Cactus Game Design Message Boards

POLL:
Does the game have
a) a good number of CBN, CBI, CBP.
b) to many CBN, CBI, CBP.
c) could use more CBN, CBI, CBP.
I personally don't think that ANY enhancements should be CBN of CBI.

A. I especially like that most of the CNB/CNP/CNI aren't interrupts so you have to have inish by the numbers to use them. It was the bain of my existence using Herod's but it actually was good because if every BW CBN enhancement was also an interrupt there would be no point to anything that can be N/I/P usually the ones that can are the interrupts and you need to pair an interrupt and a CBN to have it be a true automatic battle winner

A.  Though I support conditional CBN or CBP on battlewinners.  Only non-battlewinners should be CBN etc.

I think there are too many CBN battle-winners. But I guess all-in all I'd go with A.

In my personal opinion I believe that there are way too many CBN , CBP, and CBI. I vote there should only be more CBN's if the ability directly gets it's power from God ie: Authority of Christ . but that's just me.

B, it's more fun to have a battle have one negating card after another. CBN if good only if, as said before, it isn't a battle winner or is divine intervention (AOCP, Pillar of Fire, ...) and even then there shouldn't be that many of those types of cards.

I think the amount of CBP is good and necessary to control the power of FBTN. I like CBI for abilities that would be annoying to undo if interrupted (like look at/reveal/shuffle/etc.)

All of these are inherently CBI.

unless of course they decide to actually make CBP really mean CBP.

........it doesn't?

Quote from: STAMP on September 26, 2011, 02:02:54 PM

unless of course they decide to actually make CBP really mean CBP.

........it doesn't?

Not when "cannot be prevented" can also mean "can be prevented".

Oh, and of course the obvious...

You missed the tiny text:

Quote from: STAMP on September 26, 2011, 02:02:54 PM

B - too many...unless of course they decide to actually make CBP really mean CBPandalsoANBworkshoweverSTAMPwantsitto.

If the CBP card gets negated (interrupt and prevent) after it's played.

If CBP worked like that, I could still interrupt/do something else (Reach->AoCP, etc)

I don't see why that's a bad thing.

It's a very bad thing in my book.  I don't like inconsistency when the only reason a rule is defined is because "that's the way we want it to work".

"Cannot be negated" should mean "cannot be negated" and stick to the table.  It does.
"Cannot be interrupted" should mean "cannot be interrupted" and stick to the table.  It does.
"Cannot be ignored" should mean "cannot be ignored" and stick to the table.  It does.
"Cannot be prevented" should mean "cannot be prevented" and stick to the table.  It does NOT.

You play a CBP ability against me.  I should be able to interrupt that ability and then do anything after that EXCEPT prevent it.  Why?  Because it cannot be prevented!

So go ahead...interrupt and discard the card with the CBP ability.  Or redirect it.  Or discard the hero on which a CBP-enhancement was played.  Or apply protection from the CBP ability.  Or do Reach+AoCP...let the CBP ability kick back in...then do a Reach+something else.

Do whatever your heart desires BUT know that you cannot prevent it.  That's all I ask.   

I think that they should just change the wording to cannot be prevented before it is played. That way the card does as it says and causes a lot less confusion and dispute.