Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Bryon on December 01, 2009, 12:39:43 AM
-
Rob wrote:
"If making a rescue attempt, remove this card from the game to shuffle all cards..."
I am fine with the above proposed errata.
The playtesters are in agreement.
It's official. :)
I think that makes this the complete ability:
"If making a rescue attempt, remove this card from the game to shuffle all cards in play, set aside areas, and hands into decks. All players draw 8. Begin a new turn."
-
Bummer, you got it right ;) I was so hoping it would be worded ever so slightly differently, Good job all Playtesters, I'll reveal my combo later ;)
-
dying to find out what it was
-
Since "all" isn't capitalized there, does it REALLY mean "all" now?
-
Since "all" isn't capitalized there, does it REALLY mean "all" now?
LOL. Nice.
-
Here is my deck, which lead to this errata - http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=18817.msg294346;topicseen#new (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=18817.msg294346;topicseen#new)
-
I think this is a good errata. It not only stops RDT's combo from breaking the game, but also stops simple recursion in a normal deck from reusing ANB too many times. I never liked spending that much of limited time for a game in a tournament just shuffling cards. :)
-
Rob wrote:
"If making a rescue attempt, remove this card from the game to shuffle all cards..."
I am fine with the above proposed errata.
The playtesters are in agreement.
It's official. :)
I think that makes this the complete ability:
"If making a rescue attempt, remove this card from the game to shuffle all cards in play, set aside areas, and hands into decks. All players draw 8. Begin a new turn."
Boo.
Since "all" isn't capitalized there, does it REALLY mean "all" now?
Wyn.
-
I think we should also add, "No player may use this card to break the game," as an identifier.
-
I think we should also add, "No player may use this card to break the game," as an identifier.
+1 I have seen way two many anb combos that have become iligale.
-
On a slightly positive note, this did happen in time before I pulled the trigger on a trade netting me more green cards. ;D
-
I think we should also add, "No player may use this card to break the game," as an identifier.
+1 I have seen way two many anb combos that have become iligale.
+1 to acree's comment and to agree what he's agreeing
-
:'(
Oh well, maybe we can errata all the return to hand cards in the same way to counter combo decks and get rid of the silly maximum hand count that has been imposed.
-
Nice ruling :) Now ANB is slighty less annoying. :rollin: So this means that ANB can be negated now? Also, this Errata should be added to the Errata thread.
-
Couldn't it before? It never specifies End the Battle, and the Sampson's Sac ruling makes it seem the blocker could negate it if ANB was playing while an EC is in battle.
This was the errata before:
If making a rescue attempt, ALL players shuffle ALL cards in the field of play, set-aside areas and their hands back into their draw pile. Only cards in Land of Redemption and discard piles remain. ALL players draw 8 new cards. Holder may begin a new turn. [Note: The new turn begins when the new hands are drawn.]
Also, the old errata didn't specify that ANB is discarded. Was it shuffled too? The REG errata is confusing me...
-
Prior to the new errata ANB was discarded when played.
Because it ends the battle (phase and the entire turn for that matter), it cannot be interrupted or negated after it is played. This hasn't changed.
-
I have a HUGE problem with this and I think this Erratta is unessecary and ridiculous. First of all the combo is nearly impossible to pull off in type I and in type II that is the nature of the game (make some combo that decimates an opponent) that is why Type I is for babies and Type II is for the Big Boys and Girls.
All Seriousness, are we going to just start erratting cards everytime someone creates a combo that does something devastating like this? SITC was around for over 2 years before Gabe won Nats with it, but for those who have been playing SITC decks, we know that they are relatively fragile. Same with this Deck. There a multiple ways to wreck this deck and the erratta on ANB is unecessary, and frankly makes Type II more boring. I say let them play and when you get beat by this deck then you will learn how to beat it. If someone is smart enough to make the combo, I say let them play it and let other people play at their own risk.
Besides I have been playing against a deck that does this exact thing for over a year now and I have had my entire deck d/c'ed nearly a dozen times in official tournaments on a combo simpler than this and NO ONE has bothered to do anything about it simply because none of the PTB have seen it. It sets up quicker and is much more difficult to defeat because it has multiple avenues to acomplish the same goal. It can D/C your deck on Offense or on Defense.
The fact that everyone is wringing their hands over this ANB deck is insane. I guess all you have to do is WOW and razzle dazzle one of the PTB wiht a fancy deck and averyone thinks the sky is falling.
I really dont know whether to laugh or cry.
-
I really dont know whether to laugh or cry.
Tissue-user here.
-
I really dont know whether to laugh or cry.
Tissue-user here.
yeah. poor me. I keep trying to beat this deck and keep getting beaten with it. If it hasnt been outlawed by the Huge Minnesota Type II tournament, I plan on bringing it up there and beating everyone with it.
-
yeah. poor me. I keep trying to beat this deck and keep getting beaten with it. If it hasnt been outlawed by the Huge Minnesota Type II tournament, I plan on bringing it up there and beating everyone with it.
I have just one word for that--"Bring It!"
Yeah, you may think that that is two words, but Count Fount and the KC Gang will back me up.
Crusty, we hope to see you for the third annual MN Type II Only tournament*. We may even play Type II Sealed Deck or Type II Teams the night prior.
*Official motto: Six rounds--because we have to.
-
yeah. poor me. I keep trying to beat this deck and keep getting beaten with it. If it hasnt been outlawed by the Huge Minnesota Type II tournament, I plan on bringing it up there and beating everyone with it.
I have just one word for that--"Bring It!"
Yeah, you may think that that is two words, but Count Fount and the KC Gang will back me up.
Crusty, we hope to see you for the third annual MN Type II Only tournament*. We may even play Type II Sealed Deck or Type II Teams the night prior.
*Official motto: Six rounds--because we have to.
Yeah, see, that is the kind of type II culture I am trying to cultivate here in Ohio...I can see already that I have fellow type II kinsman in Minnesota.
I dunno about Type II sealed. It seems like it would be boring just shoving two starter decks together and playing...
-
I dunno about Type II sealed. It seems like it would be boring just shoving two starter decks together and playing...
Two starter decks + appropriate non-random cards to balance good vs. evil + one FoOF or RoA tin of the players choice. You're right, that probably would be boring.
-
Hmm..That sounds a bit more interesting....
-
[/quote]
I have just one word for that--"Bring It!"
Yeah, you may think that that is two words, but Count Fount and the KC Gang will back me up.
[/quote]
Dont know about countfount, but youve got the kansas citian backing you up(although i wouldnt cover much of anyones back). But then again, im not as gramarfied as he is.
-
If you can take a legal 75 minute turn that allows you to shuffle all the decks in the game 50 times and takes all the cards out of your opponent's deck and give him nothing to do for that 75 minutes but watch you play solitaire, then something is wrong.
The point of the game is fun and fellowship. Watching helplessly during a 75 minute solitaire turn is not fun. Nor does it promote much fellowship.
For what it is worth, A New Beginning has been responsible for a LOT of complaints over the last few years, especially in Type 2. The fact that it can be recurred and used umpteen times makes players groan. Other games would just ban it. I'm glad Rob prefers to let the players have some fun with it without abusing it.
-
Other games would just ban it. I'm glad Rob prefers to let the players have some fun with it without abusing it.
+1
The combo is ingenious and unique, but it's definitely way past over powered once set up. I support the PTB in their errata, because it's definitely better than banning the card.
Also...
Type I is for babies and Type II is for the Big Boys and Girls.
Please calm down and grow up, there's no need for name calling or rash judgments. This is 1) JUST a card game and 2) a CHRISTIAN card game. Show some brotherly love, please? :) It's one thing to talk about the types themselves as being less/more challenging/boring or whatever, but insulting players is rude and vastly uncalled for.
-
I am 99.5% sure the bread man was just using sarcasm, just without smileys....I have NEVER heard him degrade any player based on playstyle or anything else...
-
Here is an attempt to the wording for the errata:
If making a rescue attempt, remove this card from the game to return ALL player's cards in the field of play, set-aside areas and hands into each player's draw pile. Only cards in Land of Redemption and discard piles remain. ALL players draw 8 new cards. Holder may begin a new turn. [Note: The new turn begins when the new hands are drawn.]
If there are better ways of saying this, please contribute a modified version. I noticed someone thought the existing errata in the REG was confusing. If so, help me out!
Mike
-
So, if the word is "return" does that mean the Thorns LS would no longer keep LS's in play?
-
Change "return" to "shuffle" and I think you've got it.
-
When you return cards to your draw pile, a shuffle is always included. If you place a card in your draw pile (e.g., bottom of draw pile), you do not shuffle. That will be clear when the new REG update is released. Shuffle is not an ability, whereas return is an ability.
Mike
-
That doesn't make sense to me. Green has several cards that use "shuffle" as the way in which they target a card. Plague of Frogs, David's Music, Two Bears, Nathan, ANB, and probably one or two more. It seems to me that "shuffle" is an ability just like "return" or "capture."
In addition, if "shuffle" isn't an ability then what do House of Rimmon and the Thorns LS protect from?
-
That doesn't make sense to me. Green has several cards that use "shuffle" as the way in which they target a card. Plague of Frogs, David's Music, Two Bears, Nathan, ANB, and probably one or two more. It seems to me that "shuffle" is an ability just like "return" or "capture."
In addition, if "shuffle" isn't an ability then what do House of Rimmon and the Thorns LS protect from?
+1
-
I did not mean to imply anything has been changed. Shuffle still means shuffle. All I am saying is that return is an equally valid word that does the same thing. Return is a more general term, of which shuffle is a subset.
"Play as" is a construct used in the REG to take a variety of ways of saying the same thing and using one word instead.
Mike
-
OK, that's good but I guess I don't understand why you need to use "return" when "shuffle" is just as clear. Why change the wording if you don't have to? The ideal situation is that cards wouldn't need a 'play as,' right?
-
"Play as" used to restate what was unclear. I hope to expand "play as" to include a shorter list of key words. Since the REG defines what keywords mean and do, it makes sense to use those keywords. It will not change the way any cards are played, but will use a more consistent and shorter list of keywords. There is nothing wrong with shuffle, but return can be used in a more general sense. For example, you return captured Heroes to territory, to hand. You can't miss noticing that different words and phrases that mean the same thing have been used over the years. I am trying to say all those things in one consistent and more current manner.
I think this will be clearer when the updated REG is rolled out early next year.
Mike
-
I kinda agree with Sean. Why add another term, when Shuffle pretty much means the same thing...
-
Return is not a new word. It is a more general word.
Mike
-
Hey,
"Shuffle" is to "return to draw pile" as "Repel" is to "Ignore."
Crusty, we hope to see you for the third annual MN Type II Only tournament*. We may even play Type II Sealed Deck or Type II Teams the night prior.
If my count is correct 2010 will be the 5th annual MN Type II Extravaganza not the third.
I think Type II Booster Draft would be more interesting than Type II Sealed. Draft 4 Tins then build a type 2 deck out of it. Hum, that could get really expensive really fast.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
It could be confusing to new players though... if they see that a card protects from shuffle, and play a card that says "return," thinking the two are different. I've never been a fan of generalized terms, since they start to become a little unclear at times.
I respect any desicion you guys make, but this is just my personal view on the matter. :)
-
*cries for his lost friend*
-
Obligatory on topic piece: If you are going to have ANB remove itself from the game, could we get rid of the rescue attempt requirement from the errata? That way all the fANBoys (and fanmen) can claim a partial victory.
Crusty, we hope to see you for the third annual MN Type II Only tournament*. We may even play Type II Sealed Deck or Type II Teams the night prior.
If my count is correct 2010 will be the 5th annual MN Type II Extravaganza not the third.
Isn't it going to be the fourth? The third was a (teeny-tiny) joke on my part, because I missed the first one so I to refuse to recognize it's existence. Hopefully crustpope will travel from Ohio to steal your coveted long distance travel crown.
I think Type II Booster Draft would be more interesting than Type II Sealed. Draft 4 Tins then build a type 2 deck out of it.
I don't know. The best part of T2 is the tactical element, a great deal of which is lost with the inherent randomness of booster. Moses v. The Egyptians, however, would completely rock as a T2 starting point.
-
Wait, so shuffle isn't shuffle but return to...deck. My head hurts.
-
The combo is ingenious and unique, but it's definitely way past over powered once set up.
That sentance could be applied to any combo such as SitC, Besieging the City, or this ANB recursion. The key is to look for the clues as to what deck it is and then defend against it accordingly. Frankly I would LOVE to play against this deck. The first time it comboed off against me I would be in AWE, and the next time I played it, I would be able to defend against it knowing that it depended on GOH and ANB recursion. There are so many ways to attack this deck that it would soon become a footnote in redemption lore...but now no one will be able to build a defense to it because it has already been errattaed.
also:
Type I is for babies and Type II is for the Big Boys and Girls.
Please calm down and grow up, there's no need for name calling or rash judgments. This is 1) JUST a card game and 2) a CHRISTIAN card game. Show some brotherly love, please? :) It's one thing to talk about the types themselves as being less/more challenging/boring or whatever, but insulting players is rude and vastly uncalled for.
I am 99.5% sure the bread man was just using sarcasm, just without smileys....I have NEVER heard him degrade any player based on playstyle or anything else...
That is to say except Brad. :P I degrade him all the time, but I only do it because I care...His ego gets to big sometimes and I have to drag him down a bit ;)
Mr. Ethecist is correct here. I was merely taking a playful shot at those of you who play type I religioiusly. I used to be one of you, but now I have converted to the dark side :maul: You should come too, we have cookies and t-shirts ;D
My big problem with this is that when someone comes up with a combo, it seems that the immediate reaction to it by the PTB is to figure out a way to errata a card to make it "un-broken" some of the eratta's I agree with (such as SitC) but others (like ANB) I think are a bit premature. I understand that this may be more because ANB has been a thorn in the Playtesters side for many years now, but hey, that is what they get paid the big bucks for right?
I would just rather see a more hands off approach to how to handle these "broken" decks. Let seasoned type II players try to crack it open before we rush back to the drawing board to prevent the sky from crashing down around us...
-
that is what they get paid the big bucks for right?
Pretty sure they lose money being play-testers.
-
that is what they get paid the big bucks for right?
Pretty sure they lose money being play-testers.
well, sign me up to lose money then, because I would LOVE to be a playtester!
-
To talk about the errata, I do NOT think this combo is so powerful that it needs an errata. I think it was a great work and should not be punished.
The only reason I do support this is the shuffling time. I agree that it is not fun to shuffle your deck 40 times after ANB without you ever getting a turn. It pains me to say this though.
-
Hopefully crustpope will travel from Ohio to steal your coveted long distance travel crown.
Unless I get the crazy idea of using the air miles I have added from our honeymoon and conference travels and come up from the East Coast....but first I'll have to hear if Minnesota gets Nationals...one can only go that far North very sparingly and still remain sane :P
-
the updated REG is rolled out early next year.
suuuuuuurrrrrrrre :)
-
that is what they get paid the big bucks for right?
Pretty sure they lose money being play-testers.
well, sign me up to lose money then, because I would LOVE to be a playtester!
+1 Me, too :P
-
Hey,
...one can only go that far North very sparingly and still remain sane :P
I don't get it, why would you want to remain sane?
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Here is another attempt to the wording for the errata:
If making a rescue attempt, remove this card from the game to shuffle [return] ALL player's cards in the field of play, set-aside areas and hands into each player's draw pile. Only cards in Land of Redemption and discard piles remain. ALL players draw 8 new cards. Holder may begin a new turn. [Note: The new turn begins when the new hands are drawn.]
This should satisfy those that responded to the first attempt.
Mike
-
I do like it that we stay with shuffle instead of return even if they mean the same thing. Did you see the errata Bryon posted on the errata thread? It included "end the battle" and "end the turn" both of which help clarify what is happening.
-
Thanks - I didn't know Bryon had posted something.
Mike