I don't see the latter being any more 'valid' of a question.
The question you cite as being at -2, used terminology from a game with infamously, extremely precise definitions in a way that made no sense. Because of that, and the way the question was structured, it would be quite incoherent to many people. It also didn't demonstrate an effort to understand the ability or rules involved - such questions are generally discouraged or disliked on Stack Exchange, and in some cases either de facto low quality or de jure off-topic.
It has been improved somewhat from its original form, but remains difficult to interpret.
The second question at +2 is neither of these things. It clearly asks about a specific component of a specific process of a specific format, and shows an understanding of both the basics involved as well as potential implications relevant to it.
It should perhaps have been split into two questions, related but not necessary to each other, but there are no problems with either actual question.