Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: sepjazzwarrior on January 27, 2010, 06:37:01 PM
-
Today I had a thought I was wondering what the Redemption community would think about this new idea. All of us have faced the rath of a Garden Tomb, Genisis, or purple ignor deck and have seen the un-fun playing that can result from ignorring before a character enters battle, or pre-ignor. I was thinking that a way to possibily make the game more battle-oriented would be to change the defination of ignor just slightly so as that it would let characters that would be ignored enter battle, basically making ignor like immunity except you don't have to defeat the character by the numbers. Repell and "cannot enter battle" would go back from meaning pretty much ignor to meaning what they sound like: repell sending a character back to territory and "cannot enter battle" meaning the character can't enter battle, but if it is already in battle then it is uneffected by the card. These changes would only slightly de-power existing stratigies because, although an evil character can now enter battle while ignored, he still has to somehow defeat the character in battle while ignored. This way the next set of cards won't have to be made to help combat pre-ignor, people won't have to build decks in fear of Garden Tomb, and pre-ignor can still be an effective tool. I'm not calling for any rules to be changed, I would just like to pose this idea to the Redemption community and see what you think. Thank you and Godbless.
-
I'm all for it, but I doubt the PTB would be.
-
If you did that, it would make people who use TGT actually have cards to back it up instead of just "splashing" it in their deck. I think splashing TGT means that you are not willing to figure what would REALLY make your deck better! I like the idea!
-
I like this idea of course. But I also think it will never happen.
-
Hey,
I have considered this sort of idea a couple times in the last couple years. There are two main problems with it:
(1) it would be a HUGE change. The change would go against 10+ years of precedent and significantly change the way ignore functions and is used. That's not something we're inherently not willing to do, but the bigger the change the more justification is needed to make it happen, and I don't think there's enough justification for this.
and
(2) it would completely kill the pre-block ignore strategy. While I empathize with the dislike of pre-block ignore and I struggle to find ways to beat The Garden Tomb like everyone does, eliminating a strategy from the game is never a good thing. More strategies always makes the game more varied and thus more interesting. The flip side being that fewer strategies makes the game less interesting.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
If we were to change how ignores work, I'd only do this one change:
You can put characters who are being ignored into battle straight from your hand. Guys in territory are still stuck, but being able to block from hand would be very nice. They would still be ignored the instant they enter battle, but they would at least be allowed to enter. This would make ignore still be powerful, but give it SOME sort of potential backfire for being so strong.
-
pre-ignor wouldn't be eliminated as a strategy because the EC still has to somehow would still beat the hero in battle.n If you can play the ignor before the EC enters then they never have a chance to play a kill card aganst you or be immune to you or anything like that. It would be just like playing any other kill card before battle, except it doesn't necessarly have to target a specific character, but could target a varity of characters (ignor a birgade, ignor human/demon, ignor a class). Think about how many battle-winners would would work while you are ignored in battle? You either have to negate the ignor or play something like death of unrightious to win. It would still be a powerful strategy, you would just have to have more in a deck other than The Garden Tomb.
-
(1) it would be a HUGE change. The change would go against 10+ years of precedent and significantly change the way ignore functions and is used.
This is something that won't get any better over time...just sayin'.
(2) it would completely kill the pre-block ignore strategy.
It certainly would not eliminate the strategy! It would simply make it require at least as many cards as other strategies, which IMO is an infinitely good benefit for the game, and vastly outweighs the evils.
I...love...this idea. I say we can at least do a playtesting and/or a trial for this, like we did for the 2P D3 and other rules.
-
All of us have faced the wrath of a Garden Tomb,
I feel sometimes that I'm alone in the fact that when I faced a GT deck, I had no problems with being ignored (because I never was). Even the person who I was against said that I had no problems dealing with him (I only lost due to not getting the enhancements I need (like in most games :P)).
-
I still believe that Ignores should work as I described anyway. Every card defaults to in play, but your hand is not in play... why are Ignores given the exception of being able to target characters that are in your hand?
This would be the easiest change to make that would balance out ignore IMO. Just say ignores cannot target characters in hand unless specified.
-
I'll never understand how there can be so much noise about changing rules to solve a perceived game problem( hand limit fiasco), then endorse an idea to use game rules to "solve" a perceived game problem( this one ). As far as this idea goes, I think it would drop ignore off the map. Many people I know use ignore solely for the fact that they cannot be blocked at all. Making it so Deck Discard, FBTN, or any other defense gets a chance to do things against an ignore offense would kill that advantage. Whether or not less people playing ignore is considered good is your opinion. I like things as they are. Just my :2cents:
-
This would be the easiest change to make that would balance out ignore IMO. Just say ignores cannot target characters in hand unless specified.
This would be my second choice, but I still think that making Ignore, Repel, and Cannot be Blocked abilities distinct from each other would be a good idea. Maybe that in addition to your idea...
-
it would completely kill the pre-block ignore strategy...eliminating a strategy from the game is never a good thing
I'd be glad to see it die. And having an available strategy that makes the playing experience less fun, is NOT a good thing for a game to have. Is that my opinion? Sure, but I'm not anywhere near alone in it.
Every card defaults to in play, but your hand is not in play... why are Ignores given the exception of being able to target characters that are in your hand?
I also like this idea. It resolves an inconsistency, hurts "pre-block" ignore, but still leaves it playable as you can still use it to keep those nasty ECs in your opponents territory (that have horses WC EEs on them) from blocking you :)
-
I agree with lambo.
-
I wouldn't mind in the least if nobody used Ignore as it works now. Epic battle phases are the best part about the game, and PBI just removes any chance of it. In addition, the problem with BPI is that it takes far fewer cards than all other viable strategies to work:
TGT+TGT Hero, then you have a whole other offense
Jacob+RTC, then you have a whole other offense
Elishana+Gathering+Melchizedek+Peace Treaty, then you have ten more offensive cards
Cheribum+ET+Peace Treaty and Spiritual Warfare, then you have a whole other offense
Jeremiah+HT+Spiritual Warfare and Burning Incense, then you have a whole other offense
The imbalance is that the most powerful offense is also the one that requires the least to work.
-
You forgot Maharai + Claudia + ET + No Need for Spices, Scarlet Line, and all those others. That's my favorite (to use), and it goes perfectly with speed.
-
Besides pre-block ignores, ignores in general is actually somewhat risky, considering that it gives your opponent infinite inish that they can use to destroy your territory then interupt the ignore and get rid of you. Also, maybe if people play with Priestly Breastplate more often, then they can stop all non-cbn ignores.
However, if it must be changed, then I'm also with Lambo idea of playing from hand.
-
^ adding on to what you said, if you could block from hand, then ignores become a serious double edged sword. If they have no ECs in hand or no way to negate the ignore, then they cant stop you. HOWEVER... if they have say, a pg character and confusion... look out below!
That'd be a fun balance of risk and reward. Will you win the battle... or will you give them infinate iniative to mess with you? I know I'd think twice before playing a preblock ignore in this case.
-
Hey,
it would completely kill the pre-block ignore strategy...eliminating a strategy from the game is never a good thing
I'd be glad to see it die. And having an available strategy that makes the playing experience less fun, is NOT a good thing for a game to have. Is that my opinion? Sure, but I'm not anywhere near alone in it.
Does that mean that you wish we would have killed Choose the Blocker back in 2004 too?
Jacob+RTC, then you have a whole other offense
Elishana+Gathering+Melchizedek+Peace Treaty, then you have ten more offensive cards
Cheribum+ET+Peace Treaty and Spiritual Warfare, then you have a whole other offense
Jeremiah+HT+Spiritual Warfare and Burning Incense, then you have a whole other offense
I assume that anyone that is seriously concerned about these combos is playing with Darius' Decree. Not that Darius' Decree is single-handedly the answer to all of them (and of course TGT isn't on that list at all) but Darius' Decree is a huge step in the right direction.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Ignore is not the problem, the problem is pre-block.
-
You forgot Maharai + Claudia + ET + No Need for Spices, Scarlet Line, and all those others. That's my favorite (to use), and it goes perfectly with speed.
No Need for Spices doesn't work with this...
-
Right. After Reuben's Torn Clothes, we decided that "ignore any evil brigade" will be followed with a restriction. Usually "in battle."
-
See, the wording on No Need for Spices only further strengthens my argument I think...
If you specify in battle only, you can still add characters in from hand or territory right? Why does RTC stop ECs from entering battle from hand then, when all cards that don't specify locations default to in play? My hand is not in play, why are those ECs being targeted?
-
Ignore does not only target the EC. It also targets the hero, similar to how immune and protect target the hero. Hero ignores females means a few things, kinda like this (this is very rough): "Hero can't be blocked by females. Hero is immune to females. Females are immune to the hero, but will lose the battle." Notice the first sentence is a "cannot be" ability, which is a protect ability. In rough terms, it is like "Hero is protected from being blocked by females." This ability targets the Hero, not the EC. Therefore, the EC need not be in play. Only the hero need be in play for the ignore ability to work.
about NNFS: NNFS says "ignore an evil brigade in battle." That means you select a brigade in battle, and then ignore it.
No Need for Spices can't work as a pre-block ignore, since there are no evil brigades in battle to choose from.
Get it?
-
Ah, I forgot the "in battle" part...and also won a game or two that I probably shouldn't have. :P
However, Scarlet Line still works for that combo, correct?
-
Ignore does not only target the EC. It also targets the hero, similar to how immune and protect target the hero. Hero ignores females means a few things, kinda like this (this is very rough): "Hero can't be blocked by females. Hero is immune to females. Females are immune to the hero, but will lose the battle." Notice the first sentence is a "cannot be" ability, which is a protect ability. In rough terms, it is like "Hero is protected from being blocked by females." This ability targets the Hero, not the EC. Therefore, the EC need not be in play. Only the hero need be in play for the ignore ability to work.
about NNFS: NNFS says "ignore an evil brigade in battle." That means you select a brigade in battle, and then ignore it.
No Need for Spices can't work as a pre-block ignore, since there are no evil brigades in battle to choose from.
Get it?
No Need for Spices makes sense when you put it that way, but I still really dislike ignores stopping people in my hand from blocking. When you say it's sorta like "______ may not enter battle", doesn't it need to first target all _______ that it can to say "hey, you can't enter battle." Idk, I just think its wierd how no other cards can impact cards in a players hand without specifying "opponents hand", yet ignore can.
This isn't a random new thing for me... I've always disliked this since I first heard about it. :P
-
I learned that the "can't enter battle" part of ignore doesn't really target characters when I learned that you couldn't be protected from it (for instance, via the Color Guard LS). The "virtual mutual immunity" part of ignore can be protected against, I believe though.
-
In answer to BubbleBoy... yes, Scarlet Line does still work.
-
I still think that "ignore" could be re-interpreted to include 2 things.
1 - Targeting the hero to say that it is protected from all blocking evil characters.
2 - Targeting ECs so that they can't enter battle.
The first part would mean that they still couldn't be hurt by players entering battle from hand (unless there was an interrupt). But the second part would only target ECs that were in play, meaning that you could still block from hand.
-
Eve and Widow both say "Can't be blocked by..."
Those both target the hero, not the evil character. "Can't be blocked by" is, by definition, the same as ignore.
-
Hey,
I just think its wierd how no other cards can impact cards in a players hand without specifying "opponents hand", yet ignore can.
Lampstand of the Sanctuary and Darius' Decree both impact cards in a players hand without specifying "opponents hand" and neither of them are ignore abilities.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
That doesnt count... because it DOES target the hand. It says anything that is not in battle, which includes your hand. Therefore it indirectly states it. Also, I thought DD targeted the opponent, stating they are not allowed to play X without Y.
Just saying ignore X without stating what targets are viable means it should default to in play... :-\
-
Hero ignores. The target is the hero.
Protect from capture does not target capture abilites. It targets the hero.
Immune to demons does not target demons. It targets the hero.
Can't be blocked by */8 or higher does not target */8 or higher. It targets the hero.
-
How does Household Idols work then? It's not being blocked... it's not even in battle. I would think HHI targets heroes.
You may say its a mere exception, but its a rather large exception if you ask me.
*EDIT* More things that make no sense to me:
The REG states that if you ignore a character that is immune to you, the battle results in a stalemate. Immune means that they cannot be targeted by abilities. Doesnt the stalemate mean that the ignore was not allowed to target the immune character?
Finally, We've started using the term "Cannot be ignored." Cannot be ____ means you are protected from that ability. How can you be protected from ignore, if ignore doesnt target you?
-
Its not an exception, its how ignore is defined.
How can you be protected from ignore, if ignore doesnt target you?
I think there may be a valid point here.
-
How does Household Idols work then? It's not being blocked... it's not even in battle. I would think HHI targets heroes.
HHI kinda protects the battle field from those heroes.
"Cannot be ignored" is kind of like "Cannot be negated," which is kind of like "Regardless of immunity." They all allow the card to work AS IF that ability were not there.
-
HHI kinda protects the battle field from those heroes.
What? lol. That doensn't make much sense...
"Cannot be ignored" is kind of like "Cannot be negated," which is kind of like "Regardless of immunity." They all allow the card to work AS IF that ability were not there.
But, that doesnt change the fact that you state the "Cannot enter battle" part doesnt target ECs (defaulting to good ignores for simplicity of arguments). The "non-official" snippet of the new REG also states:
An ignore ability has four parts: (1) an Ignore special ability grants the ignoring card immunity to all cards being ignored and (2) the ignored cards immunity to the ignoring card. Additionally (3) Characters that are ignored and are not in battle cannot enter battle (you can not choose to bring them into battle and they cannot be targeted by an ability that would bring them into battle), and (4) characters that are ignored and are already in battle are treated as though they were not in battle for purposes of determining battle outcome.
All ignore abilities are ongoing. Part one of an ignore ability targets the cards that gain the ignore status. Parts two and four target the cards that are ignored. Part three of an ignore ability has no target.
So, how does Large Tree or Masquerading work if the EC isn't even being targeted? From the current REG:
You cannot target something that is protected (e.g., a Hero in Goshen, etc).
If you aren't being targeted by anything, protection is useless. Cannot Be Negated stops cards from being targeted by a negate. Cannot be Captured protects the character from being targeted by capture. Etc... Cannot be Ignored means cannot be targeted by ignores, yet this ability appears to be worthless unless they are already in battle.
Also, you mentioned regardless of immunity.... thats not a protect ability at all. o.O
-
Immunity isn't a protect ability?
"Cannot be Negated" makes a card work AS IF the negate isn't there.
"Regardless of Immunity" makes a card work AS IF the immunity isn't there.
"Can't be ignored" makes a card work AS IF the ignore isn't there.
In all three cases, the ongoing ability is not interrupted, not negated, not stopped at all:
The FBN state of the battle is not changed. The CBN enhancement just works in spite of it.
The immunity on Red Dragon is not interrupted or removed. The "Regardless of immunity" ability just works in spite of it.
The Ignore ability on the hero is not interrupted or suspended. The evil character can just enter battle in spite of it.
The reason this is confusing is because, while "cannot be blocked by" is obviously worded as a protect ability, the grammar on ignore abilities makes it sound like it is targeting another card.
Hero cannot be blocked by female ECs. - easily understood as a protect ability ("cannot be" makes it obvious).
Hero ignores female ECs. - Sounds like you are targeting the ECs. But you are not. Treat that phrase as "cannot be blocked by..." and it makes sense.
HHI, when originally printed, did NOT function as an ignore. It only negated band abilities. I took a Elders of Jerusalem deck to nats that year and laughed at HHI. :) Later it was decided, for the good of the game, and due to the "protect-type" wording on the card, that "good banding cards have no effect" should be treated like an ignore. It was old wording that needed to be fit into the rock-paper-scissors idea, and ... it took a shoehorn. And pliers. And imagination.
"Have no effect" is kinda wonky when it appears on a card that is outside of battle, but it kinda "protects the field of battle" from having those characters step on it. :)
-
"Cannot Be Negated" is protection.
"Immunity" is a form of protection.
"Regardless of protection" is not protection. In fact, Isn't that out there as one of the oddball abilities of the game? It totally breaks everything about protection. Lol.
I have ALWAYS been told that protection and immunity work by stopping other cards from targeting them. This is why Protect stops even Cannot be negated abilities.... it simply doesn't allow the protected card to be targeted.
Protect allows cards to be unaffected by specified special abilities and is related to cards that specify “cannot be” or “may not be” (see Cannot be in the glossary of the rulebook[p. 40]). Protected cards cannot be targeted for harm. Cards that protect give an ability like immune to the cards they protect (see Immune on page 8).
http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/howtoplay101.htm (http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/howtoplay101.htm)
Cannot be
This is a protect ability.
http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/gloss_cannotbe.htm (http://www.redemptionreg.com/REG/gloss_cannotbe.htm)
So, Cannot be Ignored is a Protection ability. What does it protect against? Being targeted by an Ignore. Issue is that you have stated that the "may not be blocked by" part of ignores do not target the Evil characters.
-
Cannot be negated is NOT protection. If it was protection, then it could be prevented. "Cannot be negated" is scissors.
Cannot be negated is in a category SEPARATE from all other "cannot be" abilities.
According to the rules, "cannot be" and "may not be" in every OTHER instance is a protect, including "cannot be blocked by." "Cannot be blocked by" is a protect (it is a rock). "Cannot be negated" is not a protect (it is a scissors).
Trust me on this:
"Cannot be negated" abilities work when all special abilities are prevented. How do they even get to activate their "cannot be negated" status, if their special abilities are prevented? The only way they can is because they are given a special category in the rules. They work in spite of prevents.
"Regardless of immunity" is exactly the same. The special ability on Plague of Frogs only works because there is a special category for "regardless of immunity." They work in spite of immunity. The immunity on Red Dragon does not target Plague of Frogs. The immunity on Red Dragon targets itself. Plague of Frogs works in spite of that immunity.
I agree with you that there is no point in protecting yourself from a protect. And, you are correct that "cannot be ignored" is worded as a protect. According to the rules, if "cannot be ignored" were a protect, it would do absolutely nothing. It would be the same thing as having a hero special ability like "Immune to immune abilities on evil characters." Since immune abilities on evil characters do not target heroes, that ability does nothing.
Therefore, "cannot be ignored" must function as "The character can block regardless of ignore."
-
The reason this is confusing is because, while "cannot be blocked by" is obviously worded as a protect ability, the grammar on ignore abilities makes it sound like it is targeting another card.
This is a great argument for why these two abilities should be defined differently. Don't you think that would solve some problems?
HHI, when originally printed, did NOT function as an ignore. ...
"Have no effect" is kinda wonky when it appears on a card that is outside of battle, but it kinda "protects the field of battle" from having those characters step on it.
I think "Have no effect" should function like the characters can enter battle, but they will be ignored once opposed.
The argument that "we shouldn't change game mechanics, because this is the way we've been playing it for years" seems rather illogical to me. Maybe it'll take a little while for the long-time players to get used to, but I think that whenever possible it's a good idea to make it easier to have new players just be able to look at a card and tell at least with some confidence what it does. And in the future, I think we would definitely look back at these changes and think of them as some of the best we've ever made.
-
Cannot be negated is NOT protection. If it was protection, then it could be prevented.
Cannot be negated is in a category separate from all other "cannot be" abilities.
"Cannot be" and "may not be" in every other instance is a protect, including "cannot be blocked by."
Say what?? I see nothing in the REG that says this. *edit* the preventing it point makes sense... although, how could you prevent it when its already protecting itself from negates?
Cannot be Captured is though, so my point remains:
Cannot be
This is a protect ability. Cannot be taken prisoner, discarded, removed from the game, captured, or converted limits or protects the potential targets of the ability, just as ignore or immune or protect limits or protects the potential targets of the ability. For example, Elizabeth Elisabeths special ability, “cannot be taken prisoner,” could be understood as “immune to capture.” “Cannot be” does not “prevent” or “negate” anything. It only limits the potential targets of a special ability. An Evil Character blocking Elizabeth Elisabeth could still use Net to capture a Hero other than Elizabeth Elisabeth. Note: If the special ability of a card includes the words “cannot” or “may not” WITHOUT the word “be”, then this is a type of prevent. For instance, if a card states that Heroes may not band, this is not a protect, but a prevent because of the lack of the word” be”. Heroes would be PREVENTED from banding.
How can "Cannot be Ignored" limit the targets of Ignore, if the ignore doesnt even target it?
-
Say what?? I see nothing in the REG that says this.
How about the fact that cannot be negated is categorized separately from protect? Or that it has its own point on the rock-paper-scissors matrix?
-
Ok, I get that CBN isnt a protect. My other point still stands... so lets talk about that now.
-
How can "Cannot be Ignored" limit the targets of Ignore, if the ignore doesnt even target it?
I answered this in my post above (edited while you were writing your reply, so you might have missed it). Ignore does not target the ECs, so "Cannot be ignored" does not limit targets. "Cannot be ignored" on those cards is best understood "can bock regardless of ignore abilities."
-
Therefore, "cannot be ignored" must function as "The character can block regardless of ignore."
I really dislike when cards are worded as one thing (a protect), but actually play as something completely different. Making exceptions for every type of ability just leads to a confusing mess... because I can't find anything in the current REG that says CBignored should be played like that. :-\
I see no problem with ignores targeting X ec's and saying "you cant enter battle." It'd make a lot more sense in terms of Cannot be Ignored, and it'd also allow blocking from hand as a method to combat preblock ignore. It'd be a whole lot cleaner, easier to understand, and IMO, balanced.
No offense to anyone, but this seems like sort of a "just because it does" kinda ruling to me. :-\
-
So, you think "cannot be blocked by" should not do what it says?
-
I think it should do what it says by targeting the characters.
Also, if "Cannot be ignored," which until something is clarified in the rules, seems to be a protect ability... why does the old ruling of being immune to a brigade with the Site Guard soul not do the same thing? Unless of course we have two "cannot be" abilities that arent actually protect abilities....
-
"Character may not be blocked by a female evil character." does target a character: the one it is on.
"Immune to ignore abilities" makes no sense. You can't be protected from a protect. That's why color guard (nor any other card) can protect from an ignore.
"Cannot be ignored" is not a protect. I am sorry that those cards are worded that way. I understand that it contradicts the rule that "cannot be" abilities are always protect abilities.
If it helps, we can give "cannot be ignored" a seperate entry like "cannot be negated" so that players won't think they are protect abilities.
In the future, is it clearer to write them "so and so can block regardless of ignore abilities."? We want the cards written clearly. We thought "cannot be ignored" would be clear, but you are correct that it violates the rule that "cannot be" abilities are protect abilities.
So, what is better:
a) add a rule to explain that "cannot be ignored" is a separate ability, like "cannot be negated," or
b) word future cards "can block regardless of ignore" and give the two cards that read "cannot be ignored" a play as to that effect.
We value your opinion.
-
If it were worded "Regardless of ignore" like you said it should be played as, I think it'd be a lot less confusing. Adding extra entries for "cannot be ignored" would just confuse people, since there would be three types of "cannot be" abilities.
Also, I would word HHI to say "blah blah heroes cannot enter battle." instead of "blah blah heroes are ignored." Since based on the rules of ignore, HHI makes no sense as it is.
Clarify those things and I'll be much happier... since right now things just aren't lining up IMO.
-
Thanks for your input. It is valuable to know what is confusing in the rules, especially to players who were not around when the switch to Rock-paper-scissors was made.
I'll recommend play as entries for those 2 cards right now.
About HHI, that one is more complicated than it appears at first glance. If that artifact is activated while a banding hero is already in battle, or if the hero becomes a banding card during the battle (gains a permanent band ability, for example), then it needs to switch to having "no effect." What do we call that? Ignore seemed the best fit at the time, since it matches Wall of Fire, which is clasified as an ignore.
I think we'll probably have to stick with "ignore" or "repel" on that card.
-
Thanks for your input. It is valuable to know what is confusing in the rules, especially to players who were not around when the switch to Rock-paper-scissors was made.
I'll recommend play as entries for those 2 cards right now.
Three I think. there was two from AW and Large Tree.
About HHI, that one is more complicated than it appears at first glance. If that artifact is activated while a banding hero is already in battle, or if the hero becomes a banding card during the battle (gains a permanent band ability, for example), then it needs to switch to having "no effect." What do we call that? Ignore seemed the best fit at the time, since it matches Wall of Fire, which is clasified as an ignore.
I think we'll probably have to stick with "ignore" or "repel" on that card.
Prevent all good banding abilities. Good banding cards may not enter battle, any that are in battle are ignored by all evil characters.
^ maybe that?
-
I'll recommend play as entries for those 2 cards right now.
Three I think. there was two from AW and Large Tree.
Weren't there three from AW? A black one (promo), a PG one, and a crimson one, or something?
-
Black: Wings of Calamity
Crimson: Defiant & Large Tree
Pale Green: Masquerading
-
thats what you were complaining about oh noes those cards all suck
-
Black: Wings of Calamity
Crimson: Defiant & Large Tree
Pale Green: Masquerading
Wings of Calamity doesn't say "Cannot be ignored."
"Place this card on a black brigade demon. Artifacts do not prevent that demon from blocking, and the special ability on that demon cannot be negated."
-
Sorry I didn't really read the cards, I just went and found the ones Bubble Boy talked about!
-
My bad. I just thought it was the same as the others.
-
OK, so Bryon has explained how the current rules have ignore abilities targeting only the player who played them. However, I still think that this would be a good point in the lifespan of Redemption to consider re-interpreting ignore abilities. If the suggestion below helps balance the most complained about strategy in the game, why not make the switch?
I still think that "ignore" could be re-interpreted to include 2 things.
1 - Targeting the hero to say that it is protected from all blocking evil characters.
2 - Targeting ECs so that they can't enter battle.
The first part would mean that they still couldn't be blocked by anyone in play, or be hurt by any blocker at all (unless there was an interrupt). But the second part would only target ECs that were in play, meaning that you could still block from hand.
-
If the suggestion below helps balance the most complained about strategy in the game, why not make the switch?
1) Because there is nothing wrong with ignore in it's present state. People haven't learned to deal with it or they're stubborn and choose not to build their decks in a way that does.
2) Because the "most complained about strategy in the game" changes. It used to be FBTN. Then it was Speed. For almost a year it was U&T. Presently it's TGT and ignore.
If you take the axe to every tree that rubs you the wrong way, eventually there won't be a forest anymore.
-
Excellent points, Gabe - especially the second one. Here's a few more:
3) Changing major rulings like this IS a negative for a lot of people
4) Having "ignore" and "cannot be blocked by" mean the same thing is simpler, and has worked for over a decade.
5) Pre-bock ignore is not a problem if you have access to more of yoru evil characters. Territory destruction is most of the issue with TGT
6) We know what cards are coming this summer. We don't need to chop down the tree now. Cards will prune it nicely.
-
If you take the axe to every tree that rubs you the wrong way, eventually there won't be a forest anymore.
Gabe knows what he is talking about. From the time they are infants every young Iowan (Iowite, Iowegian?!?) is taught the story about what happened to the great forest that once covered their state. :)
Sorry for the interruption. Carry on, men.
-
The thing is, (and the only reason I support it, since Pre Block ignore doesn't effect me much), is that it is inconsistent(Or seems to be). All cards without a target default to play. I also think you should be able to be immune to pre block ignore (EG Color guard in a site vs an ignore of that color) and really fail to see why.
-
To add on to what Gabe said, changing how ignore is played is like treating the symptom without treating the cause. Ignore is perfectly balanced on its own. It is the combination with pre-block that makes ignore unbalanced. If you want to solve the problem, target pre-block, not ignore. Take away Jacob, ET and Hidden Treasures and you suddenly have little to no worry of ignore prior to blocking. Widow allows for many blocks, King David allows for many blocks, and Zebulun takes the entire time span of a game to become a true threat. FWIW, I question whether people even remember that Salome has an ignore ability.
Pre-bock ignore is not a problem if you have access to more of yoru evil characters. Territory destruction is most of the issue with TGT
Bryon is also dead on with this assessment.
-
The thing is, (and the only reason I support it, since Pre Block ignore doesn't effect me much), is that it is inconsistent(Or seems to be). All cards without a target default to play. I also think you should be able to be immune to pre block ignore (EG Color guard in a site vs an ignore of that color) and really fail to see why.
Could someone please explain again about this situation? I know it was talked about before but i think it is a good time to talk about it again.