sorin was my trump walker, I just didn't play Campaign of Vengeance that extensively (I was VERY lucky to drop Deploy the Gatewatch very early so I abused it like crazy with expensive lifelinkers). With that being said, yes, you are correct, "attack" triggers triggered at the beginning of combat. I see your point about the change.

But again, my point above stands that creatures in MTGPQ attack and deal damage one after another instead of all at the same time, so it does make sense to separate the two steps at "Beginning of combat" and "creature attacks". Nothing wrong with Oktagon making this change > so long as they had not retroactively messed up with perfectly fine working cards.