Hey guys, I was playing against a Mage at some point during the week and had a Skulking Geist in whatever deck I was playing. It turns out my opponent discovered two one-cost spells from two different Primordial Glyph(making the discovered spells cost (1)) and I proceeded to play my Skulking Geist (not knowing whether or not he had any one-cost spells) and no spells were destroyed, but the opponent immediately played two spells that were made to cost one mana the following turn, shouldn't they have been destroyed?
Turn of events:
Opponent discovers spells, plays a minion, passes turn.
I play Skulking Geist while Opponent has two spells that have been reduced to cost (1).
Opponents plays discovered spells.
I know the text says explicitly "1-cost spells" but aren't the previously mentioned spells costing (1) at the time of play?
The result is counter intuitive to me as I have experience with the Hunter Quest The Marsh Queen and it allows Pint-Sized Summoner to reduce the cost of another 2-cost minion and allow it to count as a one-cost minion for the quest.
Could we please bring more attention to this? It is an inconsistency between cards if nothing else.
Cards like that almost always factor in base-cost, and not costs applied by reductions.
Edit: I do think there needs to be more consistency with effects like this though. It must be some distinction the game makes based on how the cost is being applied.
Hey guys, I was playing against a Mage at some point during the week and had a Skulking Geist in whatever deck I was playing. It turns out my opponent discovered two one-cost spells from two different Primordial Glyph (making the discovered spells cost (1)) and I proceeded to play my Skulking Geist (not knowing whether or not he had any one-cost spells) and no spells were destroyed, but the opponent immediately played two spells that were made to cost one mana the following turn, shouldn't they have been destroyed?
Turn of events:
Opponent discovers spells, plays a minion, passes turn.
I play Skulking Geist while Opponent has two spells that have been reduced to cost (1).
Opponents plays discovered spells.
I know the text says explicitly "1-cost spells" but aren't the previously mentioned spells costing (1) at the time of play?
The result is counter intuitive to me as I have experience with the Hunter Quest The Marsh Queen and it allows Pint-Sized Summoner to reduce the cost of another 2-cost minion and allow it to count as a one-cost minion for the quest.
Could we please bring more attention to this? It is an inconsistency between cards if nothing else.
This space is intentionally blank.
Cards like that almost always factor in base-cost, and not costs applied by reductions.
Edit: I do think there needs to be more consistency with effects like this though. It must be some distinction the game makes based on how the cost is being applied.
Because they intended it to be that way.
I think it was said before it only works with vanilla 1 cost spells. Same like 12 mana giants didnt devolve, even though you played them cheaper.