I know the subject of bans, rotation, and errata has been given a lot of discussion lately but given today's announcement I wanted to bring it up again to ask a specific question: If the Elder team is ok with banning problematic cards (A very good thing) why was CoL given drastic errata rather than being banned?
Errataing cards like Besieging the City makes sense as the errata'd change will seldom come up without a deck being built to abuse it and the card still does the basics of what the actual wording claims. The past and recent Mayhem changes are right what I would consider borderline unhealthy errata since it completely changes how the card is played in scenarios that come up rather frequently but the card does still does basically the same thing as it's wording so I can see why it was errata'd rather than banned.
Errataing CoL by simply deleting not just an entire ability but the main ability on the card does not make any sense to me at all. Only part of the playerbase reads this forum and only a fraction of that group stays up to date on every errata change. When people bring their CoL decks to my tournaments am I just supposed to tell them "Oh hey yeah that card you have there? It just doesn't do what it says it does. That line of text on it doesn't actually exist anymore."
Even if a nerfed CoL allowed an armor/fruits deck to function as intended it is not worth this kind of errata.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not ranting because CoL was effectively removed from Redemption, I completely agree it's an unhealthy card in the current card pool and should not exist. I'm ranting because it was neutered instead of being banned. The only argument I could see for not banning CoL was that the Elders did not want to commit to the precedent of banning cards but that precedent was set in the exact same announcement. I believe the precedent of using errata to this extent is a FAR worse one to set than that of being willing to ban cards.
I am very excited about all the changes except this one. Please do not make drastic errata. Please ban CoL.
For the record, we are NOT in favor of banning cards. That is a last resort and decided upon with much apprehension. We considered many options to "solve the Liner problem" but none were easy to implement, teach or explain.
While I respect your opinion about CoL, I disagree that the "main" ability of CoL was "deleted". At least as we originally intended the card, it was meant to help keep your investment of AoG and/or FotS safe. The draw was more as an afterthought intended to offset the potential card disadvantage of placing so many eggs in one basket. It was never meant as the main ability to help you speed through your deck. We didn't envision (or even test) a speed CoL deck that used such an unconventional offense as 18 GE's and 5 Heroes.
Props for finding away to abuse the card! I'm sorry that it had to lead to an errata. We didn't rush into a decision based on public outcry but instead took our time and looked at many options before deciding that 1) something needed to be done and 2) this is the best solution.
I would have preferred a full ban on Mayhem to the Errata.
I would have preferred a full ban on Mayhem to the Errata.
This errata has undergone several months of testing and Mayhem has been so much more balanced. It now typically impacts a single turn (or maybe two), but it does not swing the game completely around.
The ban to Liners was made as a last resort decision because every errata/rule tweak we considered was simply too confusing. This errata to Mayhem is incredibly simple and therefore there is no reason it needs to be banned IMO.
I would have preferred a full ban on Mayhem to the Errata.
This errata has undergone several months of testing and Mayhem has been so much more balanced. It now typically impacts a single turn (or maybe two), but it does not swing the game completely around.
The ban to Liners was made as a last resort decision because every errata/rule tweak we considered was simply too confusing. This errata to Mayhem is incredibly simple and therefore there is no reason it needs to be banned IMO.
It's simple to understand once you are aware of it. If this were a digital card game where you could update the text of all Mayhems and CoLs everywhere I would be 100% behind these changes. Sadly that's not the world we live in.
QuoteIt's simple to understand once you are aware of it. If this were a digital card game where you could update the text of all Mayhems and CoLs everywhere I would be 100% behind these changes. Sadly that's not the world we live in.
What is the difference in knowing a card is banned and knowing it's wording has been changed?
The ban to Liners was made as a last resort decision because every errata/rule tweak we considered was simply too confusing.
The ban to Liners was made as a last resort decision because every errata/rule tweak we considered was simply too confusing.
I'm just curious, but did you try Rescuer's Choice? Because I know the Liner Lost Souls aren't really a big deal in T2 (you might get a block out of them if you're lucky, but generally people just go for a different Lost Soul unless there isn't a choice), I know there's more differences between T1 and T2 than just Rescuer's Choice, but I don't think Rescuer's Choice is too confusing.
I hope that we can eventually reprint the errataed cards with updated wording and then the old ones be rotated out or banned. There would likely be backlash from that though so a trade in program may have to be implemented for this so it's not just as easy as talking about it.I think that is a great idea! To me as a newcomer the idea of having to learn about two decades of game changes and errata's is intimidating. Even though it seems that there hasn't been too much change since I/J but maybe I'm just to uneducated?
Where were these new erratas issued? I can't seem to find the thread or article stating them.... I feel out of the loop! ;D
The Rule Annoucements section (http://www.cactusforums.com/rules-announcements/2018-rule-and-errata-changes-(pre-fom)/).Nice!! Thanks!
I feel out of the loop! ;D
I hope that we can eventually reprint the errataed cards with updated wording and then the old ones be rotated out or banned. There would likely be backlash from that though so a trade in program may have to be implemented for this so it's not just as easy as talking about it.
Quote from: The SchaeferI hope that we can eventually reprint the errataed cards with updated wording and then the old ones be rotated out or banned. There would likely be backlash from that though so a trade in program may have to be implemented for this so it's not just as easy as talking about it.
Schaefer is a prophet--confirmed.
I would suggest leadership consider banning Haman's Plot form the game. MTG Chaos Orb was ripped BY THE PLAYER'S CHOICE to maximize effectiveness. But, to force a player to consume/destroy their product is counter to what I personally view the spirit of the game as. Obviously, I'm not Cactus or on the leadership team, but I value the collectability and to ask me to destroy it just to play it turns it in to a consumable, which isn't what I feel I signed up for when I started collecting.
I used the besieging the city, hypocrisy, mayhem combo...I can completely understand why that was squashed. It was unreal how good that was and the simple Hypocrisy / Mayhem combo was in every single deck.
COL, yeah, that was obvious. It wasn't good for the game.
However, I'm confused as to why the liner was banned all of a sudden.
It has been around forever and there are more ways than ever to keep it from being shuffled away, why ban it now?
Didn't GOYS (ROJ) kind of completely fix this "issue"?
I'm an anti-banning cards / set rotation guy. So I may be biased but am I missing something?
Thanks! :D
I would suggest leadership consider banning Haman's Plot form the game. MTG Chaos Orb was ripped BY THE PLAYER'S CHOICE to maximize effectiveness. But, to force a player to consume/destroy their product is counter to what I personally view the spirit of the game as.Still pushing for my preferred Haman's Plot errata...
Also not crazy about the "for keepsies" wording, but wanted to make sure that the "give" was an honest-to-gosh "remove it from my collection and give it to my opponent to do with as he/she pleases."
I would suggest leadership consider banning Saint of Virtue from the game. I am not whining about the unfairness of me having the slightest disadvantage due to the female-only Lost Soul. Rather, I believe it opens the door to potential controversy that I brought up even when it was first released. At some point, Cactus will have to rule on its gender if and when a transgender player enters a tournament. As far as I know, it hasn't happened, but I pose the question of whether you want to enter in to that discussion and make a determination. It might be easier to ban the card.
I would suggest leadership consider banning Haman's Plot form the game. MTG Chaos Orb was ripped BY THE PLAYER'S CHOICE to maximize effectiveness. But, to force a player to consume/destroy their product is counter to what I personally view the spirit of the game as. Obviously, I'm not Cactus or on the leadership team, but I value the collectability and to ask me to destroy it just to play it turns it in to a consumable, which isn't what I feel I signed up for when I started collecting.
Thanks for the consideration!
Could we not simply add it to the genderless list? The verses in Matthew are obviously talking about the male slave in one of Jesus' parables (which is why it has been ruled a male). But if you want to go with a broader sense: Everyone who is faithful to God will be called a "Good and Faithful Servant," regardless of gender. So again, obviously it is ruled male due to the verses, but since everyone could be called this: genderless is another reasonable solution.
Just thinking out loud
Could we not simply add it to the genderless list? The verses in Matthew are obviously talking about the male slave in one of Jesus' parables (which is why it has been ruled a male). But if you want to go with a broader sense: Everyone who is faithful to God will be called a "Good and Faithful Servant," regardless of gender. So again, obviously it is ruled male due to the verses, but since everyone could be called this: genderless is another reasonable solution.
Just thinking out loud
+1
Both faithful servant and saint could be listed under this. Both describe men and women biblically speaking
I have to say that I have never been a fan of banning or changing the eratas. Let's be honest. Just because a great combo is developed doesn't mean, "Oh no! It's going to dominate the game and make it no fun! We have to change it!"
When you change the Eratas, you have to make sure everyone knows how the card has changed. Every Nationals I have attended, I have had to deal with Erata changes that I nor my team were aware of. This made our decks totally useless.
Now on the note of Mayhem, It did exactly what it was supposed to do, cause MAYHEM. When you shuffle it, there was no guarantee you would get the cards you wanted. You might as well change the name because if you get to keep part of your hand then there is no Mayhem. The card has been (as another player told me) neutered.
The liners have been a staple in a lot of my kids decks, (it's in three of mine). It actually hurts the deck builder 50% of the time because their deck has an extra Lost Soul. If it's buried, we have a way to get it back. I don't see what the Champions/Elders are afraid of. (And yes I stated that exactly right).
If a card scares you, make a card that counters it. Make a Dominant that can interrupt a Dominant. That way mayhem has a buffer. Make cards to stop them, NOT RULES.
I have to say that I have never been a fan of banning or changing the eratas. Let's be honest. Just because a great combo is developed doesn't mean, "Oh no! It's going to dominate the game and make it no fun! We have to change it!" The minute you ban a card you make it easier for you to ban cards again and again (we have a ban list now, just put it there and be done with it).
When you change the Eratas, you have to make sure everyone knows how the card has changed. Every Nationals I have attended, I have had to deal with Erata changes that I nor my team were aware of. This made our decks totally useless.
Now on the note of Mayhem, It did exactly what it was supposed to do, cause MAYHEM. When you shuffle it, there was no guarantee you would get the cards you wanted. You might as well change the name because if you get to keep part of your hand then there is no Mayhem. The card has been (as another player told me) neutered.
The liners have been a staple in a lot of my kids decks, (it's in three of mine). It actually hurts the deck builder 50% of the time because their deck has an extra Lost Soul. If it's buried, we have a way to get it back. I don't see what the Champions/Elders are afraid of. (And yes I stated that exactly right).I play T2 primarily so I'm not afraid of Liner one bit. However, I respect the opinions of the majority of T1 players who have told me that Liner adds an unhealthy dynamic to the game.
When the Heroes in the Bible were faced with a challenge, they didn't run from it which is what we are doing. They knew God was there to help them. If a card scares you, make a card that counters it. Make a Dominant that can interrupt a Dominant. That way mayhem has a buffer. Make cards to stop them, NOT RULES.
I don't think Haman's Plot would ever need to be banned... I mean, they'll all be gone eventually, right? :P I do like MJB's idea though. Maybe it should just say "give" though so that your opponent can use it against you in that game. :DAs much as I like the idea that two players with Brown defenses could theoretically nuke each other to oblivion--to correspond with the intent of the original HP wording--I want to make sure that real world ownership changes.
I would suggest leadership consider banning Saint of Virtue from the game. I am not whining about the unfairness of me having the slightest disadvantage due to the female-only Lost Soul. Rather, I believe it opens the door to potential controversy that I brought up even when it was first released. At some point, Cactus will have to rule on its gender if and when a transgender player enters a tournament. As far as I know, it hasn't happened, but I pose the question of whether you want to enter in to that discussion and make a determination. It might be easier to ban the card.I had never thought about this before, but sadly I think Gil is correct and getting more correct as time go on. The real problem is that in today's world it would be way too easy for a determined troublemaker to achieve his/her ends. Seriously, you see a lot of headlines that are a lot less click-baity (and with a more fragile tie to reality) than "Christian Card Game Discriminates Against Local Teen."
Which is why I have proposed that we simply allow a player to choose SoV to be male or female, and not be dependent on their gender. I could also see an argument for genderless as the idea of a "Saint of Virtue" is symbolic in nature, but I'm not sure it's worth getting too involved in a discussion for a rarely used card.Not opposed to any of the proposed changes (Gil's ban or either of The Guardians errata). I am just agreeing with Gil that there should be *some* change.
Chaos Orb is not the one that gets ripped. You're thinking of Chaos Confetti, which was printed in a literal joke set and was never legal in any real format to begin with.
EmJayBee83's errata suggestion for Haman's Plot might drudge up other (admittedly) old arguments against CCG's in regards to gambling. Early on MTG had an Ante element that they worried might be construed as gambling, and therefore their tournaments potentially subject to legal restrictions. I'm thinking we don't want to go this direction either.There really is no meaningful comparison between the proposed errata for HP and the old-timey MtG Ante (https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Ante) system. (Link for folks to decide for themselves.)
The liners have been a staple in a lot of my kids decks, (it's in three of mine). It actually hurts the deck builder 50% of the time because their deck has an extra Lost Soul. If it's buried, we have a way to get it back. I don't see what the Champions/Elders are afraid of. (And yes I stated that exactly right).