Tranquil Touch

[Keith Katsikas]

175
Tranquil Touch
Spell
Ritual

Remove (x) Damage Tokens from any one Living Target in Play within L.O.S., where (x) is the total amount of Light Magic you can provide using all of your Creatures and your Character.
Fully Engage all who can provide the cost.
Items and Effects on Target are Destroyed.
0
X
0
0
4
Rafal Hrynkiewicz
C

[spiller]

I know this card has been ruled that you do not have to engage a creature to cast. My problem that this goes directly against the rules of what a spell is (and how to cast a spell).
Again, from the official rule book.

"Spell
A card that is played by fully engaging the character and/or creatures, which have at least one action available on each and the magical abilities needed to cast the spell."

I have no qualms about the cost of the (x) being zero and that a creature or character which has 0 magical abilities being able to cast it. I just don't see how you can somehow cast a spell without engaging a creature/character. Normally once a rule is kind of set, I go along with it since it is often just an clafication of wording. This ruling goes directly against the rules of the game so I feel it has been incorrect.

[Keith Katsikas]

I'm thinking of adding the text: Must have at least one creature with an action available to cast.

[spiller]

I don't think you need to add any text since the rules clearly state that in order to cast a spell you need to use an action by a creature or a character. I think you just need to rethink the original ruling saying you could cast it without using an action. This is a case where the card is fine as is. Just make it clear that any creature can cast since the cost of x can be 0.

[Deleted]

Agreed. Having the cost be "0" doesn't imply that you don't need an action. This is an action-based game...everything requires an action unless a card says it doesn't. Leave it alone. Change how it's been previously ruled...be consistent from here on out.

[Keith Katsikas]

Good. Consider it done. =)

[spiller]

Keith, after our discussion at the NE regionals, I think you need to add this wording to the card (aka, the hated errata).
"X must be greater than 0"

[Deleted]

This statement is a developmental one. Perhaps it is best to direct this sort of convo in the mforums.

[kevmo]

This is one of the more obvious cards i have seen i believe we have just overthought it. Again just think simple. By the rules it states that the creature must have an action available and must fully engage itself fullfilling the magical abilities required for the spell. Even if that spell requires 0 you still have to spend 0 which would still fully engage at least one creature. It seems pretty simple why has it gotten so complicated?

[Deleted]

No, kev...it has been agreed that you need an action. Look at Keith's last post.

However, I saw Spiller's post to be one suggesting the card is too good at 0, and that it should at least be 1 and require at least some magic.