Check out our Event Calendar! View birthdays, holidays and upcoming tournaments!
Restoring DoubleType: Evil EnhancementBrigade: GoldAbilities: 0/XSpecial Ability: If used by a thief, return X cards in holder’s hand and/or territory that holder does not own to owners’ hands to force X/2 (rounded down) heroes to withdraw. Cannot be negated.Verse: Exodus 22:7
Den of Robbers: You might want to add "or Lost Soul" after the "except a dominant" because otherwise people will just give all their LSs....What is X in Restoring Double?
Is Posessing Thief worded right? Just making sure, I could see how it could be that way, but based on the name, it seems like it should be the other way around.
I'm not sure but shouldn't Judas have a Heretic identifier? Also he could use something else besides his same ability with only gold added to him.
Well I don't think Judas taught against christian teachings so I don't think he would be a heretic.
Possessing thief is insanely Overpowered. You can look at your opponents hand and discard ANY card. Bye Bye SoG. Nice knowing you.I REALLY like this theme.CGD: Please start taking notes.
Quote from: I am Knot a Blonde! on December 05, 2011, 01:07:50 PMPossessing thief is insanely Overpowered. You can look at your opponents hand and discard ANY card. Bye Bye SoG. Nice knowing you.I REALLY like this theme.CGD: Please start taking notes.Possessing Thief is not op. You have to give two cards of your own. I think the Wicked thief is over-powered if any.
The image you have for Stealing the Sheep is already used on Just a Hireling.
Are you people crazy?look at opponents hand.Discard any card.EVERY BLOCK.bye bye dominants.Your opponent just discards all of your battle winners...Everyone would run him in every deck. Regardless of what kind of deck it is... In all honesty, he will be the most powerful EC yet.
Possessing ThiefType: Evil CharacterBrigade: GoldAbilities: 2/4Identifiers: Thief, GenericSpecial Ability: Look at opponent’s hand and take a card (except a dominant) to hand or discard a card. Give opponent two cards from your hand (except a dominant). Cannot be Interrupted.Verse: Exodus 22:4
Quote from: I am Knot a Blonde! on December 05, 2011, 04:15:21 PMAre you people crazy?look at opponents hand.Discard any card.EVERY BLOCK.bye bye dominants.Your opponent just discards all of your battle winners...Everyone would run him in every deck. Regardless of what kind of deck it is... In all honesty, he will be the most powerful EC yet.It would run you out of enhancements twice as fast. QuotePossessing ThiefType: Evil CharacterBrigade: GoldAbilities: 2/4Identifiers: Thief, GenericSpecial Ability: Look at opponent’s hand and take a card (except a dominant) to hand or discard a card. Give opponent two cards from your hand (except a dominant). Cannot be Interrupted.Verse: Exodus 22:4
Quote from: Red Wing on December 05, 2011, 04:29:33 PMQuote from: I am Knot a Blonde! on December 05, 2011, 04:15:21 PMAre you people crazy?look at opponents hand.Discard any card.EVERY BLOCK.bye bye dominants.Your opponent just discards all of your battle winners...Everyone would run him in every deck. Regardless of what kind of deck it is... In all honesty, he will be the most powerful EC yet.It would run you out of enhancements twice as fast. QuotePossessing ThiefType: Evil CharacterBrigade: GoldAbilities: 2/4Identifiers: Thief, GenericSpecial Ability: Look at opponent’s hand and take a card (except a dominant) to hand or discard a card. Give opponent two cards from your hand (except a dominant). Cannot be Interrupted.Verse: Exodus 22:4its worth it. give your opponent 2 cards useless to him to discard the best card in his hand. Fine, just use him for 3-4 blocks then just mayhem. simple enough.every deck, every time.
I completely agree that it's not overpowered. If this card is overpowered, then Gibeonite Trickery and Confusion are more so (especially Trickery) because your deck is bigger than your hand and you have a better chance to hit something nasty. When you can't stop something like Trickery or play Confusion when they have no initiative (happened more than once to me...), how is that different than a CBI EC with this ability? Also, you do run out of cards rather quickly. Say you start your first turn with 8. Block with him, down to 7, activate, down to 5 of yours and 1 of theirs (or 0 if you discarded a dominant/other card). Gotta win the battle or he's gone forever, assume you can do that with 1 card (have to be lucky). 4 yours, 0-1 theirs. Say you use/place 3 neutral/good cards on offense next turn (conservative for first turn). When you're attacked again, if you don't play ANY cards, you now have 2 of your cards and 0-2 of theirs. To win the battle, you'd lose another of your cards.After just two blocks to start the game, you're down to 1 of your own cards and maybe 2 of theirs. You are crippled with no hand and very little to play anymore, since you have to give up cards. Type 1 decks would destroy themselves easily, especially early game, and your opponent would just walk in for souls.I do agree Mayhem with this card would be very mean. However, that's a single use and there are worse things you can do with Mayhem already.I don't think it should just be dismissed as a concern, but specific abusive combos should be found before changing what the card should do. With CwD, FBTN, out of battle character death, out of battle character conversion, ignore, and a host of other ways to stop him, I don't see it being an issue as of right now.
Quote from: Redoubter on December 05, 2011, 11:07:57 PMI completely agree that it's not overpowered. If this card is overpowered, then Gibeonite Trickery and Confusion are more so (especially Trickery) because your deck is bigger than your hand and you have a better chance to hit something nasty. When you can't stop something like Trickery or play Confusion when they have no initiative (happened more than once to me...), how is that different than a CBI EC with this ability? Also, you do run out of cards rather quickly. Say you start your first turn with 8. Block with him, down to 7, activate, down to 5 of yours and 1 of theirs (or 0 if you discarded a dominant/other card). Gotta win the battle or he's gone forever, assume you can do that with 1 card (have to be lucky). 4 yours, 0-1 theirs. Say you use/place 3 neutral/good cards on offense next turn (conservative for first turn). When you're attacked again, if you don't play ANY cards, you now have 2 of your cards and 0-2 of theirs. To win the battle, you'd lose another of your cards.After just two blocks to start the game, you're down to 1 of your own cards and maybe 2 of theirs. You are crippled with no hand and very little to play anymore, since you have to give up cards. Type 1 decks would destroy themselves easily, especially early game, and your opponent would just walk in for souls.I do agree Mayhem with this card would be very mean. However, that's a single use and there are worse things you can do with Mayhem already.I don't think it should just be dismissed as a concern, but specific abusive combos should be found before changing what the card should do. With CwD, FBTN, out of battle character death, out of battle character conversion, ignore, and a host of other ways to stop him, I don't see it being an issue as of right now.then you could say the same thing about any charachter. What if my charachter's ability was "rescue 5 lost souls"? but could be negated.. would it not still be OP? exactly. I could see how this charachter in itself could be used to win entire games. Heck, even tournaments.
then you could say the same thing about any charachter. What if my charachter's ability was "rescue 5 lost souls"? but could be negated.. would it not still be OP? exactly. I could see how this charachter in itself could be used to win entire games. Heck, even tournaments.
Quote from: I am Knot a Blonde! on December 05, 2011, 11:10:48 PMthen you could say the same thing about any charachter. What if my charachter's ability was "rescue 5 lost souls"? but could be negated.. would it not still be OP? exactly. I could see how this charachter in itself could be used to win entire games. Heck, even tournaments.I really do like to hear criticism of these cards with some examples of problems, but hyperbole on either side gets testing nowhere. This character, by himself, cannot win blocks, he cannot discard dominants that are still in decks (where they usually live, especially turn 1), he has no protection on his card to stop even the easiest anti-EC card, he is prevented by many cards, he has no recursion, and he cripples your hand unless you happen to be playing what your opponent is playing.I was not mean in my response, and I gave specific examples to back up my claims. Can we keep emotion and hyperbole out (on both sides), please? I really think this is a great idea for a theme and want to find ways it could work. Not having cards that can do good things (especially when they're restrictive to the holder like this one) does not help anyone.
I think if it required another Thief in play it would be a great card. As it is, I think it might be just a tad into the OP range.
Quote from: Redoubter on December 05, 2011, 11:27:52 PMQuote from: I am Knot a Blonde! on December 05, 2011, 11:10:48 PMthen you could say the same thing about any charachter. What if my charachter's ability was "rescue 5 lost souls"? but could be negated.. would it not still be OP? exactly. I could see how this charachter in itself could be used to win entire games. Heck, even tournaments.I really do like to hear criticism of these cards with some examples of problems, but hyperbole on either side gets testing nowhere. This character, by himself, cannot win blocks, he cannot discard dominants that are still in decks (where they usually live, especially turn 1), he has no protection on his card to stop even the easiest anti-EC card, he is prevented by many cards, he has no recursion, and he cripples your hand unless you happen to be playing what your opponent is playing.I was not mean in my response, and I gave specific examples to back up my claims. Can we keep emotion and hyperbole out (on both sides), please? I really think this is a great idea for a theme and want to find ways it could work. Not having cards that can do good things (especially when they're restrictive to the holder like this one) does not help anyone.I'm just wondering how I didn't see your first post, you made a lot of the points I was trying to make and I probably wouldn't have posted again if I had seen you had.Quote from: browarod on December 06, 2011, 12:41:23 AMI think if it required another Thief in play it would be a great card. As it is, I think it might be just a tad into the OP range.This might be a good way to limit the card, I have no problem with it.
Price: give 2 cards, but also have to have another thief in play... I think that will work. will need playtesting. T1 and T2.
I don't think it's OP. 2 cards is a pretty big price and dominants need to be nerfed anyway. The one qualm I have about it is it isn't a to ability. I'd like for it to say "give opponent two cards from your hand (except a dominant) to look at opponent's hand and blah blah blah". Otherwise if I get 4 of them up and band them into battle in t2 and only have a few cards in my hand (which isn't uncommon), I can take/discard 4 of your cards and only give you a couple.
I don't think it's OP. 2 cards is a pretty big price and dominants need to be nerfed anyway. The one qualm I have about it is it isn't a "to" ability. I'd like for it to say "give opponent two cards from your hand (except a dominant) to look at opponent's hand and blah blah blah". Otherwise if I get 4 of them up and band them into battle in t2 and only have a few cards in my hand (which isn't uncommon), I can take/discard 4 of your cards and only give you a couple.
There actually IS no problem. You give AFTER you take, so if you don't have enough cards, you have to give back what you took.Example: I block with him with 0 cards in hand, take one, have to give 2, so I give it back. Or I have 1 card, take his, and give back that card PLUS the one in hand (as long as it is not a dominant).If you made it a 'to' ability you might actually MAKE it OP
Making it a to ability does not make it op in the slightest and I fail to see how it can.
Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! link=topic=28980.msg453219#msg453219 Making it a to ability does not make it op in the slightest and I fail to see how it can.Well, it wouldn't necessarily make it OP, but it would make it so that if you have too few eligible cards, you wouldn't be forced to give it back with your only eligible card. If that makes sense.Besides, it makes no sense with the verse. You give after it is found in your possession. Which makes me rethink the 'discarding' thing...the verse is that the livestock is found ALIVE, so maybe it should be a take any (not a dom) and then give 2 (not a dom)?
I think the rational at the time was we wanted to weaken doms a little bit, but I don't remember that's just a guess.
Ha! My broken quote broke yours!And yeah, that may be best.Quote from: Drrek on December 06, 2011, 09:46:41 PMI think the rational at the time was we wanted to weaken doms a little bit, but I don't remember that's just a guess.It was 2am. There WAS no rationale.
So what's the final verdict everyone? Are we putting on the requirement of having another thief in play in addition to removing the discard a card, or are we just removing the discard a card? Once I have it fixed up, I could submit the theme to the player made expansion.
Love the theme. CGD needs to take note.
all I have to say is that you forgot to make a wicked thief card image.
