Author Topic: Type Testament (Read 9096 times)

Minister Polarius · « **on:** July 23, 2010, 04:32:54 AM »

Someone had an idea a while ago for a "Type Testament," where players would play with only N.T. decks, or only O.T. decks. Well I think that's just wonderful! I've built 5 Type Testament decks (2 N.T. and 3 O.T.), and I'm wondering if anyone else would like to play some games. I haven't played any TT games so far, but it seems that they can have incredible depth. For example, Divisions in the Church, a never-used card from Apostles, suddenly becomes a reliable battle-winner even against banding (since all characters in both decks are N.T., presenting an O.T. blocker is impossible!). New Jerusalem is useless in both Testaments, and Angel of the Lord is the only Dominant legal in both blocks. Speed suffers, because NT has SoG and TGT, but no Feast enhancements or Hur to abuse Gifts, while OT has no SoG or Grapes of Wrath and the 2-line Lost Soul is always a free block!

I am super excited about seeing how this type would actually play out. Any takers?

Smokey · « **Reply #1 on:** July 23, 2010, 01:21:25 PM »

I'll make a deck and we'll play later, sounds like fun

Red · « **Reply #2 on:** July 23, 2010, 01:46:17 PM »

So doing ot ones.

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #3 on:** July 24, 2010, 08:15:03 PM »

I'll make one or two up mate.

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #4 on:** July 24, 2010, 08:19:11 PM »

I like.

goldencomet · « **Reply #5 on:** July 24, 2010, 09:17:54 PM »

I wonder if this has a chance at making it to nats....

CJSports · « **Reply #6 on:** July 24, 2010, 10:53:59 PM »

It might but I doubt it just because its one more event they have to run and the deck checks would take quite awhile.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #7 on:** July 24, 2010, 11:19:14 PM »

Quote from: CJSports on July 24, 2010, 10:53:59 PM

It might but I doubt it just because its one more event they have to run and the deck checks would take quite awhile.

Not really when the LS check is being done all ya gotta do is check the references.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #8 on:** July 24, 2010, 11:36:56 PM »

Send me a PM or hit me up on Hamachi if you want to play TT. I'm equally excited about both, so idc which testament deck you've made.

Bryon · « **Reply #9 on:** October 27, 2010, 03:06:44 PM »

For the past few months since Pol posted this idea, I have been thinking about this more and more. I can't get over how much fun this sounds.

I'd love to see this as a tournament category someday, after players have given it sufficient testing. What if, in Type Testament, you had to bring an OT deck and a NT deck (each just a legal Type 1 deck except that cards can only be from the given testament)?

When you sit down to face an opponent, you begin with OT v OT.

As soon as the total number of rescued souls (of both players combined) equals 5 (or, in the case of double lock-outs, when both players have exhausted their decks), then you keep the redeemed souls where they are, remove all the rest of the cards from the game (regardless of protection, obviously), and both players switch to NT decks.

As soon as one player gets to 7 total rescued souls, he wins.

Would that work?

Red · « **Reply #10 on:** October 27, 2010, 03:13:48 PM »

why can't you bring one deck?

The Guardian · « **Reply #11 on:** October 27, 2010, 03:16:54 PM »

Other than requiring some extra time than a regular T1 game, I think this could work.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #12 on:** October 27, 2010, 03:19:35 PM »

Quote from: Red on October 27, 2010, 03:13:48 PM

why can't you bring one deck?

Because you can't have a deck that is both all OT and all NT...if you have enough cards to make either one, you should have enough cards to make both, since no card in the decks can be shared.

I love the idea. Maybe now that TEAMS is an official category, Type Testament can get a few trial runs as one of the unofficial categories at Nats. If Nats '11 is in MN (which, with my budget is probably the only way I could go), I would be more than willing to help out with such an event, and I'm sure I could get others to go along with the idea. Who's with me?

Red · « **Reply #13 on:** October 27, 2010, 03:23:13 PM »

I mean choose one of the types.Then play other players regardless of testament.

Korunks · « **Reply #14 on:** October 27, 2010, 03:34:30 PM »

Maybe we could have the first round be OT vs OT, then the next be NT vs NT, and then back to OT vs OT, etc. The advantage to this is we can keep the same round structure as T1 2P. Just my

browarod · « **Reply #15 on:** October 27, 2010, 03:39:39 PM »

I think the OT AotL would suddenly be worth quite a lot if this became an official category

.

Sean · « **Reply #16 on:** October 27, 2010, 06:51:07 PM »

This sounds like an absolutely wonderful idea. The only thing mentioned to this point that I don't like is the idea about starting with an OT deck and then moving to a NT deck for just 2 LSs. If you're going to use both then I think you need to play to the same number of redeemed souls with each deck.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #17 on:** October 27, 2010, 08:32:49 PM »

Quote from: Sean on October 27, 2010, 06:51:07 PM

This sounds like an absolutely wonderful idea. The only thing mentioned to this point that I don't like is the idea about starting with an OT deck and then moving to a NT deck for just 2 LSs. If you're going to use both then I think you need to play to the same number of redeemed souls with each deck.

Bryon's idea was that the switch would be made when the total number of redeemed souls (yours and your opponent's) reached 5, so if you are playing an equally matched opponent with the OT decks (which would be even easier with no SoG) it is more likely you would switch when the game is 3-2.

It may not be the best way, but it certainly could be tried. The one thing I would suggest is that there either needs to be an individual deck size limit, or else a size limit for the combined decks.

Sean · « **Reply #18 on:** October 27, 2010, 11:08:46 PM »

I misunderstood what Bryon was saying. Seeing it explained like that makes a lot more sense.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #19 on:** October 28, 2010, 12:26:48 AM »

I still like the idea of OT vs NT and vice versa.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #20 on:** October 28, 2010, 11:06:32 AM »

Mayhem's OT. I'm having a lot of fun with that one.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #21 on:** October 28, 2010, 11:24:48 AM »

Quote from: Master Q on October 28, 2010, 12:45:30 AM

Quote from: SomeKittens on October 28, 2010, 12:26:48 AM
I still like the idea of OT vs NT and vice versa.

But then one deck has the cool doms and the other doesn't... seems unfair
If this happens, then it should be allowed that u can play your NJ with your opponent's SoG.
Unless of course, there's no dominants at all

OT Dominants:
Angel of the Lord (G deck)
New Jerusalem
Glory of the Lord
Destruction of Nehushtan
Mayhem

NT Dominants:
Angel of the Lord (All non G-deck versions)
Son of God
Harvest Time
Grapes of Wrath
Guardian of Your Souls
Falling Away
Christian Martyr
Burial

So the NT decks would definitely be more dominant heavy. Especially with Disciples giving all NT themes a huge boost, I don't think OT vs. NT would be great at this point.

Bryon · « **Reply #22 on:** October 28, 2010, 11:36:16 AM »

Agreed. Plus, the point is that the offenses would at least be dealing with like-testament defenses, and having to defeat them in like-testament ways.

For example, you can't rely on AoCp or A Child Is Born to defeat King of Tyrus. You'll have to find an OT way to beat that OT EC.

You can't use Zeal to beat Nero or Prince of This World. (I don't foresee a lot of Teal in the NT decks, though there is a nice hero and a decent battle-winner.)

One of my favorite parts of this is having to build decks without the usual staples and combos. Now I have to decide which 14 lost souls to use, which OT and which NT cards I will use for access, how my NT deck will deal with artifacts (probably Lying Unto God, since Destruction and Captured Ark are OT), etc.

A few cards that won't see much play: NT lost soul, New Jerusalem, and the Damascus site in Syrian decks.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #23 on:** October 28, 2010, 11:39:50 AM »

And the utter uselessness of the NT only lost soul. It'd be an interesting challenge for advanced players, but not useful for new players.

/kinda like type 2

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #24 on:** October 28, 2010, 01:05:03 PM »

Quote from: Bryon on October 28, 2010, 11:36:16 AM

Damascus site in Syrian decks.

I can almost assure you that this will not see less play...considering nobody plays Syrians anyway...

Bryon · « **Reply #25 on:** October 28, 2010, 05:57:29 PM »

Nobody is using Syrians? He never told me!

There is a player here who uses them combined with old school gray (Shadow, Nero, Menahem, Sabbath Breaker, Bal. Disobedience, etc.) in a capture deck with Raiders' Camp. Syrians are not really big enough to stand alone, but they are not bad paired, blended, or shaken (but not stirred).

His offense is red, and he makes good use of Naaammmmaaann.

stefferweffer · « **Reply #26 on:** October 29, 2010, 09:08:20 AM »

I'd appreciate having the choice to only do one testament type, if this came about in tournaments. In other words, have a separate event for each testament. And OT would have no Son of God card, a thus pointless New Jerusalem dominant, and no Falling Away? Sign me up!!!

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #27 on:** October 29, 2010, 05:26:24 PM »

Red and Syrians? And this isn't Isildur? O_o

D-man · « **Reply #28 on:** October 29, 2010, 10:22:31 PM »

The more I think about it, the more I like it. I love Bryon's idea of switching decks at 5 LS combined total. If this was a category, I'd play it!

browarod · « **Reply #29 on:** October 29, 2010, 10:36:01 PM »

Quote from: D-man on October 29, 2010, 10:22:31 PM

The more I think about it, the more I like it. I love Bryon's idea of switching decks at 5 LS combined total. If this was a category, I'd play it!

We should bug Ken and have him add this to January's tournament

.

TheJaylor · « **Reply #30 on:** October 29, 2010, 11:12:18 PM »

i like it! i like it a lot!

Korunks · « **Reply #31 on:** November 02, 2010, 10:16:32 AM »

I hate the idea of switching decks midgame, seems so clunky and gimmicky to me. So what would stay during the transition? Just the lost souls? Either way yuck. I would rather alternate the Testament by round, or just have them enter a NT or OT deck.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #32 on:** November 02, 2010, 10:47:19 AM »

Round switching would be good. Transition would be lame. One or the other means people would use N.T. the whole time.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #33 on:** November 02, 2010, 10:58:20 AM »

Which one would be first, anyway?

Korunks · « **Reply #34 on:** November 02, 2010, 11:06:25 AM »

I am thinking of offering this at a local soon. Just to see what people like. I will put up the prizes myself. I will run it like this. Each player must check in 2 decks. One OT and one NT. Each deck must follow Type 1 deck building rules. The first round will be OT, The second round will be NT, third will be OT, etc. Any thoughts, something I am missing, additional rules?

Quote

One or the other means people would use N.T. the whole time.

This is what I would be afraid of.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #35 on:** November 02, 2010, 11:15:48 AM »

Perhaps best of three?
OT, NT, coin flip.

Korunks · « **Reply #36 on:** November 02, 2010, 11:21:49 AM »

Would take forever at a tournament to play best of three. Since many games can't even end by 45 minutes that would make type testament an all day category. I don't think I want that.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #37 on:** November 02, 2010, 11:40:31 AM »

Are you kidding? I'd love to play all day, especially with this added challenge.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #38 on:** November 02, 2010, 11:44:44 AM »

I like to play other categories too.

Have an even amount of rounds. That way they have to play both NT and OT equally.

Korunks · « **Reply #39 on:** November 02, 2010, 11:51:36 AM »

Quote

Are you kidding? I'd love to play all day, especially with this added challenge.

But many of my players might play this in addition to the normal categories but I don't think they would do this over the normal categories. Plus any categort that would take all day has Zero chance at becoming an official category at Nats. Something I would hope for this eventually.

Quote from: Ring Wraith on November 02, 2010, 11:44:44 AM

I like to play other categories too.

Have an even amount of rounds. That way they have to play both NT and OT equally.

I was thinking of that, but I might want to lower the round duration to make sure it doesn't take to long. Maybe a 45 minute round for swiss.

disciple_drew · « **Reply #40 on:** November 02, 2010, 08:20:15 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on July 23, 2010, 04:32:54 AM

Someone had an idea a while ago for a "Type Testament," where players would play with only N.T. decks, or only O.T. decks. Well I think that's just wonderful! I've built 5 Type Testament decks (2 N.T. and 3 O.T.), and I'm wondering if anyone else would like to play some games. I haven't played any TT games so far, but it seems that they can have incredible depth. For example, Divisions in the Church, a never-used card from Apostles, suddenly becomes a reliable battle-winner even against banding (since all characters in both decks are N.T., presenting an O.T. blocker is impossible!). New Jerusalem is useless in both Testaments, and Angel of the Lord is the only Dominant legal in both blocks. Speed suffers, because NT has SoG and TGT, but no Feast enhancements or Hur to abuse Gifts, while OT has no SoG or Grapes of Wrath and the 2-line Lost Soul is always a free block!

I am super excited about seeing how this type would actually play out. Any takers?

I originally brought that up: http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=21560.0

News:

Author Topic: Type Testament (Read 9096 times)

browarod

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk

browarod

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk