Hearthpwn

So after a match with priest I am quite confused.

Priest used shadow madness on my 3 attack minion and then used "Dream" card that he got from Ysera. What happened is that actually my card went into his hands even if I am owner of that card as it says on "Dream" card. I am wondering if this is bug or not?

Quote from Mister_Smith »

He stole the minion so he was the owner at the time he used the dream card.

True, but on card it says "owner" not owner at the time. :/

It has always been this way. Just like when you Shadow Madness a minion and Youthful Brewmaster it to your hand.

All minions have 1 and only 1 owner at any time, and it's the player whose side the minion is on. Even if temporarily, he was the owner so it went to his hand.

Quote from SanderKoeman »

It has always been this way. Just like when you Shadow Madness a minion and Youthful Brewmaster it to your hand.

That' s not the same case, you see, when you do that combo, it's perfectly fine cause Brewmaster have his effect pretty clear to everyone, his Battlecry returns a friendly minion to the player's hand.That's okay, but when you find out that one card have two meanings like Dream card, ain't that bad?

Quote from Mister_Smith »

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

Quote from Mister_Smith »

He stole the minion so he was the owner at the time he used the dream card.

True, but on card it says "owner" not owner at the time. :/

Well in terms of mechanics there is no difference. The game recognizes the minion as the priests minion which happens to have a Shadow Madness debuff on it.

As long as that debuff does not get removed or triggers it is the minion of the player who controls it.

I know what you are saying and I agree with you, what I want to say is that I would like to see removing of "owner" word from Dream card.Its somehow not right, cause, for example, you can gain control of someones property for period of time, but that doesn't make you true owner of it. :)

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

Quote from Mister_Smith »

He stole the minion so he was the owner at the time he used the dream card.

True, but on card it says "owner" not owner at the time. :/

Possession is 9/10th of the law.  Or in hearthstone 100%.  The owner is the person who's board it is on.

Quote from Trollbert »

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

Quote from Mister_Smith »

He stole the minion so he was the owner at the time he used the dream card.

True, but on card it says "owner" not owner at the time. :/

Possession is 9/10th of the law.  Or in hearthstone 100%.  The owner is the person who's board it is on.

Its like, you steal someones car and then, from that moment you are legally owner of it. 

Conclusion : Priest players should be arrested for their crimes. ( and that's not cause he stole my Al' Akir :P)

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

Quote from SanderKoeman »

It has always been this way. Just like when you Shadow Madness a minion and Youthful Brewmaster it to your hand.

That' s not the same case, you see, when you do that combo, it's perfectly fine cause Brewmaster have his effect pretty clear to everyone, his Battlecry returns a friendly minion to the player's hand.That's okay, but when you find out that one card have two meanings like Dream card, ain't that bad?

It makes perfect sense if you think about it differently. In a game like MTG, where cards are physical, and you don't want to accidentally steal peoples investment, cards that return to the hand or deck specify the "owner" of the card, meaning the person who owns it in everyday life, outside of the context of the game.

In Hearthstone, there's no way to accidentally walk off with someones cards, so when it says "owner", it means whoever controls the card at a given time. The reason the dream card is worded differently than Brewmaster, is because Brewmaster is restricted to friendly minions, whereas the Dream card can target anything. 

Just think of "owner" as "controller".

Quote from Ballinglikeafool »

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

Quote from SanderKoeman »

It has always been this way. Just like when you Shadow Madness a minion and Youthful Brewmaster it to your hand.

That' s not the same case, you see, when you do that combo, it's perfectly fine cause Brewmaster have his effect pretty clear to everyone, his Battlecry returns a friendly minion to the player's hand.That's okay, but when you find out that one card have two meanings like Dream card, ain't that bad?

It makes perfect sense if you think about it differently. In a game like MTG, where cards are physical, and you don't want to accidentally steal peoples investment, cards that return to the hand or deck specify the "owner" of the card, meaning the person who owns it in everyday life, outside of the context of the game.

In Hearthstone, there's no way to accidentally walk off with someones cards, so when it says "owner", it means whoever controls the card at a given time. The reason the dream card is worded differently than Brewmaster, is because Brewmaster is restricted to friendly minions, whereas the Dream card can target anything. 

Just think of "owner" as "controller".

When you make cards, you wanna make them pretty straightfoward, so they can't have two meanings, right? If you need to think about card's description and meaning, ain't that card kinda bad designed? 

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

Quote from Ballinglikeafool »

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

Quote from SanderKoeman »

It has always been this way. Just like when you Shadow Madness a minion and Youthful Brewmaster it to your hand.

That' s not the same case, you see, when you do that combo, it's perfectly fine cause Brewmaster have his effect pretty clear to everyone, his Battlecry returns a friendly minion to the player's hand.That's okay, but when you find out that one card have two meanings like Dream card, ain't that bad?

It makes perfect sense if you think about it differently. In a game like MTG, where cards are physical, and you don't want to accidentally steal peoples investment, cards that return to the hand or deck specify the "owner" of the card, meaning the person who owns it in everyday life, outside of the context of the game.

In Hearthstone, there's no way to accidentally walk off with someones cards, so when it says "owner", it means whoever controls the card at a given time. The reason the dream card is worded differently than Brewmaster, is because Brewmaster is restricted to friendly minions, whereas the Dream card can target anything. 

Just think of "owner" as "controller".

When you make cards, you wanna make them pretty straightfoward, so they can't have two meanings, right? If you need to think about card's description and meaning, ain't that card kinda bad designed? 

Hearthstone is notorious for being non-straightforward and inconsistent in things like this.

I don't disagree with you, but this is hardly the worst offender. 

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

When you make cards, you wanna make them pretty straightfoward, so they can't have two meanings, right? If you need to think about card's description and meaning, ain't that card kinda bad designed? 

You also want to keep the card text short, so you have conflicting interests here. If you need to define what "owner" means right in this card, it can get quite long.

Also, what is seen as straightforward for one person might seem ambigous to another and vice versa. For example, what you are complaining about always seemed pretty straightforward for me.

Imo, the only really annoying thing in HS in the context of card texts is the Druid of the Claw vs Ancient of War inconsistency.

Quote from linvega2 »

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

When you make cards, you wanna make them pretty straightfoward, so they can't have two meanings, right? If you need to think about card's description and meaning, ain't that card kinda bad designed? 

You also want to keep the card text short, so you have conflicting interests here. If you need to define what "owner" means right in this card, it can get quite long.

Also, what is seen as straightforward for one person might seem ambigous to another and vice versa. For example, what you are complaining about always seemed pretty straightforward for me.

This. :D 

I just don't like "owner" word in card's description, I find it confusing. Would like that effect stays same, only description to be changed, nothing else. 

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

This. :D 

I just don't want "owner" word in card's description, I find it confusing. That's my opinion.

"controller" would probably have been better, that's true.

Unfortunately priests will never be arrested, the only hearthstone police is the 0-3 police.

It's not really inconsistent. On every similar card (see Kidnapper), they also use the word "owner". It's inconsistent with the usage you see in MTG, but who cares?

When a Spellbender intercepts a Shadowstep, the Mage gets the Spellbender back in her hand, too. In spite of the wording of Shadowstep.

Quote from CaptainKaulu »

When a Spellbender intercepts a Shadowstep, the Mage gets the Spellbender back in her hand, too. In spite of the wording of Shadowstep.

Spellbender actually breaks a few rules.  It doesn't need to be a legal target itself.  For instance, it intercepts a Shadow Word Death and then dies despite only having one attack.

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

Quote from Mister_Smith »

He stole the minion so he was the owner at the time he used the dream card.

True, but on card it says "owner" not owner at the time. :/

Now I'm confused. You're still saying the word "owner." the dream card doesn't specify permanent or temporary owner. Your argument is that the card doesn't say the current owner or the "owner at the time," but just owner. But how can you make an argument if your reasoning still has the keyword "owner" in it?

Rethink your argument and come back later, and try not to use the word "owner" when talking about a card that is in your collection but is no longer on your side of the board, but is instead on your opponent's side.

Quote from frizoggy »

Quote from Dragonhawk21 »

Quote from Mister_Smith »

He stole the minion so he was the owner at the time he used the dream card.

True, but on card it says "owner" not owner at the time. :/

Now I'm confused. You're still saying the word "owner." the dream card doesn't specify permanent or temporary owner. Your argument is that the card doesn't say the current owner or the "owner at the time," but just owner. But how can you make an argument if your reasoning still has the keyword "owner" in it?

Rethink your argument and come back later, and try not to use the word "owner" when talking about a card that is in your collection but is no longer on your side of the board, but is instead on your opponent's side.

Well I made mistake there by using it, its true, but you got the point anyway. I am sorry if I did offend you with it, just wanted to explain something that is hard to explain,my point of view.