Seems a bit sloppy, except that the wording on the monster is so that it doesn't grow on the opponents turn as they trade minions into it, whereas the worm can't attack again during the opponents turn anyways if the opponent trades into it so the extra phrasing isn't needed.
Honestly the monster could have had the same wording as the worm, maybe then it would only be mediocre instead of total garbage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Hello. Would you like to destroy some evil today?"
Good point, I didn't see it that way. So Giant Sand Worm should have the same wording as The Boogeymonster since it can't attack on your opponent's turn anyway, right?
The Boogeymonster will still trigger even if it gets redirected by Misdirection or Mogor the Ogre. It's still considered as attacking the new target. (This should be obvious from the wording of MisD and Mogor.)
EDIT: I'm talking about triggering Misdirection by attacking with The Boogeymonster, which will still trigger Boogey. Obviously it won't trigger if a different minion attacks and gets Misdirected into Boogey.
If one of your minions runs into your Boogeymonster and dies due to Misdirection, Boogeymonster's effect doesn't trigger. Giant Sand Worm does trigger, however, and gets its attack refreshed. Very minor difference, of course. Changing Sand Worm's effect would only increase the amount of text on the card, and Blizzard wants their text to be as brief as possible to maximize readability.
There's way too much inconsistency in Hearthstone, to be honest. S
eriously, it's to the point where you need to stop bothering with it, otherwise it'll drive you insane. Just look at Shadow Word: Pain, and Shadow Word: Death.
While the whole Misdirection thing is true, why not simplify Boogeymonster's so it does trigger. It's not like Misdirection is a frequently used card, and it's not like Boogeymonster's going to be this amazingly OP legendary. It still screams "sloppy" to me.
Regardless, would be nice to get official confirmation.
EDIT: Nevermind, wording is correct. Boogey doesn't get buffed if someone suicides a minion into it.
Are there really people who care about this ? Wording consistency ?
It kind of makes Blizzard seem a little unprofessional. I know it's not a big deal, but there's honestly no real reason for the inconsistency to exist.
Are there really people who care about this ? Wording consistency ? As long as it does exactly what it says it's fine.
Um, not really, because it causes the confusion. For example, our favourite Knife Juggler and Leeroy Jenkins.
Logically if you play Knife Juggler and then Leeroy Jenkins, YOU SUMMON the minions for your opponent, so what SHOULD happen is that YOUR Juggler would fire, even though the minions aren't on your side of the board - but it's YOU who summons them. In reality, your Juggler just stands there doing nothing while your opponent's Juggler fires instead if it's on the board, even though the minions haven't really been summoned by your opponent.
So yeah, wording is the key in card games, because you need to know EXACTLY what is going to happen when you play the card.
EDIT: Heh, also, if you hover over Summon keyword it specifically says that it places a minion under YOUR CONTROL. So Leeroy Jenkins card text should be changed to "Put two 1/1 Whelps on your opponent's board".
logically if you play Knife Juggler and then Leeroy Jenkins, YOU SUMMON the minions for your opponent, so what SHOULD happen is that YOUR Juggler would fire, even though the minions aren't on your side of the board - but it's YOU who summons them.
No, i'm sorry but if you know the game mechanics and how it works in general in HS, you would know that despite the wording, it would never do that, it would have to be specifically stated in the text. Has ANYONE been really confused by knife juggler / leeroy, i mean in the real game ?
And all this big stuff about confusion caused, well it goes away when you play the card and see how it works. Lightwell is confusing, because it doesn't say "random" damaged friendly characters. But you know how lightwell works, without even reading it, because you've seen it played, and if you read it and is not the first time you play the game, you instantly understand that the card heals a random character. So yeah no big deal.
But it requires you to first play the card to see that it possibly doesn't work like you thought it does - it's a bad design.
If you see a door and you push it, just to learn that you need to pull it instead, yeah - you will remember that later on. But it still is a badly designed door, if you didn't know the way how it's supposed to be used before you even touched it.
Interaction design is really key in games like this, especially when you're the adventurous type and, let's say, design a deck around a card which you misunderstood, because the wording was weird/inconsistent. And yes, if Summon is a specific keyword, DO NOT use it on a card when it does something different - for the same reason Choose One: is not considered a Battlecry, even though in case of minions it's roughly the same.
EDIT: And specifically about the first sentence in your reply - people learn the game and mechanics based on card text and effect descriptions, nothing else. So if a card is inconsistent and prone to be misunderstood - the learning process is impaired.
EDIT2: Yeah, I work as a User Experience consultant, so I'm really triggered by this kind of stuff :P
Are there really people who care about this ? Wording consistency ? As long as it does exactly what it says it's fine.
Um, not really, because it causes the confusion. For example, our favourite Knife Juggler and Leeroy Jenkins.
Logically if you play Knife Juggler and then Leeroy Jenkins, YOU SUMMON the minions for your opponent, so what SHOULD happen is that YOUR Juggler would fire, even though the minions aren't on your side of the board - but it's YOU who summons them. In reality, your Juggler just stands there doing nothing while your opponent's Juggler fires instead if it's on the board, even though the minions haven't really been summoned by your opponent.
So yeah, wording is the key in card games, because you need to know EXACTLY what is going to happen when you play the card.
EDIT: Heh, also, if you hover over Summon keyword it specifically says that it places a minion under YOUR CONTROL. So Leeroy Jenkins card text should be changed to "Put two 1/1 Whelps on your opponent's board".
Better yet, "Your opponent summons two 1/1 Whelps." This covers the interaction with Knife Juggler.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
The thing here is, they're different, not inconsistent. That's quite an important distinction to make.
Imagine the hypothetical spell "Target minion deals it's attack in damage to a random enemy minion". Sandworm would be able to attack again afterwards, Boogeymonster wouldn't. I can't think of any direct example in the game right now, but it leaves it open to be created.
The thing here is, they're different, not inconsistent. That's quite an important distinction to make.
Imagine the hypothetical spell "Target minion deals it's attack in damage to a random enemy minion". Sandworm would be able to attack again afterwards, Boogeymonster wouldn't. I can't think of any direct example in the game right now, but it leaves it open to be created.
The thing here is, they're different, not inconsistent. That's quite an important distinction to make.
Imagine the hypothetical spell "Target minion deals it's attack in damage to a random enemy minion". Sandworm would be able to attack again afterwards, Boogeymonster wouldn't. I can't think of any direct example in the game right now, but it leaves it open to be created.
The condition is the same but worded differently
Edit: Apparently it's to prevent The boogeymonster to trigger on your opponent's turn.
Seems a bit sloppy, except that the wording on the monster is so that it doesn't grow on the opponents turn as they trade minions into it, whereas the worm can't attack again during the opponents turn anyways if the opponent trades into it so the extra phrasing isn't needed.
Honestly the monster could have had the same wording as the worm, maybe then it would only be mediocre instead of total garbage.
"Hello. Would you like to destroy some evil today?"
Good point, I didn't see it that way. So Giant Sand Worm should have the same wording as The Boogeymonster since it can't attack on your opponent's turn anyway, right?
I think The Boogeymonster is specific, so if it triggered Misdirection for instance, or get effected by something like Mogor the Ogre, it doesn't work.
If one of your minions runs into your Boogeymonster and dies due to Misdirection, Boogeymonster's effect doesn't trigger. Giant Sand Worm does trigger, however, and gets its attack refreshed. Very minor difference, of course. Changing Sand Worm's effect would only increase the amount of text on the card, and Blizzard wants their text to be as brief as possible to maximize readability.
There's way too much inconsistency in Hearthstone, to be honest. S
eriously, it's to the point where you need to stop bothering with it, otherwise it'll drive you insane. Just look at Shadow Word: Pain, and Shadow Word: Death.
While the whole Misdirection thing is true, why not simplify Boogeymonster's so it does trigger. It's not like Misdirection is a frequently used card, and it's not like Boogeymonster's going to be this amazingly OP legendary. It still screams "sloppy" to me.
Regardless, would be nice to get official confirmation.
EDIT: Nevermind, wording is correct. Boogey doesn't get buffed if someone suicides a minion into it.
If you got the coin, the Mercenaries get going. Vote for The Mercenary for CCC #3.
Oh, I never noticed the Shadow Words being like that... I gotta go lie down...
I wish boogie had same wording. That way it would at least be conceivable to run in niche taunt giving decks.
Anger is the punishment we give ourselves for someone else's mistake.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
The thing here is, they're different, not inconsistent. That's quite an important distinction to make.
Imagine the hypothetical spell "Target minion deals it's attack in damage to a random enemy minion". Sandworm would be able to attack again afterwards, Boogeymonster wouldn't. I can't think of any direct example in the game right now, but it leaves it open to be created.