Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Redemption® Resources and Thinktank => New Card Ideas => Topic started by: Mr.Hiatus on March 08, 2010, 03:32:21 PM
-
False Religion.
Artifact
Owner may discard a good dominant from hand to discard a card in opponent's territory. Each player must draw a card.
Same scripture as A bomb. Daniel 11:18 I think?
Use this with Abomination of Desolation, and it also hurts good dominants. Has a very balanced cost on both sides I think. Let me know if you guys like it.
-
I was about to scream about how UP it is, but actually it's a doozie and incredibly balanced.
-
Thank you. I know I would use it.
-
I would probably call this too strong. The most disturbing thing I can think of about it is that it is able to snipe a protect fort before battle, which is an extreme help to TGT and all character sniping themes, which are the least fun-and-fellowship-encouraging themes in the game. It also encourages Dominants, and would likely be used in just about every deck. So I'm pretty sure I would just say no to this idea, or at least the first part of it.
This card would probably still be used if it just had the second ability anyway (or maybe if it was like d3), and then it would not be OP or used in every single deck.
-
I would limit it to a one time use (at most a 2 use art). it does cost a good dominant which does make it pretty pricy. It will make you think abou adding extra doms to use it, but then you run into the problem of hand clog if you cant pull the art quickly enough. Plus t hose good doms take up deck space for good battle winners....
other than the use limit I like it and think it is balanced.
-
It also encourages Dominants, and would likely be used in just about every deck. So I'm pretty sure I would just say no to this idea, or at least the first part of it.
Yes it encourages you to discard them. And it would not be used in every deck, only A bomb ones most likely.
-
Borders on being too strong, though it would have to be tried out before a final judgment could be made.
I think Abom decks would actually be replaced by Chamber/IaH/Angel at the Tomb decks. Huge defense with that small offense, then have a Lampstand in a temple...Certainly not unstoppable, but it could certainly be devious.
-
It also encourages Dominants, and would likely be used in just about every deck. So I'm pretty sure I would just say no to this idea, or at least the first part of it.
Yes it encourages you to discard them.
Okay...but it requires you to have dominants to discard, which encourages you to use a deck with lots of dominants in it (whether you use them or not).
And it would not be used in every deck, only A bomb ones most likely.
This isn't true. If this card came out, I would use it in most of my decks, as it is possibly the perfect sniping tool.
-
Yeah, I'd use it in every deck to snipe TGT.
-
So what, it snipes fortresses... fortresses need to be sniped. Remember when EC's used to just sit in the territory and were completely vulnerable, people were fine then. Or see how there are still civilizations/themes/colors without fortresses out now that are still winning top tournaments... Anyway Pol is right, this can take out TGT, and yes this can be used in a TGT deck as well, but you are saying how this would be used in every TGT deck to take out snipe fortresses, well I would use it against you and snipe your TGT... who's wins now?
Okay...but it requires you to have dominants to discard, which encourages you to use a deck with lots of dominants in it (whether you use them or not).
Yeah so what, it encourages you to have dominants in your deck to discard... big deal you are not using them which is what everyone is saying right now is how NJ should be a banned tournament card. So this one card fixes many things.
1) It brings a new strong deck (A-Bomb) to a tournament level
2) Causes for more strategy and hurts TGT
3) People would add more dominants in their deck which hurts Speed Camp, which might win Type 2 2 player again this year at nationals
4) Discourages playing dominants, activate a Lampstand and you are scotch free of dominants, which brings about all new strategies, such as people playing with dominants on how they can actually use them in their deck, or more people deciding whether or not to use dominants.
Also a counter card could be made for this. I think in card games each set should bring about a few dominant offensive strategies, and counters to those strong offenses on the defense. This card would be a perfect example of such and counter cards could be made to stop this one.
-
I think it might be better if it was maybe Good Card rather than any card, it keeps the protection discarding then evil character nuking or discarding artifacts. (they are already way to easy to get rid of)
I don't like the idea of killing defenses without letting them block too much.
-
This is a good idea!! I think it would add some strength to A-Bomb decks. Seems that the cost for the effect is fair too. Props to you, friend.
P.S. if this does get made, can I re-trade with you and get my a-bomb back?
-
I love this card. it can snipe protect fortresses, which helps TGT, but it can snipe TGT, Z's Temple, annoying Lampy holders, sites... everything! although Prof is right in saying that Angel at the Tomb would be a downfall...
-
So what, it snipes fortresses... fortresses need to be sniped. Remember when EC's used to just sit in the territory and were completely vulnerable, people were fine then.
If this was ever the case, it was before AoCP.
Anyway Pol is right, this can take out TGT, and yes this can be used in a TGT deck as well, but you are saying how this would be used in every TGT deck to take out snipe fortresses, well I would use it against you and snipe your TGT... who's wins now?
Whoever has AoCP.
It brings a new strong deck (A-Bomb) to a tournament level
I agree that this is good. However, don't take it too far.
Causes for more strategy and hurts TGT
I would say it helps it just as much if not more.
People would add more dominants in their deck which hurts Speed Camp, which might win Type 2 2 player again this year at nationals
I just don't like the idea of encouraging dominants at all.
Discourages playing dominants
No, it encourages putting more domianants in your deck, and thus having less room for other cards.
... more people deciding whether or not to use dominants. ...
I do not understand how this card would in any way make anyone want to use fewer dominants. I'm curious as to how you could have reached this conclusion. Or am I misunderstanding?
Also a counter card could be made for this.
If you have a counter in mind, please post it. Otherwise, this is a dangerous assumption.
And on a related note, I don't see why people keep trying to find ways to get rid of protect fortresses when just about nobody is trying to counter AoCP.
-
AoCP is not uber, IMO. it's good, yes, but not uber. near end game, yeah, it's bad, but it's purple, so...
-
I think it might be better if it was maybe Good Card rather than any card, it keeps the protection discarding then evil character nuking or discarding artifacts. (they are already way to easy to get rid of)
I can see where you are coming from on that, good feedback on that one.
I don't like the idea of killing defenses without letting them block too much.
People just need to make a stronger defense then. It's almost sad that a Zebelun deck won Type 2 MN blowout. Although Zebby is a great idea and strategy, I would not use it at a tournament with that much player skill. Although I know Gabe is one of the best Redemption players out there, if not the best overall player, a Zebby offense should still be stopped. I think people's defenses are not strong enough right now, but that is not from a lack of cards.
-
I think it might be better if it was maybe Good Card rather than any card, it keeps the protection discarding then evil character nuking or discarding artifacts. (they are already way to easy to get rid of)
I can see where you are coming from on that, good feedback on that one.
I don't like the idea of killing defenses without letting them block too much.
People just need to make a stronger defense then. It's almost sad that a Zebelun deck won Type 2 MN blowout. Although Zebby is a great idea and strategy, I would not use it at a tournament with that much player skill. Although I know Gabe is one of the best Redemption players out there, if not the best overall player, a Zebby offense should still be stopped. I think people's defenses are not strong enough right now, but that is not from a lack of cards.
I think Gabe primarily used that because of Speed Camp. I agree though, Zebby isn't powerful enough to create a deck around and win huge tournaments. still, it was done, so...
-
I don't like the idea of killing defenses without letting them block too much.
People just need to make a stronger defense then. ... I think people's defenses are not strong enough right now, but that is not from a lack of cards.
TGT decks are very good at their job, and their job is to eliminate you before you have a chance to block. There are only a few ways - or a few themes - that can be successful at combating TGT, and some people like to use ways (themes) other than those. Unfortunately, yes, this is partially a matter of a relatively short card supply. However, we can go a long way in sloving this problem by making protect forts more reliable. I don't think the game needs a card like this to steal security from defenses and make the most complained about theme even stronger.
You can disagree with me if you want, but just humor me for a moment; here's a proposition of an ability that would make me more comfortable but still do basically what you intended: "All players must draw a card. You may discard a good card from hand to use this ability twice." This way the card can only be used effectively by an Abom player.
-
Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on March 08, 2010, 11:56:27 PM
Anyway Pol is right, this can take out TGT, and yes this can be used in a TGT deck as well, but you are saying how this would be used in every TGT deck to take out snipe fortresses, well I would use it against you and snipe your TGT... who's wins now?
Whoever has AoCP.
Why do you think AoC is a dominant like card? You keep referring to it as if once you play it, you automatically win. I guess you have not played too long or else you would remember that there were times before protection fortresses and people could still block. And to counter your statement on who wins, what if both players have AoC, what if someone has dominants, writ active, EC's in hand, unknown nation, the list can go on. Make a strong defense if you are so strung up on AoC.
Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on March 08, 2010, 11:56:27 PM
Causes for more strategy and hurts TGT
I would say it helps it just as much if not more.
I would completely disagree, and say that it hurts it just as much as helps it, or hurts it more than helping it. What can a TGT hero do without a TGT... give away initiative is about it.
Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on March 08, 2010, 11:56:27 PM
People would add more dominants in their deck which hurts Speed Camp, which might win Type 2 2 player again this year at nationals
I just don't like the idea of encouraging dominants at all.
I agree, but this does not encourage dominants. Although people would put more in their deck, they would not be used, meaning it would do what you want, and that is hurt dominants...
Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on March 08, 2010, 11:56:27 PM
Discourages playing dominants
No, it encourages putting more domianants in your deck, and thus having less room for other cards.
Less room for other cards? The way you talk makes it seem like one can only have a 50 card deck. The average type 1 deck uses six dominants. If this card was made people might use Glory of the Lord. Wow people would start making a useless card playable! That is a definite positive. Also the dominant count would now be 7 compared to 6, less room for other cards you say...how about less room for other card, leave out the s at the end of that.
Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on March 08, 2010, 11:56:27 PM
... more people deciding whether or not to use dominants. ...
I do not understand how this card would in any way make anyone want to use fewer dominants. I'm curious as to how you could have reached this conclusion. Or am I misunderstanding?
Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on March 08, 2010, 11:56:27 PM
Also a counter card could be made for this.
If you have a counter in mind, please post it. Otherwise, this is a dangerous assumption.
Easy, an artifact that says if a dominant was discarded without being used you may... you fill in the blank. This card can go anywhere, but no matter what it would make people using this artifact have to be able to get around that.
And on a related note, I don't see why people keep trying to find ways to get rid of protect fortresses when just about nobody is trying to counter AoCP.
Ugh you and AoC, what is it, did you play type 2 against an AoC promo recursion deck or something, I have not seen one of those since after Angel Wars. Back to my original point, you make it seem that AoC is the best card in the game, yes it is strong but there are so many ways around it now that it's not a viable strategy without supporting it with something else. People are no longer trying to hurt AoC because it has already been hurt!
I think Gabe primarily used that because of Speed Camp. I agree though, Zebby isn't powerful enough to create a deck around and win huge tournaments. still, it was done, so...
On a side note, me and Gabe must think alike because I made a Zebby deck the other week for a district tournament because I knew I would play Clift's speed camp, I still got the lock down...
There are only a few ways - or a few themes - that can be successful at combating TGT, and some people like to use ways (themes) other than those.
I hit on this earlier with AoC, but I will go all out with TGT. First off if you are playing their color you can block. If you are using TGT as well, you are helped out a lot. If you are using sites, Writs, other than the protected themes, you also have Philistine Outpost, Gates of Hell, territory cards which negate TGT, place cards which can do all sorts of stuff, banding on offense, and simply playing with a lot of EC's. I know some of those strategies include fortresses, but what I named can be paired up with things and make for a very strong defense.
-
As someone who enjoys Abom a lot, I support this card. It's well balanced (might even bring out Glory of the Lord) and powerful.
-
Why do you think AoC is a dominant like card? You keep referring to it as if once you play it, you automatically win. I guess you have not played too long or else you would remember that there were times before protection fortresses and people could still block. And to counter your statement on who wins, what if both players have AoC, what if someone has dominants, writ active, EC's in hand, unknown nation, the list can go on. Make a strong defense if you are so strung up on AoC.
...
Ugh you and AoC, what is it, did you play type 2 against an AoC promo recursion deck or something, I have not seen one of those since after Angel Wars. Back to my original point, you make it seem that AoC is the best card in the game, yes it is strong but there are so many ways around it now that it's not a viable strategy without supporting it with something else. People are no longer trying to hurt AoC because it has already been hurt!
So many ways around AoCP? Are you referring to protect forts? You may have been around longer than I have, but apparently you haven't seen many recent decks, because I see AoCP being used (successfully) way more than it should. It eliminates defenses. It's especially devastating if someone is using protect forts, and thus has been laying most of his EC's down, but is then surprised to see possibly his only form of protection suddenly disapper. Your support of "stronger" defenses to counter TGT seems to me to conflict with your disregard of the power of AoCP.
-
Madness, Gates of Hell, Darkness, Doubt or keeping ECs in hand, KotW, Judas Iscariot, Blindness, and negating ET are just a few ways around AoCP.
-
Lambo hit it on the head there. Also some more facts on ranking decks... this past years type 2 decks that got 1st-3rd included a grand total of 2? maybe even 1 AoC P. I do not know about type 1 because I play type 2, but the only AoC's were in a speed camp deck. I have had my fair share of tournament wins in plenty of categories, and I can tell you AOC might be annoying, but it is a side strategy or offensive support card now, not a card which a deck is based around like it used to be.
but apparently you haven't seen many recent decks, because I see AoCP being used (successfully) way more than it should.
:o LOL
-
Theres also another great way around AoCP
Just ban it from your tournaments. ;)
-
I would like to repost this, since you didn't seem to address it:
You can disagree with me if you want, but just humor me for a moment; here's a proposition of an ability that would make me more comfortable but still do basically what you intended: "All players must draw a card. You may discard a good card from hand to use this ability twice." This way the card can only be used effectively by an Abom player.
-
Yeah I like it, but I like how mine makes you discard good dominants. I can see both being made/played.
Theres also another great way around AoCP
Just ban it from your tournaments.
Lol, lucky I got a good sense of humor. ;)
-
Yeah I like it, but I like how mine makes you discard good dominants. I can see both being made/played.
Alright, howsabout a compromise:
"Upon activation, each player must draw a card. You may discard this card and a good Dominant from hand to do this twice."
This way, you are able to discard a Dom to use the ability twice in a row, but then you must discard the card and thus can't do it again.
By the way, I apologise if I came off rude last night.
-
It's all good. I am sure I came off rude, or indifferent as well, lost in translation online. And yeah I like your compromise idea.
-
Love it.
-
False Religion.
Artifact
Owner may discard a good dominant from hand to discard a good card in opponent's territory. Each player must draw a card.
Same scripture as A bomb. Daniel 11:18 I think?
I dont like having the ability to discard characters to block with. I agree with Bubbleboy on this one. However in the above version i dont feel like there is enough of a benefit for the cost being paid.
-
Yeah I like it, but I like how mine makes you discard good dominants. I can see both being made/played.
Alright, howsabout a compromise:
"Upon activation, each player must draw a card. You may discard this card and a good Dominant from hand to do this twice."
This way, you are able to discard a Dom to use the ability twice in a row, but then you must discard the card and thus can't do it again.
By the way, I apologise if I came off rude last night.
The card needs to discard itself if I don't discard a good dom. Otherwise, I could activate it every turn and I'd never want to discard a good dom as I could do it every turn. Like the idea otherwise. :)
-
How is false religion an Artifact? Just call it "defiled," slap a snake and a skull on it and call it a day.
-
Good thinking Pol.
-
I didn't read the whole thread because I am going to bed, but here is my problem with it (and why I like it all the same).
I activate lampstand in Z Temple, then activate this card (whatever we are calling it now) then discard SoG, do what I can, then attack with Angel at the Tomb and get my SoG back to do it all over again.
-
Simple solution. Remove one good dominant from the game.