Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: TXJonathan on July 10, 2010, 08:39:55 PM

Title: Article #2 answers
Post by: TXJonathan on July 10, 2010, 08:39:55 PM
Here's my guess on what the special abilities on the sites might be.


SPECIAL ABILITY: Protect Evil Characters from conversion.  Cannot be prevented.

SPECIAL ABILITY: Protect Lost Souls from shuffle by an opponent. Protect opponent's draw pile from search abilities.

SPECIAL ABILITY: Protect Disciples from capture and discard abilities on opponent's cards. Cannot be interrupted.

Even if those aren't the real special abilities, they could be nice cards.





 
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: lightningninja on July 11, 2010, 12:22:56 AM
They're not.  ;)
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: Master KChief on July 11, 2010, 12:28:30 AM
one almost is.
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: Isildur on July 11, 2010, 12:38:25 AM
one almost is.
Almost...
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: BubbleBoy on July 11, 2010, 08:16:24 AM
I find it interesting that they are using sites for protection this set instead of fortresses. Very interesting indeed...
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: TheMarti on July 11, 2010, 09:08:47 AM
It makes sense though. Sites ("locations") offer a certain (minimal) amount of protection, whereas fortresses (buildings) offer more. *shrug*
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on July 11, 2010, 09:13:04 AM
Sites are also easier to kill
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: The Warrior on July 11, 2010, 02:24:58 PM
Sites are also easier to kill
i disagree
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: Red Dragon Thorn on July 11, 2010, 03:21:52 PM
Then frankly you don't know what you're talking about.

Sites are so much weaker then fortress'
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: SomeKittens on July 11, 2010, 03:33:15 PM
Heck, the Pyramids are still standing.  Not so much for the Wall of "Protection".
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: lightningninja on July 11, 2010, 03:57:13 PM
I think he was talking about in the game of Redemption, in which case yeah I'd say there's more fortress killers in the game.

If he was talking about in real life, yeah obviously sites are weaker.  ;D
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: Rawrlolsauce! on July 11, 2010, 03:59:16 PM
With my current deck, I can negate some forts. I can negate no sites.
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: Red Dragon Thorn on July 11, 2010, 03:59:50 PM
There's more fotress killers yes, but they're all horrible.

Most of them are either too specific (Breaking the Walls comes to mind) or have restrictsions on who can use them. Additonally, since sites go into battle for access they're really weak there with all the discard and remove all cards in battle options.

Additionally virtually nothing can touch the N.T. fortress'
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: Rawrlolsauce! on July 11, 2010, 04:02:24 PM
The only common site stopper that comes to my mind is Trumpet Blast, which is hit-or-miss. It is a proven fact that 100% of useful fortresses are good, and  IOJ/DS rawk.

>:3
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: Red Dragon Thorn on July 11, 2010, 04:04:32 PM
Proven fact?

The Gates of Hell would like to say "Hi"

Also, Land Dispute, Dannites Attack, Jacob's Dream. And thats' just off the top of my head.
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: Master KChief on July 11, 2010, 04:05:47 PM
he said good fortresses.

but i would have to say land dispute is both the best site/fortress manipulator in the game.
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: Rawrlolsauce! on July 11, 2010, 04:07:54 PM
Proven fact, as it is both a fact and proven. Other proven facts include: Rawrlolsauce is awesome, Fezzes are cool, black is weak, and his power level > 9000.

How often do you see any of those cards, except Land Dispute? Maybe its because I haven't played a lot of site decks, but I can count the number on one hand. And with Land Dispute, they're going to go after your access site and you know it ;).
Title: Re: Article #2 answers
Post by: Master KChief on July 11, 2010, 04:10:56 PM
well, i would say land dispute-rs now have a reason to nab non-site accessors come disciples.
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal