Should the Stun effect prevent Block cards?

The Stun keyword on attachments says "Target cannot play non-Move cards." I wondered whether this prevented the use of Block cards (they aren't Moves, after all), and it does not prevent them.

Should it? I suppose the difference is between "triggering," which both Block and Armor cards do, and "playing," which is something else. After all, Arcane Feedback can "trigger," but has no way to "be played," so the system probably treats them separately.

And if Block and Armor are separate because they depend on triggering, then should there be some other attachment that prevents triggering? Stun prevents non-Move non-trigger cards; Halt prevents Move cards (does it prevent triggered ones like Dodge?); so perhaps some new effect could be added in the future that prevents Blocks from triggering? Maybe even something nastier, and very strategic, that prevents ALL triggered effects?

 

stun and halt do not stop triggers i almost got blown out because i figured halt means you cant move when it actually means you cant play move cards.

I personally feel halt shouldn't let you move at all just like i think stun shouldn't let you block.

 

Couldn't the same thing be said about halt cards stopping from you using any attack cards that have a move attached to it?

I mean this as in a logical effect, but unintended based on what it is intended to do (Just stop you from moving)

 

Not the same thing as not being able to attack doesn't leave your tanky warrior open to a smashing to the face.

 

For perspective, early on the alpha as I recall, Stun cards prevented a character from playing any cards - move, block, armor, attack, whatever.

A stun-lock deck was devastating in PvP. To the point of it not being fun to play against. I very much like the complementary distinction between Stun and Halt now.

 

True, I just mean Attack/Move = move card as block = non-Move card. Both are technically true, but only in an indirect way. I just meant if something as in block would not be affected (Because of stun), why wouldn't you be able to use the attack of a Move/Attack (Because of Halt)?

I am just speaking logically it would make sense. Since both are indirectly limited, and one works while the other doesn't it could be considered inconsistent, and confusing. Don't get me wrong I as Jifoley said like the differences of Stun and Halt, but when there are special rules it could (Possibly) make things kinda messed up. Don't get me wrong, I don't think you should be able to move with it, as that is what halt is about, but if you are standing next to the person shouldn't you still be able to attack them with it? (Or whatever range it is)

 

Already made this point earlier and i do agree with you that it should be usable just not the move part but like jon said this is because move attack cards count as move and halt prevents the casting of move cards

 

You lost me. What's inconsistent about Blocks? Are you basically asking the question I did at the outset? (Then the question about "triggering" still applies and makes a distinction. To avoid confusion, the Stun keyword should probably also say "This does not apply to triggered effects.")

Also, there's been plenty of discussion about Step attacks, and it's entirely possible they will be revised, but the idea is "your move is intrinsically connected to your attack and you can't do one without the other." As I've suggested before, this would be more logical to the player if Step cards didn't let you stand still the rest of the time.