At first, i was thinking that what you describe is the reason: Lux's progress resolves ALL AT ONCE and EAFTER the spell stack has finished executing. So the combined mana cost of your spells on the stack would increase the progress all in one.
But then again, you DO NOT have this behaviour when playing the OTK Karma/Lux deck. Here, you usually play Dawn and Dusk, which then gets doubled by Karma, and you will receive TWO Final Sparks. So this would speak for the Lux progress being resolved spell by spell, not all at once after the stack finished.
Also, it could not be case, that the 1-by-1 spell resolution only works for "the same spell" (Dawn and Dusk in the above case), because when the opponent tries to Deny your DnD and you react with your own Deny, this Deny spell will resolve Lux's progress separately and can give you a Final Spark before further spell resolution of the stack. I just played a game where i observed this.
i just had a situation where smart ordering of spells would have granted me lethal with Lux' Final Sparks, but the expected behaviour did not occur, leaving me quite frustrated, since i cannot rely on simple logic to solve complex game states in order to win games.
This was the scenario:
Opponent: attacks with 4 (barriered) units and plays judgement against my blockers. He is at 4 health and 0 mana. After blocking, i would survive his attack. 2 of his barriered units had 2 health (so 2 sparks could kill his Nexus if done correctly).
Me: Lux on board, at 4/6. Spells in hand: Single Combat (2), Deny (4) and Twin Disc (3). I have enough mana to play them all.
So my idea for lethal was the following:
- one of his barriered 2-health units is blocked and will survive the attack
- the other barriered 2-health unit is unblocked and will survive the attack as well
- cast Single Combat on one of his barriered units, this will make my Lux progress go to 6/6, giving me the first Final Spark
- cast Deny against his Judgement, this will then bring my Lux progress from 0/6 to 4/6
- cast Twin Disc on some shit to make my Lux progress go to 6/6 again, giving me the second Final Spark
- after the attack, cast both Final Sparks in his 2-health units for lethal (4 health Nexus)
The Spell Stack (from left to right) looked the following:
1. my Single Combat (played AFTER Deny)
2. my Deny against Judgement (played BEFORE Single Combat)
3. his Judgement, being denied
So in theory, the order of spell execution should be correct, right?
- Single Combat is executed first, updating my Lux's progress to 6/6 and giving me a Final Spark.
- Then Deny is executed, updating the progress from 0/6 to 4/6
But what actually happened was that my Lux's progress somehow was at 0/6 after both spells were executed, not at 4/6 as expected.
Is this a bug? Or is there some behaviour that i missed or dont know?
My experience since the new patch:
- Oh, everyone is talking about how Mageseekers got buffed. Looks like a solid choice against aggro.
- Lets try out these new Heimer/Lux decks popping up.
- (20 games on ladder later) Damn, i cant win a single game against aggro with these decks.
- (goes back to playing Karma/Lux abusing Monk + Stand Alone)
I should actually consider reporting it. Was waiting for more info to determine if it might be expected behaviour first. But youre probably right.
I guess this behaviour should be quite easily reproducable using the described order of spells.
At first, i was thinking that what you describe is the reason: Lux's progress resolves ALL AT ONCE and EAFTER the spell stack has finished executing. So the combined mana cost of your spells on the stack would increase the progress all in one.
But then again, you DO NOT have this behaviour when playing the OTK Karma/Lux deck. Here, you usually play Dawn and Dusk, which then gets doubled by Karma, and you will receive TWO Final Sparks. So this would speak for the Lux progress being resolved spell by spell, not all at once after the stack finished.
Also, it could not be case, that the 1-by-1 spell resolution only works for "the same spell" (Dawn and Dusk in the above case), because when the opponent tries to Deny your DnD and you react with your own Deny, this Deny spell will resolve Lux's progress separately and can give you a Final Spark before further spell resolution of the stack. I just played a game where i observed this.
Hi,
i just had a situation where smart ordering of spells would have granted me lethal with Lux' Final Sparks, but the expected behaviour did not occur, leaving me quite frustrated, since i cannot rely on simple logic to solve complex game states in order to win games.
This was the scenario:
Opponent: attacks with 4 (barriered) units and plays judgement against my blockers. He is at 4 health and 0 mana. After blocking, i would survive his attack. 2 of his barriered units had 2 health (so 2 sparks could kill his Nexus if done correctly).
Me: Lux on board, at 4/6. Spells in hand: Single Combat (2), Deny (4) and Twin Disc (3). I have enough mana to play them all.
So my idea for lethal was the following:
- one of his barriered 2-health units is blocked and will survive the attack
- the other barriered 2-health unit is unblocked and will survive the attack as well
- cast Single Combat on one of his barriered units, this will make my Lux progress go to 6/6, giving me the first Final Spark
- cast Deny against his Judgement, this will then bring my Lux progress from 0/6 to 4/6
- cast Twin Disc on some shit to make my Lux progress go to 6/6 again, giving me the second Final Spark
- after the attack, cast both Final Sparks in his 2-health units for lethal (4 health Nexus)
The Spell Stack (from left to right) looked the following:
1. my Single Combat (played AFTER Deny)
2. my Deny against Judgement (played BEFORE Single Combat)
3. his Judgement, being denied
So in theory, the order of spell execution should be correct, right?
- Single Combat is executed first, updating my Lux's progress to 6/6 and giving me a Final Spark.
- Then Deny is executed, updating the progress from 0/6 to 4/6
But what actually happened was that my Lux's progress somehow was at 0/6 after both spells were executed, not at 4/6 as expected.
Is this a bug? Or is there some behaviour that i missed or dont know?