The picture for the site and the Forbidden fruit don't show up for me. Is that a problem on my end?
The picture for the site and the Forbidden fruit don't show up for me. Is that a problem on my end?
They show up for me on mobile. I hadn’t viewed them on this device until a few moments ago so they shouldn’t be cached. I assume you’v tried to reload the page? If that doesn’t work maybe clear your cache and reload again.
Take already means something in Redemption, and it's not searching a card location for a card and adding it to your hand
Unless otherwise specified, targets are moved to the hand of the player gaining control of the cards.
Let Take mean gaining control of a card.
Also, how final are the numbers? I get that all this early Fall stuff would make sense at the beginning of the set, but it seems a step back from the the more organized CoW and RoJ.
Stick to search.
Trust me, Fall of Man is very organized, but it uses a different method than recent sets. It should make sense once enough cards have been revealed.
-9 counts for 9 toss on an opponent? Asking about the gray curse that has -x/x if it were tossed
Not sure I've seen a -x toss option
I will say I'm on board with the idea, though I was a fan of opening my binder and having all the themes next to each other, more or less.
-9 counts for 9 toss on an opponent? Asking about the gray curse that has -x/x if it were tossed
Not sure I've seen a -x toss option
-9 counts for 9 toss on an opponent? Asking about the gray curse that has -x/x if it were tossed
Not sure I've seen a -x toss option
Now I'm curious what the Nats release will look like.
I have to admit the name made me happy, not only does the name have such a huge scope, but it sounds pretty epic too (in a tragic sort of way). Then I got to reading the cards and they look great so far, the only issue I have is negatively targeting an opponent's reserve... that being said, if I had to make a list of top cards to be able to target an opponent's reserve, that one would be on it.
And I love the art of The Serpent's Curse, the other art is good too, but The Serpent's Curse just awesome.
Sorry, I STILL really don't like this use of Take. It's horribly confusing and will frustrate the majority of current players and ALL new players.
Granted, the way the REG is worded does suggest that cards in a deck or discard pile can be "taken" as they are not currently under your control. That remains unintuitive, as you would think of your card piles as being in your control, if anyone's. Give and Take still share an entry in the REG, implying two perspectives of the same ability- simply, switching the control of a card from one player to another. That is very intuitive. Saying it's still a Take ability to get a card from your card pile because you're switching control of a card from... nothing... to yourself is absolutely bizarre.
I've played many, many trading card games- Magic, Pokémon, Harry Potter, My Little Pony, Force of Will. One of the few universal card abilities is searching a deck or a discard pile for a card. The wording is the same, up and down the board, because the wording is intuitive and clear. Calling Searching a Take ability, insofar as Redemption maintains the definition of Taking as gaining control, is wildly counter intuitive.
Redemption does NOT need to acquire even more set-rewriting errata or conflate more special abilities. It makes this game- by FAR the most complicated TCG- harder for fans to keep up with and impossible for newcomers to learn.
This change alone will have to make me postpone and rewrite my entire upcoming Welcome to Redemption: Special Abilities video. And what would I even say? "Take is the same thing as Give, just seen from a different perspective. They mean to gain or surrender control of a card respectively. Except Take now also means to search your deck, discard pile, or Reserve for a card. But only when it says to do it that way. Those Take abilities allow you to gain control of cards you, uh... already own by switching control from your, uh... deck, to you. Or something."
That's so so SO confusing, and, more importantly, unnecessary. We just don't need to replace a perfectly functional keyword with one we already have and use.
And as for all those cards that let you "take" a revealed card or whatever. You want to distinguish that from normal Take abilities?
Then just use the better word that every other card game already uses.
Add.
Just errata those usages of "take to hand" with "add to hand". Completely intuitive, no conflation, and now you have to errata a dozen cards instead of 40% of all special abilities in the game. Problem solved.
I'm really sorry to sound so annoyed and irritated, but stuff like this KILLS me.
-9 counts for 9 toss on an opponent? Asking about the gray curse that has -x/x if it were tossed
Not sure I've seen a -x toss option
The opposing character is decreased X/X, where X is the strength of the discarded Enhancement at face value.
Imho serpents curse needs cbn on the curse side
Can it start in play and be cbn protected? :-)
Imho serpents curse needs cbn on the curse side
Not enough room.
Wow! These new cards and abilities look amazing!
But I still fear that it makes gameplay even more hard or impossible to stand against OP decks.
And as already said within different threads: Newcomers' life will get even harder when trying to get into the game! (Playing I/J starters is still fun and easy and complex enough for newbies - but the next step becomes more and more hard to take!)
Wow! These new cards and abilities look amazing!
But I still fear that it makes gameplay even more hard or impossible to stand against OP decks.
And as already said within different threads: Newcomers' life will get even harder when trying to get into the game! (Playing I/J starters is still fun and easy and complex enough for newbies - but the next step becomes more and more hard to take!)
Sorry, I STILL really don't like this use of Take. It's horribly confusing and will frustrate the majority of current players and ALL new players.
Granted, the way the REG is worded does suggest that cards in a deck or discard pile can be "taken" as they are not currently under your control. That remains unintuitive, as you would think of your card piles as being in your control, if anyone's. Give and Take still share an entry in the REG, implying two perspectives of the same ability- simply, switching the control of a card from one player to another. That is very intuitive. Saying it's still a Take ability to get a card from your card pile because you're switching control of a card from... nothing... to yourself is absolutely bizarre.
I've played many, many trading card games- Magic, Pokémon, Harry Potter, My Little Pony, Force of Will. One of the few universal card abilities is searching a deck or a discard pile for a card. The wording is the same, up and down the board, because the wording is intuitive and clear. Calling Searching a Take ability, insofar as Redemption maintains the definition of Taking as gaining control, is wildly counter intuitive.
Redemption does NOT need to acquire even more set-rewriting errata or conflate more special abilities. It makes this game- by FAR the most complicated TCG- harder for fans to keep up with and impossible for newcomers to learn.
This change alone will have to make me postpone and rewrite my entire upcoming Welcome to Redemption: Special Abilities video. And what would I even say? "Take is the same thing as Give, just seen from a different perspective. They mean to gain or surrender control of a card respectively. Except Take now also means to search your deck, discard pile, or Reserve for a card. But only when it says to do it that way. Those Take abilities allow you to gain control of cards you, uh... already own by switching control from your, uh... deck, to you. Or something."
That's so so SO confusing, and, more importantly, unnecessary. We just don't need to replace a perfectly functional keyword with one we already have and use.
And as for all those cards that let you "take" a revealed card or whatever. You want to distinguish that from normal Take abilities?
Then just use the better word that every other card game already uses.
Add.
Just errata those usages of "take to hand" with "add to hand". Completely intuitive, no conflation, and now you have to errata a dozen cards instead of 40% of all special abilities in the game. Problem solved.
I'm really sorry to sound so annoyed and irritated, but stuff like this KILLS me.
In the end though, no matter what card game you are playing, there will be keywords players have to memorize. It's a necessary part of card games. Standardizing abilities into keywords absolutely does not make the game more complex and writing a rant about how Redemption is "by FAR the most complicated TCG" proves nothing but the fact that you have very little experience with other TCGs. The only paper card game I have enough knowledge to comment on regarding complexity is Magic and I can assure you Magic is so beyond Redemption in complexity that any comparison is laughable.
People could guess what cards were remaining simply based on the holes in the number list.
Well shame on you for spoiling everything... ::)
Edit--I'm also bored at work and would probably be doing the same thing if I didn't already know what they were... ;)
Well shame on you for spoiling everything... ::)
Edit--I'm also bored at work and would probably be doing the same thing if I didn't already know what they were... ;)
Well, I haven't been edited by R.O.S.E.S. yet, so I can't have hit too near the mark... ::)
Not to be that guy, but we can do that a bit now - in fact, I'm going to, because speculating is fun. We are missing cards 5, 7 and 11 from the first dozen; if I had to take a stab I'd guess that 5 is called something along the lines of "Opened Eyes", "Nakedness Revealed", or "Hiding from God" (Any could be an EE, but the first could also be a DAE and the last might even be an evil dom and/or have Jonah synergy). I would guess that 7 is "Passing Blame" (likely an EE) and that 11 is either "Cast from the Garden" (EE or possibly curse, though that might have been posted today if it was) or, more likely, the wielder of the Flaming Sword, with the same reference (WC angel, obviously. "Cherubim with the Flaming Sword" is unwieldy - I'm going to call it "Guardian of the Garden" in my head because I like alliteration).Your guesses have varying degrees of accuracy... but since you pretty much nailed this one I'll give it to you. 8)
I'm wondering how Blame Shifting can be a good enhancement? Or am I missing something?
I'm wondering how Blame Shifting can be a good enhancement? Or am I missing something?
Non-human
Non-human characters include angels, animals, demons and symbolic characters.
I need to ask something before getting on the train:
Is that the official border art for the set (which looks like alternate art from previous sets) or are the spoiled cards consisting of the alternate border art?
As you might have noticed from the preview images, we’re doing some things differently this time around. The initial set release will contain all alternate border cards. That’s right! The alternate border is the new normal! That does mean that we won’t have a special release at Nationals this year, but you get all the cool looking cards right up front.
I believe this quote from the article answers your question.
I believe this quote from the article answers your question.
Thanks! It totally does*, and I'm on the hype train just from the pics.**
They did also say that rarities haven't been determined yet, so some of the cards won't have the borders depicted as they would probably have the full art instead. (Going based off of the AB releases from the last two sets). This would also mean the URs would be full art / borderless!!!
I noticed the curse ability is listed before the EE ability and am wondering why it was reversed. Cards in RoJ like Behemoth have the good or evil icon in the ability box mirror the order of the icons in the top left box. As English speakers/writers we tend to read and follow things from left to right, top to bottom. I was thinking that it might flow better for the players to switch the EE to be on top and the curse on bottom.
For what it's worth, my two cents are that in general it's better for the game to keep barriers to entry low. We aren't as established as something like Warhammer where the complexity is half the draw; we can't afford to turn away players who try the starter decks and enjoy them but get overwhelmed by all the crazy and complex abilities in the more recent sets.I totally agree with both statements!
New players don't know a search ability defaults to putting the target card in your hand and I've seen many players think searching for a character puts it straight into territoryWhat about "Search area x and add to hand"?
[Calling it "take" is] so so SO confusing, and, more importantly, unnecessary. We just don't need to replace a perfectly functional keyword with one we already have and use. Just errata those usages of "take to hand" with "add to hand". Completely intuitive, no conflation, [...] Problem solved.Agreed! I object to every change that is unnecessary and complicates that provide no real benefit.
It's just like how abilities that used to say "remove from the game" now say "banish".Which to me as a newcomer was totally confusing too! "Remove from the game" is pretty straightforward. Everyone get's that. Why say banish instead? It's just unnecessary.
In the end though, no matter what card game you are playing, there will be keywords players have to memorize. The only paper card game I have enough knowledge to comment on regarding complexity is Magic and I can assure you Magic is so beyond Redemption in complexity that any comparison is laughable.But this doesn't justify unnecessarily making something more complex than it already is. If we want the community to grow we can't have that because it will turn away potential new players. One challenge I'm facing is how to introduce teens to the game. Especially if their English is bad. A real scenario I am facing right now. They don't know words like "banish". Memorizing keywords is fine but having use a dictionary a lot isn't fun. So this group is already excluded from the game except maybe someone translates this material which is a lot of work!
Newcomers' life will get even harder when trying to get into the game! (Playing I/J starters is still fun and easy and complex enough for newbies - but the next step becomes more and more hard to take!)For me that transition is only possible because of:
A few days ago we had a long match basically using RoJ Angels where we nearly spent as many time reading REG, Rulebook, forum and ORDIR as we spent playing. (of course we are no experts but when considering newcomers do know much less this raises barriers!)Yeah we "played" 3 hours and in the end I was tired, discouraged, confused and had a headache...
Obviously I wouldn't be able to do it every time, but I would be more than willing to sit in on a Lackey game sometime soon to answer questions that come up. I think you'll find that most of the scenarios you're encountering are not as complicated as you might think (and when it is, it very well could be due to outdated wording on older cards).