This is a scenario that has happened more than once and we were wondering if our friend was playing it right or cheating us:

He plays Saalanesh's Domination and takes from my hand: Hight Elf's Disdain, Greater Heal and Blessed Spawning

He plays all of them but doesn't search is deck (even if it was pointless), didn't have any damaged units to heal or any other tactic to cancel

He did the same thing in many other games opposing other players with many other decks

Thank you

If he plays Blessed Spawning, he still have to shuffle his deck also.

Not sure if it has to be discussed more, maybe from FAQ it is already clear for all of us, but the conclusion here doesnt seem right (and it was not that long ago).

If opponent "didn't have any damaged units to heal", then he cannot heal. In FAQ: "In order to heal a unit, that unit must have damage on it to be removed." If there is no damaged unit, then there is no valid target for that Greater Heal, and cards only can be played if there is valid target(s).

No. It is not a requirement that the unit is damaged. For that, the effect would need to say something like "Heal all damage from target damaged unit" - but note that Greater Heal doesn't target in the first place, so you can't have an invalid target anyway.

In general, you can use healing effects on undamaged units. However, if no damage tokens are actually removed, the unit won't count as having been healed for effects that trigger off a unit being healed.

But then what does it mean: "Healing is a game term for removing damage tokens from a unit. In order to heal a unit, that unit must have damage on it to be removed."

How can I heal an undamaged unit (in general), if the condition to heal a unit is that it must have damage on it to be removed?

In general I could say that I heal someone from 0 damage to 0 damage, but in game terms healing is when you remove damage tokens. From the context it seems to me that removing 0 token is not removing.

First, remember that Greater Heal doesn't target. It doesn't even require you to have any units in play. All it does is heal any damage from the units you do have, if you have any. In other words, there are no other requirement to playing Greater Heal than you being able to pay its cost.

If we're talking about a targeted healing effect, like Tear of Isha ("Action: Heal all damage on one target unit."), the requirements for the target are given in the card text. Here, the only one is that it is a unit. It doesn't have to be a damaged unit, or a unit you control, or a High Elf unit, or whatever, just a unit.

That you can use a healing effect on an undamaged unit has been clarified by the devs. But it is in line with other rules and rulings. For example, you can use an effect like "corrupt target unit" on a corrupted unit.

The paragraph from the FAQ you quoted means two things: healing is the removing of damage tokens (so moving damage tokens to another unit isn't healing, and cancelling damage isn't healing either). And a unit only counts as having been healed if tokens were actually removed from it. If you have Glittering Tower in play, which triggers off a unit being healed, and three units, two of which are damaged, and you use Greater Heal, Glittering Tower will trigger two times, not three times, because only two units were actually healed.

The Greater Heal part I can see the point. It makes me clear also that only cards that target must have a legal target to be played.

The other part I could not yet settle. If it was about being healed and not about healing, then the sentence "In order to heal a unit, that unit must have damage on it to be removed" shouldnt read "In order to have a unit being healed, that unit must have had damage on it to be removed."? Well, I am not sure this is the correct wording, but I am quite sure the original sentence is about the healing effect itself, not about the unit.

However, if it was clarified by devs, I stop it. I guess there is no chance to clarify this in FAQ as there is no more support...