Mahtan/wagic
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

reinstating a piece of counters code i commented out which was originally explained to me as a "bug" when infact i found a ruling on it which was added during timespiral block...putting a +1/+1 counter on a creature which has a -1/-1 counter on it does indeed cancel out BOTH counters. good thing i didn't delete it.

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
omegablast2002@yahoo.com
2011-04-28 12:35:14 +00:00
parent 7840e3cde8
commit 59a8afb745
1 changed files with 4 additions and 12 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

16
projects/mtg/src/Counters.cpp
View File

@@ -72,24 +72,16 @@ Counters::~Counters()
int Counters::addCounter(const char * _name, int _power, int _toughness)
{
/* for (int i = 0; i < mCount; i++)
/*420.5n If a permanent has both a +1/+1 counter and a -1/-1 counter on it, N +1/+1 and N -1/-1 counters are removed from it, where N is the smaller of the number of +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters on it.*/
for (int i = 0; i < mCount; i++)
{
if (counters[i]->cancels(_power, _toughness) && counters[i]->nb > 0)
if (counters[i]->cancels(_power, _toughness) && !counters[i]->name.size() && counters[i]->nb > 0)
{
counters[i]->removed();
counters[i]->nb--;
return mCount;
}
}*/
//leaving this commented out incase it was placed here to avoid some bug(maybe a misunderstanding of how counters work in MTG)
//bug fix, creatures that have abilities based on +1/+1 counters should still be allowed to use their counter
//putting a -1/-1 counter is not the same thing as removing a 1/1 counter.
//consider this effect, put a 1/1 counter on creature, then put a - 1/-1 counter on creature. it never saids
//remove the counter 1/1, it saids put a NEW counter -1/-1.
//the card should have both a 1/1 and a -1/-1 counter at this point.
//if an effect states that it should take off the counters, then it should be done with the following code
//counter(1/1,-1) this is removel of 1/1 counters. judging by the primitives its fully understood as i see this method being used often.
}
for (int i = 0; i < mCount; i++)
{
if (counters[i]->sameAs(_name, _power, _toughness))