I would love to see it go but I don't think it's going to be that easy.
I would love to see it go but I don't think it's going to be that easy.
It really is. The game doesn't break at all my removing cascade. A few cards get slightly stronger and a few get slightly weaker, that's it.
I would love to see it go but I don't think it's going to be that easy.
It really is. The game doesn't break at all my removing cascade. A few cards get slightly stronger and a few get slightly weaker, that's it.
More than a few...all banding cards inherently get stronger and all drawing cards get inherently stronger.
In the interest of full disclosure, I have traditionally been on the side of maintaining the status quo. The issue of cascade negate was discussed at length during the process of creating REG 5.0. It was agreed upon at that time to maintain the status quo with the understanding that we would likely revisit at some point.
One of the things to keep in mind is that the majority of cascade negate situations, (which are really not all that common to begin with), are pretty easy to understand.
Hero A bands to Hero B. Hero B's ability activates. The band is then negated and Hero B's ability is thus negated.
As more and more CBN/CBI cards have been introduced into the card pool, the cascade negate process becomes much more convoluted (as evidenced by recent threads) because those cards end up in the middle, but I still believe that those scenarios are still fairly uncommon.
That being said, one of our objectives as a playtest team in recent years has been to give CBI to abilities that are "messy" to undo (i.e. cards like Ends of the Earth, search abilities, and even limited draw abilities like Servant Angel) and staying away from giving CBN/CBI to battle winners. Ergo, the likelihood of the messier cascade negate scenarios happening would continue to rise if no change was made. As a result, I would now say I am more open to the idea of eliminating cascades (or taking a smaller first step and starting with the idea that cascades can't "hop" CBN/CBI as Watchman mentioned).
Either of those changes could make the game better, but I am not convinced that is a certainty. Eliminating cascade opens the door to other odd scenarios and interactions, some of which we probably won't even realize until we start playing that way. As I mentioned at the beginning, banding and drawing--two of the strongest abilities in the game both offensively and defensively--both get inherently stronger in a world without cascades. In the interest of games not timing out due to "resetting" things, maybe it's okay for band and draw to get stronger, but it will change the game--of that I am certain.
I would like for the poll to include an option for supporting cascade negate that does not hop CBN/CBI
I would like for the poll to include an option for supporting cascade negate that does not hop CBN/CBI
As I mentioned at the beginning, banding and drawing--two of the strongest abilities in the game both offensively and defensively--both get inherently stronger in a world without cascades.
Lost Souls with draw-dependent triggers also get better without cascade.
I attack with a Hero who has a regular draw ability and draw the Lawless LS, which I trigger on myself to get an extra evil card.
You block and at some point negate my draw.
Lawless goes back on top of the deck with the other cards I drew, but since it's not cascaded, I get to keep the evil card and then I'll draw Lawless again the next time I draw. I might even Woes my own draw ability so I can play another draw card and use Lawless twice in one battle... ::)
Same scenario except instead of Lawless, I draw Covet LS, which I give to you and take one of your LS.
Then the draw is negated and Covet goes back on my deck...but I still have the LS I grabbed from you... :dunno:
::)
So when you were playing without cascade negate rules and a situation like this came up:
Draw ability happens, Revealer LS is drawn and activates.
Draw is then negated putting Revealer LS back on top of deck.
Did you leave the revealed cards on the bottom of the deck? (Essentially allowing Revealer to reveal 4 cards total--2 with the negated draw and 2 with the actual draw)
Interesting. I suppose it's just the years of playing with cascade (and mostly understanding the principle behind it), but that actually seems counter-intuitive to me...