Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Gabe on March 21, 2013, 11:04:23 PM
-
The second errata issued to A New Beginning has at least one major flaw that allows it to be exploited with Book of the Law. Rob and the elders became aware of this at Nationals 2012. We decided to leave things as they were until it proved to be problematic. At the T2 only tournament, "Combo Master Kirk Dennison" successfully abused the loophole created by faulty wording in our errata.
If making a rescue attempt, remove this card from the game to shuffle all cards in play, set aside areas, and hands into decks. End the battle. All players draw 8. End the turn. Begin a new turn.
After some discussion about what the best course of action will be to fix yet another problem with the most errata'd card in Redemption, the elders have agreed unanimously to issue the following new errata to A New Beginning:
If making a rescue attempt, remove this card from the game to shuffle all cards in play, set aside areas, and hands. If no Heroes remain in battle, end the battle, all players draw 8, and you begin a new turn.
This has been updated on the official errata thread (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/official-errata/errata-reworded-special-abilities/msg471510/#msg471510).
P.S. - please don't shoot the messenger :)
-
I just really appreciate the topic title, mostly. Thanks for the update Gabe, and may the erratas be ever in your favor.
-
Does ANB shuffle face-down artifacts?
-
Does ANB shuffle face-down artifacts?
Yes.
-
So ANB for most Errata'd card forever?
-
Heheheh, glad I pointed out the base of this combo last year. Love having played a part in getting a new errata.
-
Does ANB shuffle face-down artifacts?
Yes.
Just throwing out there that, since the wording is being redone anyway, it would probably be advantageous to add "and artifact piles" to the wording above. It still does not specifically target artifact piles, which are not "in play", but the standard ruling is still that those cards are shuffled. I think that's the only thing that is still in contention about this card, so just throwing out there that we could nip that in the bud too...
Please don't shoot this messenger either...
-
Building an all-artifact deck. See you next T2.
-
Since it is being Errated again can we please fix the inconsistency with this card targeting Artifact Piles and not specifying it does? When it was brought up in the past that ANB could shuffle artifact piles but split altar couldn't even though they contain the same wording it was brushed off. Can we fix it now please, since you are making an errata any way?
-
I just really appreciate the topic title, mostly.
When I saw the title, I stopped reading after ANE (mostly to try and figure out what it meant). I came up with "A New Ending", being a pun on "A New Beginning" and also indicating that this is the "errata to end all erratas" for ANB.
-
Well I guess it is time to unveil my deck that took the T2 only by storm (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/complete-decks/joe%27s-fresh-start-%28aka-anb-deck-that-broke-the-game-again%29/msg502992/#msg502992).
Kirk
-
Wait, didn't I or SomeKittens already bring this up or did we successfully keep it to ourselves in hopes of some day using it in a tournament? Cause he and I noticed that loophole back when we were active players and exploited it in personal games frequently.
Edit: nevermind, it wasn't the *exact* problem with the errata I was thinking of
-
You did post on this thread (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/strategies-and-combos/anb-problem/msg476701/#msg476701). I was just the first to experience tournament success with it.
Funny how it seems that once players come up with a great idea that the deck is fine until it wins a major tournament. Then changes happen (rule change or errata) to nerf that deck. Said no one concerning TGT ever but yes concerning T2 combo decks. ::)
Kirk
-
I quit.
-
I quit.
Way to go guys, it worked!
But STAMP, you shouldn't look at it as a new errata so much as the errata that should have been made in the first place... ::)
-
Building an all-artifact deck. See you next T2.
The deck combines the two best strategies for a T2 deck: Characterless and ANB!
-
Since it is being Errated again can we please fix the inconsistency with this card targeting Artifact Piles and not specifying it does? When it was brought up in the past that ANB could shuffle artifact piles but split altar couldn't even though they contain the same wording it was brushed off. Can we fix it now please, since you are making an errata any way?
this
-
Why is it when a card is exploited for T2 it's immediately addressed with an errata, but when a card is exploited for T1 it isn't or we just try to print lolcounters in the next set? #doublestandard
-
Why is it when a card is exploited for T2 it's immediately addressed with an errata, but when a card is exploited for T1 it isn't or we just try to print lolcounters in the next set? #doublestandard
FWIW, Kirk's combo could have worked just as well in T1 with a few tweaks. The main reason these combos generally aren't as reliable in T1 is that you can less afford to handle a bad early draw since your opponent has to rescue two fewer LS's. Also, the only card that has really been errata'd specifically for T2 combos (that I can think of) is ANB, and that's simply because of the various ways it has been abused to not let your opponent play the game. When you refer to broken cards in T1, I assume you mean TGT and/or Thaddeus. And yeah, it did take a few sets (primarily because certain counters were perhaps tested as being more useful than they ended up being) awhile, but I guess I wouldn't call Siege Army or CwD lolcounters.
-
Why is it when a card is exploited for T2 it's immediately addressed with an errata, but when a card is exploited for T1 it isn't or we just try to print lolcounters in the next set? #doublestandard
FWIW, Kirk's combo could have worked just as well in T1 with a few tweaks. The main reason these combos generally aren't as reliable in T1 is that you can less afford to handle a bad early draw since your opponent has to rescue two fewer LS's. Also, the only card that has really been errata'd specifically for T2 combos (that I can think of) is ANB, and that's simply because of the various ways it has been abused to not let your opponent play the game. When you refer to broken cards in T1, I assume you mean TGT and/or Thaddeus. And yeah, it did take a few sets (primarily because certain counters were perhaps tested as being more useful than they ended up being) awhile, but I guess I wouldn't call Siege Army or CwD lolcounters.
Highway, Trust, Stillness? Sin in the camp? Don't say that ANB is the ONLY card.
-
Can someone explain to me why the switch from this:
ALL players shuffle ALL cards in the field of play, set-aside areas and their hands (except this one) 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.
To this:
If making a rescue attempt, remove this card from the game to shuffle all cards in play, set aside areas, and hands. If no Heroes remain in battle, end the battle, all players draw 8, and you begin a new turn.
Is a better option than just banning the card? I recognize all the reasons for why people are opposed to banning, but as it stands, the card has so many extra stipulations on it (the biggest one being the remove from the game clause) that any new player is going to be completely baffled by it anyway.
-
Why is it when a card is exploited for T2 it's immediately addressed with an errata, but when a card is exploited for T1 it isn't or we just try to print lolcounters in the next set? #doublestandard
FWIW, Kirk's combo could have worked just as well in T1 with a few tweaks. The main reason these combos generally aren't as reliable in T1 is that you can less afford to handle a bad early draw since your opponent has to rescue two fewer LS's. Also, the only card that has really been errata'd specifically for T2 combos (that I can think of) is ANB, and that's simply because of the various ways it has been abused to not let your opponent play the game. When you refer to broken cards in T1, I assume you mean TGT and/or Thaddeus. And yeah, it did take a few sets (primarily because certain counters were perhaps tested as being more useful than they ended up being) awhile, but I guess I wouldn't call Siege Army or CwD lolcounters.
Highway, Trust, Stillness? Sin in the camp? Don't say that ANB is the ONLY card.
Also see healing rule change and hand limit. (T2 combo decks prompted this).
Kirk
-
When you refer to broken cards in T1, I assume you mean TGT and/or Thaddeus.
I was thinking of Oak specifically when I wrote that, but yes, those are also valid.
And yeah, it did take a few sets (primarily because certain counters were perhaps tested as being more useful than they ended up being) awhile, but I guess I wouldn't call Siege Army or CwD lolcounters.
ASA is nigh useless against TGT since territory sniping is what they do best and he'll never have a chance to be dropped. Much less sustain a specific identifier in territory to trigger his ability. TGT still swings easily under CwD and is prone to oft-used utility cards like CapArk, DoN, and Passover Hymn/Live Coal used in battle.
-
Do they even play T1 in Minnesota? :o
-
I feel like T1 and T2 in Redemption are like PvE and PvP in MMOs respectively. People find ways to abuse things in PvP (T2) and the designers nerf them (usually with hotfixes, i.e.: erratas) with the side-effect of nerfing PvE (T1), but when something outperforms other things in PvE (T1) they call it "that's just how it is" and don't re-balance until the next patch (expansion).
-
Has there ever been a card errata'd because of an exploitation in T1?
-
Has there ever been a card errata'd because of an exploitation in T1?
The first errata to ANB was due to it's ability to give a player a second consecutive term when it did not say "If making a rescue attempt."
-
I also conveniently forgot about Mayhem.
-
Holy Grail and Grapes also.
-
Lost Souls (2-Liner and 3-Liner)
-
Are those cards errata'd because of a) an exploitation and b) solely because of Type 1?
-
Are those cards errata'd because of a) an exploitation and b) solely because of Type 1?
I guess it's hard to say that any card is ever given an errata solely because of T1. With the exception of Lost Soulseseses, I don't know of any cards that are useful in T1 that aren't also useful in T2, and you can have up to four of a lot of them. So any broken combo in T1 can be expanded in T2, which is why combo decks are more prevalent in T2.
Also something to point out, AutO is arguably even more deadly in T2, where you can have twice the ratio of AutO's to cards in deck, and Gideon/Samuel has 4 Edicts he can use. I usually only use 3 AutOs in my T2 decks, but I could see putting in a fourth. Thaddeus is ridiculous in T2, where you can more easily maintain a full fleet of Disciples (due to duplicates), however, Disciples are tempered quite a bit by CwD and ASA. TGT is generally weaker in T2, but that's just because defenses are naturally bigger and have more territory protection typically. But even if any of those cards were errata'd, it wouldn't necessarily be just because of T1.
Do they even play T1 in Minnesota? :o
We try to avoid it if at all possible. But every once in awhile we get a defending national champion to show up at our locals and game nights and insist on it, so he can beat us over the head with his newest rendition of FBTNB.
-
does ANB target face-down artifacts in the artifact pile? i dont see anything in the new errata that allows it to target those...
-
does ANB target face-down artifacts in the artifact pile? i dont see anything in the new errata that allows it to target those...
This again, as brought up by me and a couple others in this thread, but I'm not seeing an Elder comment yet. Can we fix this issue now and not deal with it again down the road :(
If we don't fix the artifact pile thing, there will be more threads (just like the last 3 times this card was errata'd) where we are told "we don't want to deal with the errata again". If we're going to fix it, can we fix it?
-
We're discussing the best way to deal with the whole artifact pile thing. Hopefully we'll return with something definitive soon :)
-
We're discussing the best way to deal with the whole artifact pile thing. Hopefully we'll return with something definitive soon :)
Thank you! :D I know we all didn't want to have this conversation again, that's the only reason I mention it again :laugh:
-
We're discussing the best way to deal with the whole artifact pile thing. Hopefully we'll return with something definitive soon :)
Bump any update?
-
Bump any update?
Still working on it...
-
Rest assured that Artifacts in the Artifact pile do shuffle. But we will iron out a solution that will keep the rules lawyers happy. ;)
-
Make it fix split altar. PLEASE.
-
We're discussing the best way to deal with the whole artifact pile thing. Hopefully we'll return with something definitive soon :)
So does that mean ANOTHER Errata? ;)
-
I think we should leave the SA for ANB the way it is printed, and just change every rule in the REG that affects it instead. ;)
-
I think we should leave the SA for ANB the way it is printed, and just change every rule in the REG that affects it instead. ;)
I agree with this. It's simpler in the long run.
-
I think we should all just mail every copy of ANB in existence to me so that I can change the special abilities to the new errata.....with fire.....
-
You'll have to pry my 47 ANBs out of my cold, dead hands.
-
....... bravo kirk!!
KingLeo 8)
-
I need 49 ANBs. It's just a good number to have.
-
You should give me seven so that you have 42, for that is the answer. :D
-
Face down cards that in the the field of play will no longer be considered "out of play". This is an archaic rule that's unintuitive. While it may have had a purpose at one time, it does not any longer. We will remove face down cards from the definition of "Out of Play" in the next REG update. Additionally, we will add the following definition for "Face Down Cards".
Face Down Cards
Face Down cards are cards in territories, battle, and set-aside areas that are face down either due to special ability, or are inactive artifacts in an artifact pile. Face down cards have no abilities, brigade, titles, or identifiers while they are face down. The only known attribute of a face down card is the card type. Face down cards are only targetable by abilities that specify they can target face down cards or inactive artifacts, or cards that can target any or all cards in a location. When a face down card enters battle, it is immediately flipped face up, unless otherwise specified by the special ability that flipped it face down.
This should resolve the concern about ANB shuffling inactive artifacts as well as clean up a number of other odd card interactions. It also gives a slight boost the underplayed site guard strategy.
-
Just to answer some of the questions/comments that might result:
-Does this help improve any National Promos?
No. Since any National Promos that this may have affected don't target any/all cards in a location, but rather only target artifacts in a location, they cannot target face down artifacts.
-How does this help improve site guarding?
A face down EC is allowed to block from territory just as a face down Hero is able to attack from territory. That means you can block with a face down EC in a site that isn't being attacked as your initial block. It also means that you have an EC in your territory that has no numbers, brigade, or identifiers, and that is able to enter battle with no numbers, brigade, or identifiers. So if there are any cards that may or may not place some sort of restrictions on which ECs can or can't block, those restrictions won't apply to face down ECs until they are flipped face up, at which point they are in battle.
-Can I discard face down card with Abom?
No. Since Abom doesn't allow you to target any card in a territory (due to the LS restriction) then it doesn't apply.
I'm sure there will be more questions, but those are a few of the ones I figured would be first. Any other questions should probably be in other threads (in order to leave this thread to address ANB).
-
With respect, why did this ruling come into being with the "national promo"? This does not make sense...either a card should be in play or it is not. I thought clarity of rulings were supposed to make the game simpler?
-
You know, elders could have taken this opportunity to fix how horrible Split Altar is, but they didn't. Why? The reason the card was made in the first place was to target cards like Urim and Thummim, and then it wasn't able to. The card became totally and completely useless. And it's a national promo! That's sad, in my opinion.
It's inconsistencies like these that makes the game difficult to keep newer players involved in - they get to tournament level and don't understand half of what is going on.
I know we're against banning cards and whatnot, but if ANB is really causing this many issues, how come we aren't considering getting rid of it totally? This is what, the third errata in 2 years? I think there's a problem.
-
-Can I discard face down card with Abom?
No. Since Abom doesn't allow you to target any card in a territory (due to the LS restriction) then it doesn't apply.
Just to make sure I understand the logic here... Let's say that I set Ahimelek aside from hand with Ambush. The next turn, Ahimelek enters battle and remains face down, as Ambush instructs not to flip it up until an evil character is presented. My opponent blocks with Antiochus IV Epiphanes (and another Greek is in play). Even though we both know that my face-down card is a hero, my opponent nonetheless cannot discard it?
Ambush - "Set aside a male Hero (face down) from your hand for one turn. Hero returns to territory face down. Hero enters battle face down with access to any site. When opponent presents an Evil Character in battle, Hero is flipped face up."
Antiochus IV Epiphanes - "If another Greek Evil Character is in play, discard a Hero. Opponent may discard a card of matching brigade from hand or territory instead. Cannot be negated."
-
That is correct. The same principle applies to Christian Martyr, AotL, and cards that just say "discard an artifact" being unable to discard face down cards whose card types are known.
-
I really don't get why people are so up in arms about Split Altar. I made the original design of the card. After changes were made to it, I also told the "elders at the time" that it didn't work as intended, before it went to print (I was assured that it did). I have more reason to be miffed about it than anyone but I've moved on.
Split Altar - "Shuffle all Artifacts of each opponent into owners’ deck. You may play the next Enhancement. Cannot be negated."
How exactly do you propose we make that shuffle the Artifact pile without giving it errata (which Rob said he will not do)? If it said "shuffle all Artifacts in play of each opponent" then it would work based on this new change. If there was a top down way to "fix" Split Altar, I assure you that I would support it. Thus far I have not seen a way, and honestly, it's not that big of a deal.
-
Gabe, I get that. I really do. I am just confused how it's apples/oranges and not apples and apples. Especially if you are saying if it said "shuffle all artifacts in play of each opponent" would work with the new description of face-down. Because isn't the default of not seeing a location on a card's ability become "in play", not active? I would completely understand if SA said active, but it doesn't. That's my confusion how this change affects one situation, but not the other...
-
But don't all SA automatically direct to "in play" unless otherwise specified? Since face down cards are now in play, and Split Altar doesn't say "active", it should target the full pile.
-
Split Altar indicates all artifacts of each opponent. Because all abilities automatically default into play, that would mean that Split Altar could very easily be interpreted to shuffle artifact piles under the new rule. The only reason that I can say that it doesn't is because the Elders don't want it to, for whatever reason.
-
To be clear, what Gabe said isn't the reason Split Altar doesn't work the desired way. The reason it doesn't work as desired is because it doesn't say all cards in an Artifact Pile/territory/play/etc. The goal of the definition was not to change any rules, the goal was to have a rule that explained a justification for the status quo (that ANB shuffled face down cards, that face down ECs were flipped face up when they entered battle, that face down Heroes don't have brigades to play TC enhancements, etc, etc).
FWIW, I don't see how allowing SA to shuffle face down artifacts really makes it that much better. Most T1 decks use no more than ~5 artifacts? Ones that use more usually use Temples/Charms/etc. that actually make Split Altar relatively useful (since it can shuffle all of the artifacts in multiple places). Regardless of whether or not it shuffles piles, the most useful part would have to be the ability to negate and shuffle active arts, right? The fact that it can be played off of HT and allows you to play the next enhancement should make it even better. Yet I haven't seen it in a tournament deck except for once, and I sincerely doubt I would see it in a tournament deck if it were changed.
Also to be clear, the Elders have nothing against the card. It's not that we want to make sure it never works the way seemingly everyone wishes it does. As Gabe pointed out, he tried to "fix" it a long time ago. It's just that the only ways to make it do what everyone wishes it would are errata or a rule change. Errata is out, as the policy is that errata is only used to unbreak cards, not make them better or worse. And every rule change has consequences that can affect many, many cards. If we allowed Split Altar to shuffle artifact piles, we'd have to allow Christian Martyr and AotL to discard Ambushed/Site Guard Heroes. Would that be so bad? Maybe not, but then we have made Split Altar marginally better and other cards marginally worse. So it was decided that we would maintain the status quo that has worked out well to this point, with the lone exception of Split Altar becoming a major source of contention for a reason that I've never really been able to figure out.
-
To be clear, what Gabe said isn't the reason Split Altar doesn't work the desired way. The reason it doesn't work as desired is because it doesn't say all cards in an Artifact Pile/territory/play/etc.
This distinction makes sense to me now, though I still think it's convoluted. ANB really needs banned.
-
To be clear, what Gabe said isn't the reason Split Altar doesn't work the desired way. The reason it doesn't work as desired is because it doesn't say all cards in an Artifact Pile/territory/play/etc.
ANB really needs banned.
If it wasn't for the crotchety, old, semi-retired player out in the NW, maybe it would be. But he has a very powerful lobby that continually supplies Rob with peanut M&Ms, so it's not going to happen.
But seriously, if cards were ever to be banned, ANB would more than likely be one of the first. Trust me when I say that having to go back and fix the same card over and over again (thanks, Kirk >:() isn't how most of the Elders would prefer spending their time. And I wouldn't be silly enough to say that this errata is the last one we will ever need or anything like that. But the fact is, Rob has stated he doesn't like the idea of new players opening a pack, getting a shiny new card, and then finding out that they can't use it. I would have been especially sad if I wasn't allowed to use the ANB I drafted in Sealed at 2011 Nats, which helped me win a game.
-
To be clear, what Gabe said isn't the reason Split Altar doesn't work the desired way. The reason it doesn't work as desired is because it doesn't say all cards in an Artifact Pile/territory/play/etc.
This distinction makes sense to me now, though I still think it's convoluted. ANB really needs banned.
Not to me, what does the word "cards" have to do with anything? It's implied they are cards that are Artifacts. I don't see the difference. And further, I think a large reason for the uproar for SA has been it could not target Urim and Thumim, which is still once of the most annoying cards in the game and can only be targeted using one of two evil cards if you are playing those themes (Babylonians and Assyrians if I remember correctly). No one ever has to worry about their U/T being targeted.
-
Rob has stated he doesn't like the idea of new players opening a pack, getting a shiny new card, and then finding out that they can't use it.
How about a new player opening an ANB and having no idea that it doesn't work the way it says it does on the card?
-
To be clear, what Gabe said isn't the reason Split Altar doesn't work the desired way. The reason it doesn't work as desired is because it doesn't say all cards in an Artifact Pile/territory/play/etc.
This distinction makes sense to me now, though I still think it's convoluted. ANB really needs banned.
Not to me, what does the word "cards" have to do with anything?
It's what distinguishes ANB from almost every other special ability that allows it to shuffle everything, even face down cards. Like I mentioned, we would either have to allow SA to shuffle face down cards and allow CM to discard an Ambushed Hero, or we keep things the way they are in regards to both of those situations. The decision was to keep things as they are.
And further, I think a large reason for the uproar for SA has been it could not target Urim and Thumim, which is still once of the most annoying cards in the game and can only be targeted using one of two evil cards if you are playing those themes (Babylonians and Assyrians if I remember correctly). No one ever has to worry about their U/T being targeted.
Simon the Zealot does a fine job at stopping U&T, as will at least one of the new cards that I can think of. Joseph's Silver Cup also stops it. And they do a better job than SA would, since it would come back after SA shuffled it (in some cases on the very next turn).
How about a new player opening an ANB and having no idea that it doesn't work the way it says it does on the card?
Most new players probably aren't going to come up with the convoluted combos that have spurred the many changes, and will probably just be happy that there is a cool way to reset the game after a potentially bad draw. In many if not most of the times ANB has been used, it has been used simply to reset the game, no more, no less. It can still be used that way just as well as the day it was printed, it just doesn't allow you to do it over and over again or gain any broken benefits like discarding an entire opposing deck or winning battles before they start.
-
But the fact is, Rob has stated he doesn't like the idea of new players opening a pack, getting a shiny new card, and then finding out that they can't use it.
Here's the issue I have with this though - any kid who gets involved with the game enough to find out it isn't legal is going to quickly find out that the card has been bastardized beyond recognition, which is going to have its own problems. The fact that the ability only kicks in during a rescue attempt and causes the card to be removed from the game (among lesser things that most new players probably won't encounter) means that the card doesn't even work the way it is printed anyway. Rob may not like the idea of a new player opening a pack and getting a card they can't use, but I'm not sure that opening a pack and getting a card that they have no idea how to use it is much better.
Not to me, what does the word "cards" have to do with anything?
It's not "cards" it's "artifact piles". The logic goes that Split Altar wouldn't target face-down artifacts because it doesn't specify a specific location, just a specific card type, which isn't covered under the new rules.
-
Rob may not like the idea of a new player opening a pack and getting a card they can't use, but I'm not sure that opening a pack and getting a card that they have no idea how to use it is much better.
Maybe not, but it also probably isn't that much worse either. Ultimately, banning a card can only be done by one person, and one person only. Rob has given his reasons for not doing so in the past, and while those reasons may someday change, they have yet to do so.
-
Rob may not like the idea of a new player opening a pack and getting a card they can't use, but I'm not sure that opening a pack and getting a card that they have no idea how to use it is much better.
Maybe not, but it also probably isn't that much worse either. Ultimately, banning a card can only be done by one person, and one person only. Rob has given his reasons for not doing so in the past, and while those reasons may someday change, they have yet to do so.
Rob has expressed a more... enlightened attitude towards the possibility of banning cards. I'm not even suggesting we start banning cards to balance the meta, I'm just suggesting we ban ANB for the very specific reason that it causes problems and no longer does anything close to what is printed on it.
-
Can I just make the statement that the reason that people still bring up examples like Split Altar is because it's a national promo, and therefore it should, hypothetically, be better than, say, a starter deck card? That is, in my opinion, why it keeps coming up, and especially why it's come up in this context.
-
Rob may not like the idea of a new player opening a pack and getting a card they can't use, but I'm not sure that opening a pack and getting a card that they have no idea how to use it is much better.
Maybe not, but it also probably isn't that much worse either. Ultimately, banning a card can only be done by one person, and one person only. Rob has given his reasons for not doing so in the past, and while those reasons may someday change, they have yet to do so.
Rob has expressed a more... enlightened attitude towards the possibility of banning cards. I'm not even suggesting we start banning cards to balance the meta, I'm just suggesting we ban ANB for the very specific reason that it causes problems and no longer does anything close to what is printed on it.
I understand the idea of banning ANB but i feel like its dangerous. its a slippery slope when cards start getting banned. I prefer not banning anything and trying to find ways to counter cards like auto. its more strategic and requires higher levels of thinking and planning. if we start banning cards it becomes easy to simply say "that card is broken ban it" and we end up eliminating strategy and deck building concepts
-
Can I just make the statement that the reason that people still bring up examples like Split Altar is because it's a national promo, and therefore it should, hypothetically, be better than, say, a starter deck card? That is, in my opinion, why it keeps coming up, and especially why it's come up in this context.
FWIW, out of the 7 National Promos, I'd probably rank Split Altar as middle of the pack (4 out of 7) as far as usefulness. That position wouldn't change in the slightest if it shuffled Artifact piles as well, as it still wouldn't allow you to search for Son of God/Discard all Evil Characters CBN-style/or be the best Hero in the game.* Should we errata Elijah to be a green Hero so that he is useful? Or make Walking on Water CBN? How about allow Mary's Prophetic Act to search an opponent's hand for an Evil Dom? The fact is we have National Promos that aren't that good, and we have State and Regional Promos that are terrible (I'd probably rank Frog Demons below any card from the G&H decks in terms of usefulness), while we have starter deck cards, commons, and local and district promos that are seen in a significant amount of decks.
*Okay, maybe only top 10. But I did feel quite a sense of vindication when Daniel showed up in more of the top decks at Nats last year than did Susanna or MMoJ.
-
I understand the idea of banning ANB but i feel like its dangerous. its a slippery slope when cards start getting banned. I prefer not banning anything and trying to find ways to counter cards like auto. its more strategic and requires higher levels of thinking and planning. if we start banning cards it becomes easy to simply say "that card is broken ban it" and we end up eliminating strategy and deck building concepts
This is exactly why I believe banning ANB is so safe. It's not being done for any other reason than the card has caused serious issues, and it seems inevitable that more issues will come up. Additionally, the card doesn't even do what it says (and hasn't for some time). It would be a ban for simplicity's sake.
-
I understand the idea of banning ANB but i feel like its dangerous. its a slippery slope when cards start getting banned. I prefer not banning anything and trying to find ways to counter cards like auto. its more strategic and requires higher levels of thinking and planning. if we start banning cards it becomes easy to simply say "that card is broken ban it" and we end up eliminating strategy and deck building concepts
This is exactly why I believe banning ANB is so safe. It's not being done for any other reason than the card has caused serious issues, and it seems inevitable that more issues will come up. Additionally, the card doesn't even do what it says (and hasn't for some time). It would be a ban for simplicity's sake.
I agree with this. Most erratas are fine, doing simple fixes on broken exploits (like holy grail, or Mayhem), or fixing some wording problem (like A Child is Born) without really changing the card too much. No person has to worry about the card they just got from a pack being illegal, or that card's ability being too different from the one printed.
A New Beginning isn't like that though. Its special ability isn't at all what is printed on the card. It has been errata'd multiple times because its ability is too easily broken. Rules have been changed (you can't rescue two turns in a row without your opponent having a turn in between) rather than get rid of the card. I doubt there is another card that will have such a unique situation as ANB were it so much simpler to just ban it, so I don't think there is any slippery slope here.
-
I knew someone would bring up the other promos, but they were in a different era, and SA was bad out of the gate. That is my only point with that. I don't consider it any sort of good - I consider cards like LuG (that just totally discard the artifact instead of shuffling it) better than it. That's a matter of opinion, though. But this conversation has happened again and again, they're never going to fix Split Altar no matter what is or isn't argued.
Also, I agree with Chris and Blake - it doesn't do what it says. Why do we still have it? If we're going to errata the junk out of it, why shouldn't we ban it? I don't know. These changes are causing more problems then solving them.
-
But the fact is, Rob has stated he doesn't like the idea of new players opening a pack, getting a shiny new card, and then finding out that they can't use it.
Is it really any better to have a new play open a pack, get a shiny new card, then figure out it no longer does what's printed on the card?
-
I knew someone would bring up the other promos, but they were in a different era, and SA was bad out of the gate. That is my only point with that. I don't consider it any sort of good - I consider cards like LuG (that just totally discard the artifact instead of shuffling it) better than it. That's a matter of opinion, though. But this conversation has happened again and again, they're never going to fix Split Altar no matter what is or isn't argued.
And my opinion is that it would still be almost as bad if it did shuffle artifact piles. Maybe a few more people would use it, but not many I would guess. In most situations, decks that have a lot of artifacts are criticized, since only one can be used at a time. And artifacts that are crucial to a deck strategy tend to be easily fetched, even after being shuffled. Even most T2 players use fewer than 8 artifacts, and that's including multiples of certain ones and considering the decks are twice as big.
Also, I agree with Chris and Blake - it doesn't do what it says. Why do we still have it? If we're going to errata the junk out of it, why shouldn't we ban it? I don't know. These changes are causing more problems then solving them.
It does do (almost) everything that it says. It shuffles all cards in play, hands and set-asides. It allows you to begin a new turn. It allows everyone to draw 8 cards. The only thing it doesn't do that it used to be able to is be abused in a variety of ways that are bad for the game.
But the fact is, Rob has stated he doesn't like the idea of new players opening a pack, getting a shiny new card, and then finding out that they can't use it.
Is it really any better to have a new play open a pack, get a shiny new card, then figure out it no longer does what's printed on the card?
Haha, you almost got me there. Nice one.
-
I think the fact that a card is a nationals promo should have no bearing on its power.
My reasoning: Rarity should not determine power. My reasoning for that is that it makes the game more about who can buy the cards they want rather than about the ability to build a deck and play well.
By making powerful cards rare all you do is manipulate supply (less rares are available than commons and such) and demand (the cards are in more top decks) to push the price of the good cards up and therefore decrease the number of players that can have top decks. (I'm not defining what a top deck is or anything like that, but I'm basing this on the idea that only N cards are going to make it into top decks and if many those N cards are expensive that will make top decks more expensive)
Split Altar is fine as it is, sure when it came out it would have been better had it included artifact piles, but now the big thing with Artifacts is having a bunch active with Temples and special activation artifacts (like Magic Charms and Iron Pan). Split Altar does a wonderful job of clearing out your opponent's artifacts at the beginning of an attack. If we really want to power up Split Altar it should be a Territory Class, that would make it much better than allowing it to shuffle artifact piles.
-
The masses are getting restless. Time to LOCK AND LOAD!
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fadvantageserviceltd.com%2Fimages%2Fmmpeanutks.gif&hash=508b63271aaca5d68688f1b6fd1754f25b3e2f76)
(P.S. I use 2x Split Altar in all my T2 Prophets decks. I would use 4x for the simple reason that it would make Uzzah defenders look like this:)
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-1pYH0TWSaNs%2FTcrXxE-3cYI%2FAAAAAAAAAkU%2F7llS2IwNdc0%2Fs200%2FCurlyHoward.jpg&hash=efa3dd8059a70986de3f94577f77d4d35c2c4587)