Author Topic: Vulnerable Redux (Read 1027 times)

browarod · « **on:** January 27, 2014, 02:17:24 PM »

Decided to revive my old vulnerable mechanic with a few more evil cards. I'm not sold on how In the Land of Enemies is worded so suggestions for cleaning that up would be most appreciated.

Urged and Afflicted
0/0 Brown Evil Enhancement, Territory-class
"Place in territory for 3 turns: Heroes in battle are vulnerable to Evil Characters with a different gender. Cannot be negated."
~Judges 16:16, 19b

In the Land of Enemies
0/0 Pale Green Evil Enhancement, Territory-class
-X=# of Evil Characters opposing the Heroes-
"Place in an opponent's territory: That player's Heroes are vulnerable to opposing characters while in battle if there are less than X Heroes in battle. Cannot be negated during the battle phase."
~Leviticus 26:36

Vulnerable - Cards that are vulnerable to <X> cannot be protected from, immune to, or ignore whatever <X> is. Effectively, whatever <X> is (and cards played on it, if it's a character) gains "regardless of protection/immunity" when targeting the vulnerable card and "cannot be ignored" by the vulnerable card.

Redoubter · « **Reply #1 on:** January 27, 2014, 05:21:50 PM »

First, I'm wondering if the following wording might be a little better, for rules purposes:

Vulnerable - If a card X is vulnerable to another card Y, than any abilities on Y, or on cards played by Y, have "regardless of protection" and "regardless of immunity" when targeting X, and gain "cannot be ignored by X."

I'm not sure how to get rid of the "variable" card references, though that would be necessary to make it a simple, easier-to-understand rule for the game.

For In the Land of Enemies, the current wording wouldn't stop preblock ignore. Not sure if you wanted to try to limit that with this card, too. I'm not sure I like the ability in general, I'd have to give that more thought, but a cleaned up ability would be "Place in an opponent's territory: That player's Heroes are vulnerable to opposing Evil Characters while there are fewer Heroes in battle than Evil Characters. Cannot be negated during the battle phase." Not sure if you could retroactively lose the 'regardless' components though...that could be an issue.

browarod · « **Reply #2 on:** January 27, 2014, 05:32:47 PM »

For the definition, I was trying not to have it be an effect that granted abilities to those cards, but I suppose that would be the easiest way to do it since those terms are already defined and then this would basically just be a package deal of them.

For ItLoE, I wasn't specifically thinking about pre-block ignore so whether or not it helps with that doesn't specifically matter to me (if it does, great; if not, no biggie). The basic premise is based on the verse. The Leviticus chapter talks about what God would do if they didn't follow him or turned away from him and one aspect was about bringing weakness into their hearts in the land of enemies. Since Redemption only has territories and battle, the easiest way to personify that, that I could think of, was in the case of the number of ECs being greater than the number of Heroes (as it would be if you're in their territory or "land").

Hopefully that helps explain what I was trying to do with that one.

EDIT: Updated the definition of Vulnerable.

Cactus Game Design Message Boards

News:

Author Topic: Vulnerable Redux (Read 1027 times)

browarod

Vulnerable Redux

Redoubter

Re: Vulnerable Redux

browarod

Re: Vulnerable Redux