[At any time Nomads En-Cor would be dealt damage, you may redirect that damage to another target creature you control.]
Why isn't it?
Because the developer had specific functionality and fluidity goals for it. That's why it's activated and not triggered—but it could have been either.
This is no different.
It’s written that way because that’s how the rules of the game work. Just because your version says kinda the same thing doesn’t mean it works the same way in game.
*Its also written that way because it was originally printed under pre-Sixth edition rules and updating to match those rules made it clunkier that it already was.
[At any time Nomads En-Cor would be dealt damage, you may redirect that damage to another target creature you control.]
Why isn't it?
Because the developer had specific functionality and fluidity goals for it. That's why it's activated and not triggered—but it could have been either.
you are implying that Nomads En Kor has different functionality goals. How can it have different functionality goals when it does not differ in functionality in 99% of cases? What IS the functional benefit of having two versions that are functionally identical 99% of the time?
How you're missing the point still is really facepalm worthy.
And this wouldn't be a question for me to answer—but for the developer of Nomads En-Kor to answer.
In summary, it was because the fluidity of an activated ability was better suited to the effect as it was desired to be.
Functionality is only a single aspect. Fluidity is the other, and I would fancy, the greater purpose most of the time.
He’s not the one who is facepalm worthy.
You still have yet to define why you aren’t just using an activated ability. It accomplishes exactly the same thing you are saying without having to rewrite the rules. What is the actual gameplay impact of your ridiculousness that an activated ability doesn’t accomplish?
Because Crescendo in this form primes the fluidity of this design.
Also the interactivity (that it's interactive with itself).
That is meaningless gobbledygook. What actual game play interactions or strategies does this thing create that isn’t accomplished by an activated ability?
If you write this as an activated ability, gobbydeygook is what you're going to get.
I already wrote it as rules text that actually works in the game - you not thinking its stylish doesn't make it bad. Your text is just a slapdash pile of worlds where people have to assume what you meant.
And, again, what is the gameplay value of having and activated ability that acts like and activated ability but kinda sorta isn't. You have yet to even explain what it does differently than what I wrote other than have fewer words and be less clear about what it does.
[At any time Nomads En-Cor would be dealt damage, you may redirect that damage to another target creature you control.]
Why isn't it?
Because the developer had specific functionality and fluidity goals for it. That's why it's activated and not triggered—but it could have been either.
This is no different.
Part of the reason is that Nomad en-Kor can redirect the damage point by point to many multiple targets instead of redirecting all the damage to another single target, btw the text of that card nowadays reads: 0: The next 1 damage that would be dealt to Nomads en-Kor this turn is dealt to target creature you control instead.
Nomads En-Kor could be written,
[At any time Nomads En-Cor would be dealt damage, you may redirect that damage to another target creature you control.]
Why isn't it?
Because the developer had specific functionality and fluidity goals for it. That's why it's activated and not triggered—but it could have been either.
This is no different.
It’s written that way because that’s how the rules of the game work. Just because your version says kinda the same thing doesn’t mean it works the same way in game.
*Its also written that way because it was originally printed under pre-Sixth edition rules and updating to match those rules made it clunkier that it already was.
It could have been written either way.
The purpose of designation between activated, triggered, and static abilities is for functionality and fluidity as I've explained.
you are implying that Nomads En Kor has different functionality goals. How can it have different functionality goals when it does not differ in functionality in 99% of cases? What IS the functional benefit of having two versions that are functionally identical 99% of the time?
And this wouldn't be a question for me to answer—but for the developer of Nomads En-Kor to answer.
In summary, it was because the fluidity of an activated ability was better suited to the effect as it was desired to be.
Functionality is only a single aspect. Fluidity is the other, and I would fancy, the greater purpose most of the time.
He’s not the one who is facepalm worthy.
You still have yet to define why you aren’t just using an activated ability. It accomplishes exactly the same thing you are saying without having to rewrite the rules. What is the actual gameplay impact of your ridiculousness that an activated ability doesn’t accomplish?
Also the interactivity (that it's interactive with itself).
That is meaningless gobbledygook. What actual game play interactions or strategies does this thing create that isn’t accomplished by an activated ability?
I already wrote it as rules text that actually works in the game - you not thinking its stylish doesn't make it bad. Your text is just a slapdash pile of worlds where people have to assume what you meant.
And, again, what is the gameplay value of having and activated ability that acts like and activated ability but kinda sorta isn't. You have yet to even explain what it does differently than what I wrote other than have fewer words and be less clear about what it does.
Part of the reason is that Nomad en-Kor can redirect the damage point by point to many multiple targets instead of redirecting all the damage to another single target, btw the text of that card nowadays reads:
0: The next 1 damage that would be dealt to Nomads en-Kor this turn is dealt to target creature you control instead.
You could still redeem yourself. It would not be hard. Just design real working cards.
Low-power cube enthusiast!
My 1570 card cube (no longer updated)
My 415 Peasant+ Artifact and Enchantment Cube
Ever-Expanding "Just throw it in" cube.