S rank budget Faie (Jan 2019)

[terrarius]

BG playing by the rules ?

[mrmana3]

How about: “Whenever this minion attacks, it has a 50% chance to FIGHT a random enemy.”

Perfect fix.

[alplod]

I’ve always considered “fight” to be a symmetric process, so probably not the best word to be used in this case.

I got the joke, btw

[phoinexflame]

Gambler continuing to shoot down enemies even when he is already dead

Wow! How one could archieve that?

Drop an Ironcliffe next to Gambler, attack Ironcliffe with Gambler. If RNG is on your side the 0 health gambler will proceed to shoot every other enemy on the field (this is also a good example of Gambler’s consecutive attacks ignoring provoke).

any attacks after that one aren’t technically attacks and don’t follow the rules of attacks

I don’t think that’s correct as the text of Gambler says: “Every time this minion ATTACKS he has a 50% to ATTACK again, ATTACKING a random enemy”.
All the damage it deals with its ability after every first attack are also attacks.
Call it spaghetti code, call it a bug, but it’s definitely not working according to the rules.
Applying MoS should still prevent it from attacking the General, if we’d go by the rules.

This isn’t spaghetti code nor is it a bug, this is the result of CPG giving cards poor wording and using the same word to define different effects. Gambler isn’t the only example of this, Sirocco and Ebon Ox also share this quality.

Ideally Gambler’s text would be: “Whenever this deals damage during your turn, it has a 50% chance to deal damage equal to its attack to a random enemy”. This would help prevent confusion from most of the interactions with Gambler but would be much wordier than the current text.

[halcyon98]

Ideally Gambler’s text would be: “Whenever this deals damage during your turn, it has a 50% chance to deal damage equal to its attack to a random enemy”. This would help prevent confusion from most of the interactions with Gambler but would be much wordier than the current text.

This solution is almost perfect. The only issue I find is when you summon Gambler when Ox is online. The 3 damage dealt to a random enemy due to the Destiny still counts as Gambler dealing the damage.

[phoinexflame]

Looks like I indeed missed the interaction with Ox That means the proper description of how Gambler works would be: “Whenever this minion attacks, it has a 50% chance to deal damage equal to its attack to a random enemy, every time it does so it has a 50% chance to do it again” that just sounds terrible.

Anybody have a better idea how to properly word Gambler’s effect?

[atheistmantis]

We don’t know if it’s indeed a wrong wording or if the wording is correct but those specific interactions (keeping on shooting after technical death, attacking generals while Mark of Solitude is on) are actual bugs.
Surely there’s something wrong with the card, and people complained about it since forever (and who knows when things will get fixed…).

[nomnomnomnom]

@boronian was this interasction known/on the wiki?

[halcyon98]

Fight is a broken mechanic.

[boronian]

https://duelyst.gamepedia.com/Bloodsworn_Gambler

I don’t know, read the wiki, find out and add an interaction

[humancalc]

Is it safe to say Gambler’s non-first attack won’t trigger effects like Day Watcher then?

Gambler hidden passive:
When a post on Gambler is posted, there is 50% chance another post on Gambler is posted .

[phoinexflame]

Yep, only the first attack will trigger Daywatcher/E’Xun/Frostvia/vaporize mirages.

[nomnomnomnom]

@owlbeastmd sorry about taking this off track

[owlbeastmd]

The party forgives you, comrade.