Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Redemption® Resources and Thinktank => New Card Ideas => Topic started by: Korunks on March 11, 2010, 11:06:16 AM
-
Just what I would like to see, make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. :)
Type: Lamb • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Rescue any Lost Soul in play, regardless of special ability. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Revelation 1:12-13 • Availability: I Deck, and J Deck
Jesus can reach anywhere and save us from our sin and bondage. ;)
-
True BUT sometimes he knows that person needs person X (/4 or NT) to reach that ls and help them. (Though not by themselves, he is there the whole way)
-
Rescue any Lost Soul in play, regardless of special ability.
I'm fine with this, as long as you say "May not be played with New Jerusalem."
-
No dice. I am tired of all the complaints about NJ. if somebody has a speed deck that gets his dominants quicker, then that is fine. i see no problem with NJ.
-
No dice. I am tired of all the complaints about NJ. if somebody has a speed deck that gets his dominants quicker, then that is fine. i see no problem with NJ.
Everyone is complaining about Dominants (except maybe you). Most of those people are complaining about NJ (except maybe you) more than anything else. If we are going to make a dominant more powerful, we'd better give it a cost of some sort, and making NJ less likely to be played would make a lot of people happy.
-
by that logic, you take away the most used, played, and excting stratagy of all. SPEED!!! By answering somebody's complaint about NJ, then I complain because it is a valid card. me and a few other people that I know, do not want to ban anything. NJ is a fine card. people can use it or not. if you don't like it so much, then don't use it. if you end up using it, then you defeat your own arguement by wanting it banned.
-
by that logic, you take away the most used, played, and excting stratagy of all. SPEED!!! By answering somebody's complaint about NJ, then I complain because it is a valid card. me and a few other people that I know, do not want to ban anything. NJ is a fine card. people can use it or not. if you don't like it so much, then don't use it. if you end up using it, then you defeat your own arguement by wanting it banned.
People use it out of necessity. Personally, I don't like NJ that much either. Also, a lot of people I know hate speed decks as well, because everyone uses them.
Another reason people want NJ gone, is because it takes less skill to win when you get 40% of your points by an instant card. slap down GoYS, SOG, NJ, then you only have three points left (t1). The other fix that people are striving for it to make it so you need 6 points to win.
Regardless, I like the ideas in this thread.
-
by that logic, you take away the most used, played, and excting stratagy of all. SPEED!!!\
I'm not taking it away, (well, I'm not doing anything myself, but...) I'm powering it down. Taking away is bad. Powering down is good.
By answering somebody's complaint about NJ, then I complain because it is a valid card. me and a few other people that I know, do not want to ban anything. NJ is a fine card. people can use it or not. if you don't like it so much, then don't use it. if you end up using it, then you defeat your own arguement by wanting it banned.
I never said I wanted to ban NJ. Banning is bad. Powering cards down through other cards is good, good, good. If a card is too powerful, the playtesters aren't just going to ignore it and keep making cards. They're going to take action, either by errata or by new rules or by the cards in the next set (or two or three, depending).
-
Rescue any Lost Soul in play, regardless of special ability.
I'm fine with this, as long as you say "May not be played with New Jerusalem."
excellent idea. i like it.
also, banning is not bad. sometimes cards are created far too powerful, and the only way to stop them is to ban them. there is nothing wrong with that.
-
also, banning is not bad. sometimes cards are created far too powerful, and the only way to stop them is to ban them. there is nothing wrong with that.
At this point, for this game, I would definitely say banning is bad. All the positive effects of banning can be accomplished through errata. Also, the Redemption community in general has come to appreciate Cactus' no-ban policy, and changing it now could have some bad consequences. I agree that banning is good for some things sometimes, but defintiely not all things all the time, and IMO not here and now.
-
Son of God
"Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls (except the Lost Souls card). Rescue any Lost Soul in play. Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem."
Very intriguing idea... :)
-
perfect time for the plug:
Armegeddon
Evil characters may attack Land of Redemption to Fall Away redeemed souls during battle phase instead of making rescue attempt.
Rev. 16-16
-you can block this attack with an evil character
-GoYS stops it
-with Grapes you can do it twice
sounds good to me!
-
also, banning is not bad. sometimes cards are created far too powerful, and the only way to stop them is to ban them. there is nothing wrong with that.
At this point, for this game, I would definitely say banning is bad. All the positive effects of banning can be accomplished through errata. Also, the Redemption community in general has come to appreciate Cactus' no-ban policy, and changing it now could have some bad consequences. I agree that banning is good for some things sometimes, but defintiely not all things all the time, and IMO not here and now.
why would banning be bad for redemption? what bad consequences would there possibly be?
-
I have thought NJ must be dealt with some time. It is far FAR too powerful and does not allow enough strategy. SoG+NJ+AoTL=3 Lost Souls (most of the time anyway). That's ridiculous. That's 2 lost souls left to rescue. I don't think that any consequences would come out of banning NJ.
-
exactly. there's just no simple way to 'errata away' nj. i can see no harm whatsoever from banning nj.
-
there's just no simple way to 'errata away' nj.
No, there isn't. But we have told the cardmakers and playtesters that we want to power down Dominants (especially NJ), so let's see what they do before we get too drastic.
why would banning be bad for redemption? what bad consequences would there possibly be?
By the way, I made a point of saying "could have consequences" because It's really more of a gut feeling. I know that a lot of people (I couldn't name anyone) are very thankful to Cactus that they have never banned a card, because it makes things a lot simpler, and easier for new players - any card you see can go in your deck without fear of being illegal. I like that feeling myself. Also, as with the stock market, if you suddenly make something worthless, it's price will plummet, and whoever has invested in it will be quite disappointed. I think that a lot of people would quit the game (or would fail to start or reenter) if we banned any cards, especially if we banned a card that has been used for 15 years. :P
-
newer players are very unlikely to see nj (if it weren't uber-powerful) as it is an old promo and unlikely to show up in anything outside a gift set (which is few and far between). as far as monetary value, it never really fetches more than 5 bucks. i don't perceive many players taking a hit to the wallet if nj is banned.
-
One downside of banning a card is it starts a slippery slope affect. When there was a long discussion previously talking about banning NJ, it wasn't long until other cards were being mentioned to be banned. When he who shall not be named was banned from the boards, others were talking about others who thought they should be banned as well.
As for the value of it, it will hurt those who don't have a plethora of cards yet managed to get a few good cards to trade for NJ. If NJ get's banned, they would have wasted their few good cards for something to even out a table.
-
As for the value of it, it will hurt those who don't have a plethora of cards yet managed to get a few good cards to trade for NJ. If NJ get's banned, they would have wasted their few good cards for something to even out a table.
I thought I said something similar to this, but you probably said it better.
-
My playgroup kids dont all have a NJ but if they did they wouldn't complain about losing as much. I take mine out when I play against them. I just got one of them NJ and now he has more confidence in his deck, even if he still loses. He would be sad if they banned cards. I for one quit yugioh becasue when i would get the awesome card they always banned it.
-
Not only that, I'm pretty sure there would be a HUGE uproar if it was banned.
-
As for the value of it, it will hurt those who don't have a plethora of cards yet managed to get a few good cards to trade for NJ. If NJ get's banned, they would have wasted their few good cards for something to even out a table.
that's an entirely hypothetical situation that can be applied to virtually any card. goys used to carry a pretty good price. now it's reduced down in value to pretty much any other common ultra because of the ability to crack one in almost every other texp pack. what about those that traded hefty for a goys before texp came out? this is nothing out of the normal. it's called supply and demand.
-
I for one quit yugioh becasue when i would get the awesome card they always banned it.
This is a great illustration of why not to ban. If you're going to ban a card you'll need to do it almost immediately after it is realeased, or else people will start to put their life savings into these powerful cards and then suddenly realise that they are worthless, which is an extreme discouragement.
Also, when you ban one card, you will start to ban cards more and more and you won't be able to stop. Then people will start having to keep track of what cards they can use and which they can't, and already having to deal with admittedly comlex rules, a lot of newer players will probably just turn away from the game.
-
One downside of banning a card is it starts a slippery slope affect. When there was a long discussion previously talking about banning NJ, it wasn't long until other cards were being mentioned to be banned. When he who shall not be named was banned from the boards, others were talking about others who thought they should be banned as well.
You disprove your own argument. When Colin was banned, was anyone else banned? No. Banning NJ would be the best improvement this game has had in years, and the "slippery slope" argument is completely without merit. The only other way to fix the T1 meta would be to do 6/60 like we've been begging for with very little opposition for years.
-
The only other way to fix the T1 meta would be to do 6/60 like we've been begging for with very little opposition for years.
First of all, I oppose. I oppose greatly, if it makes a difference. I do not want to nullify previous starter decks. This is the main issue, but I also really just don't like changing a mechanic which has remained unchanged throughout the 15 year lifespan of this game. (Also, I would rather keep T1 and T2 as dissimilar as possible.)
Secondly, this is not the only other way to fix this. As I have said before, we can easily solve this problem with cards! Many people on the boards have posted ideas for single cards that could solve the dominant problem. We have asked the cardmakers to power down dominants. Everyone is aware that a lot of people want NJ banned. Something is going to happen. I would at least wait until after the next set releases before driving for the banning of any cards.
-
People are alot harder to justify banning then cards though. No one argued that Colin was a trouble maker but if say I got banned because of random silliness, or anyone else, there would be quite a bit of explaining to do and chances are all you would get would be a short "He was causing trouble" leaving those who like me (albeit they be few) feeling hurt. You bann NJ, everyone rejoices, then you bann TGT, everyone rejoices, then aocp... notice how the chances of hurt aren't there in the cards? Not to mention, the cards can't fight back.
-
Secondly, this is not the only other way to fix this. As I have said before, we can easily solve this problem with cards! Many people on the boards have posted ideas for single cards that could solve the dominant problem. We have asked the cardmakers to power down dominants. Everyone is aware that a lot of people want NJ banned. Something is going to happen. I would at least wait until after the next set releases before driving for the banning of any cards.
creating more cards to counter the meta does not always fix it. see: sog, fa, nj, goys. those run of cards are, if anything, the epitome of a slippery slope. and still, after all these years, the t1 meta is still broken. creating more cards has proven futile; banning is the healthy remedy.
-
Son of God
"Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls (except the Lost Souls card). Rescue any Lost Soul in play. Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem."
Very intriguing idea... :)
Two things if this is a reprint, then they can still use the other SOG. I think more people would play old SOG+NJ then this SOG. Another thing, if this card is played as is, would your opponent be able to play NJ? :o
-
Son of God
"Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls (except the Lost Souls card). Rescue any Lost Soul in play. Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem."
Very intriguing idea... :)
Two things if this is a reprint, then they can still use the other SOG. I think more people would play old SOG+NJ then this SOG. Another thing, if this card is played as is, would your opponent be able to play NJ? :o
They would during a different phase of the game, unless the card said something like this:
Son of God
"Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem for the remainder of the game. Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls, and rescue any Lost Soul in play."
That way, the new version may actually be used, since you could play it before your opponent to stop his NJ.
-
im really loving this new son of god. son of god should be errata'd to say this. :)
-
Son of God
"Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls (except the Lost Souls card). Rescue any Lost Soul in play. Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem."
Very intriguing idea... :)
Two things if this is a reprint, then they can still use the other SOG. I think more people would play old SOG+NJ then this SOG. Another thing, if this card is played as is, would your opponent be able to play NJ? :o
They would during a different phase of the game, unless the card said something like this:
Son of God
"Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem for the remainder of the game. Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls, and rescue any Lost Soul in play."
That way, the new version may actually be used, since you could play it before your opponent to stop his NJ.
It needs an exception for the 2 & 3 liner.
-
Son of God
"Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls (except the Lost Souls card). Rescue any Lost Soul in play. Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem."
Very intriguing idea... :)
Two things if this is a reprint, then they can still use the other SOG. I think more people would play old SOG+NJ then this SOG. Another thing, if this card is played as is, would your opponent be able to play NJ? :o
In this case, I'd play the newer one instead of the older one. Most decks rely on SOG/NJ combo...if you get rid of one of the cards, they'd have to work harder and maybe their deck isn't build to do that...But would there be a way to get the card out whenever your want besides PoC promo?
They would during a different phase of the game, unless the card said something like this:
Son of God
"Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem for the remainder of the game. Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls, and rescue any Lost Soul in play."
That way, the new version may actually be used, since you could play it before your opponent to stop his NJ.
-
Son of God
"Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls (except the Lost Souls card). Rescue any Lost Soul in play. Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem."
Very intriguing idea... :)
Two things if this is a reprint, then they can still use the other SOG. I think more people would play old SOG+NJ then this SOG. Another thing, if this card is played as is, would your opponent be able to play NJ? :o
They would during a different phase of the game, unless the card said something like this:
Son of God
"Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem for the remainder of the game. Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls, and rescue any Lost Soul in play."
That way, the new version may actually be used, since you could play it before your opponent to stop his NJ.
It needs an exception for the 2 & 3 liner.
The 2 & 3 Liners no longer have a special ability, they have identifiers (or the special ability is CBN, can't remember which). Either way, whatever is written on the card cannot be stopped in any way.
-
It needs an exception for the 2 & 3 liner.
False - the Lost Souls card has errata/play as. The must be rescued twice is an identifier, not a special ability. Thus you can't neagte it.
-
ok, that's good to know. I'm lost on what actually happened with the ability/identifier war... ;) I was just going off of the REG which says it's an SA.
-
It was changed so that new cards wouldn't always have to say "except the Proverbs 22:14 Lost Souls card" which all LS negaters up to that point had had to include.
-
I for one quit yugioh becasue when i would get the awesome card they always banned it.
This is a great illustration of why not to ban. If you're going to ban a card you'll need to do it almost immediately after it is realeased, or else people will start to put their life savings into these powerful cards and then suddenly realise that they are worthless, which is an extreme discouragement.
Also, when you ban one card, you will start to ban cards more and more and you won't be able to stop. Then people will start having to keep track of what cards they can use and which they can't, and already having to deal with admittedly comlex rules, a lot of newer players will probably just turn away from the game.
I didnt quit yugioh just because of the banned cards, I quit cause the reprinted the ultra rares and secret rares to commons decreasing any value of the original card. If they ban it they ban it. I won a game yesterday and I did even use AotL and NJ I just made 4 rescues and played SoG.
-
thats why i think my idea is on the right track. Instead of banning NJ, come up with a way to soften it's effect- which is essentially what the ruling with playing it with only your own SoG did...
-
Son of God
"Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem for the remainder of the game. Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls, and rescue any Lost Soul in play."
Oh yes, put this in the 2011 starter decks for sure!
-
I won a game yesterday and I did even use AotL and NJ I just made 4 rescues and played SoG.
i played the entire month of november ROOT without aotl in my deck by mistake, and i still won. proves games and tournaments can still be won. :)
-
I played a couple games of ROOT without NJ...the first time I just didn't think I drew it, the second time I thought RTS had made it disappear somehow (my opponent was playing a TGT deck where the TGT seemed to disappear somehow). Eventually I looked at the decklist and saw that it was just plain missing.
I still won both games though.
-
it jsut proves that there is no reason to ban a card. you can still win with out them.
-
...um, actually, thats more reason to ban nj. more support as to games can still be won without it.
-
Your right! but i saw the Rob and the play testers will make the right decision
-
I really think a Son of God like the one suggested would be awesome. Whether or not banning cards is a good idea (I'm not sure how I feel about the idea, but I would lean towards not supporting it), I don't think it would ever happen, unless Rob changes his long held opinion of it. This SoG would have multiple strategic advantages, and while it wouldn't eliminate NJ entirely, it would certainly make players think twice about how/when they use it.
-
Rescue any Lost Soul in play, regardless of special ability.
I'm fine with this, as long as you say "May not be played with New Jerusalem."
Agreed, as long as it's worded rightly. For extra power, there has to be a price. What about a dominant that just says "I WIN"? OP? ;D
-
We just got back from a tourney and 3 of my playgroup kids traded and bought NJ if it was banned, they would be really upset. sure they might not draw it in a game but its the fact that it is in there deck.
-
We just got back from a tourney and 3 of my playgroup kids traded and bought NJ if it was banned, they would be really upset. sure they might not draw it in a game but its the fact that it is in there deck.
the fact is that NJ is not overpowered, and it introduces an important Biblical concept to young people. It limits the use of Son of God and now with the ruling that you can only play it with YOUR SOG, it's really toned down from back in the day.
-
We just got back from a tourney and 3 of my playgroup kids traded and bought NJ if it was banned, they would be really upset. sure they might not draw it in a game but its the fact that it is in there deck.
the fact is that NJ is not overpowered, and it introduces an important Biblical concept to young people. It limits the use of Son of God and now with the ruling that you can only play it with YOUR SOG, it's really toned down from back in the day.
+1 Back when any sog was played it was quite OP'd.
-
I also do not believe NJ is OP. I feel it needs a little balance. Oh I just had a neat card idea, new thread's away.