Author Topic: MAJOR RULE CHANGES - In effect NOW. Tell everyone! (Read 36538 times)

Bryon · « **Reply #200 on:** March 20, 2012, 07:07:17 PM »

Quote from: theselfevident on March 20, 2012, 04:24:50 PM

I think there should be some sort of deck out rule.

There isn't a rule for that. There is a card for that. It is called The Watchful Servant. If your opponent draws out quickly, he can't block you. Can't even use Unholy Writ. Toss in some healing or recursion and your dandy.

And then we made some CBI cards and now it doesn't work so well...

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #201 on:** March 20, 2012, 08:12:19 PM »

Quote from: Bryon on March 20, 2012, 07:07:17 PM

Quote from: theselfevident on March 20, 2012, 04:24:50 PM
I think there should be some sort of deck out rule.
There isn't a rule for that. There is a card for that. It is called The Watchful Servant. If your opponent draws out quickly, he can't block you. Can't even use Unholy Writ. Toss in some healing or recursion and your dandy.

And then we made some CBI cards and now it doesn't work so well...

The problem is a hero will always have flaws. Heroes can be Christian Martyred, heroes can be captured, heroes can be discarded from deck, etc. etc. I understand the need to implement some kind of rule that stops speed, but I think the one you guys just implemented is much too abuseable. A rule like, "You may not make a rescue attempt if you have zero cards left in your deck, unless your opponent also has zero cards" would be something to test out. "The first time your deck reaches zero cards, choose one Lost Soul to put back in your opponent's Land of Bondage" would be another one to test. I'm not saying these rules are necessarily better than the one you implemented, but I think they should be looked at as alternatives.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #202 on:** March 21, 2012, 01:27:34 PM »

Quote from: STAMP on March 20, 2012, 02:57:28 PM

Quote from: Master KChief on March 20, 2012, 02:55:55 PM
Just like Type A, we need a category for just senior citizens. Type Z?
Type AARP

Thanks for bringing a smile to my day

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #203 on:** March 23, 2012, 01:32:06 PM »

Quote from: cardsofmanykinds on March 18, 2012, 09:31:12 AM

i think #2 is very wrong since God can redeem our souls (no pun intended) wherever we are.

Mark 5:15 When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons, sitting there, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. 16 Those who had seen it told the people what had happened to the demon-possessed man--and told about the pigs as well. 17 Then the people began to plead with Jesus to leave their region. 18 As Jesus was getting into the boat, the man who had been demon-possessed begged to go with him. 19 Jesus did not let him, but said, "Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you." 20 So the man went away and began to tell in the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him. And all the people were amazed.

Just because he can doesn't mean he won't force us. The demon possessed man did the witnessing (Hero) when they rejected the Son of God(Dom). This is the same justification I used for /4 and NT.

Wings of Music · « **Reply #204 on:** March 23, 2012, 01:37:29 PM »

Calvinizim vs. Armeniazm?

This'll be good

* pops the pop corn *

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #205 on:** March 23, 2012, 01:42:36 PM »

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on March 23, 2012, 01:32:06 PM

Quote from: cardsofmanykinds on March 18, 2012, 09:31:12 AM
i think #2 is very wrong since God can redeem our souls (no pun intended) wherever we are.
Mark 5:15 When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons, sitting there, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. 16 Those who had seen it told the people what had happened to the demon-possessed man--and told about the pigs as well. 17 Then the people began to plead with Jesus to leave their region. 18 As Jesus was getting into the boat, the man who had been demon-possessed begged to go with him. 19 Jesus did not let him, but said, "Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you." 20 So the man went away and began to tell in the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him. And all the people were amazed.

Just because he can doesn't mean he won't force us. The demon possessed man did the witnessing (Hero) when they rejected the Son of God(Dom). This is the same justification I used for /4 and NT.

I personally don't feel like it's a big theological issue because frankly, this is a card game, and I'm not going to get all bent out of shape over some small issue like this (I'm still quitting the game if they print Hero Judas though). That said, I don't feel like your argument really stands up to scrutiny. Is it sacrilegious? No. Could it easily be misconstrued as sacrilegious? Yup.

theselfevident · « **Reply #206 on:** March 23, 2012, 02:05:29 PM »

Quote

...(I'm still quitting the game if they print Hero Judas though)...

Why? you could start him out as a hero, and then he gets converted to evil character... opposite of Saul/Paul...

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #207 on:** March 23, 2012, 04:45:51 PM »

Quote from: theselfevident on March 23, 2012, 02:05:29 PM

Quote
...(I'm still quitting the game if they print Hero Judas though)...

Why? you could start him out as a hero, and then he gets converted to evil character... opposite of Saul/Paul...

Because I don't think that it's right for Cactus, at this evolved stage in card creation, to print a character who is almost certainly in hell as a hero who rescues Lost Souls. I have absolutely no desire to debate this in this thread, so if someone wants to dispute my claim, PM me about it. I won't respond to any posts here.

Plus, that would be a PR nightmare so it'll never happen, so I feel perfectly okay making idle threats.

galadgawyn · « **Reply #208 on:** March 24, 2012, 09:52:00 AM »

1. and 3. This doesn't affect much of my deck building so not that big a deal to me. I also don't think rule 1. will have quite the impact some think it will. The biggest benefit for me is the possibility of them printing some cool powerful new Doms because players can't overload their deck with them. This should give them much more freedom in new Dom creation and that would make the rule worth it to me.

4. I think restricting all Doms on first round may have been better but I'm fine with the errata. Mayhems still great.

2. I really don't like it. I feel this will not stop speed/help defense like they think it will. The biggest problem is that it is going to cause more timeouts and that is not good for the game. In order to avoid timeouts, people will have to play soul generating speed decks. Extending the time per game or having time clocks like chess is the best (and I think only) way to really change the meta away from speed. Speed decks are not the best strategy to win; they are just the best way to win within the time limits. Also:

Quote

Quote from: dermo4christ on March 16, 2012, 03:26:28 AM
ugh....i soooo don't like the rule about not rescuing ur own souls. I just found out that you could do that...and not it's taken away from me....lol. Gosh!

This is relevant in our decision. Most new players do not intuitively conclude that they can rescue their own Lost Souls. Up until now, they had to be "corrected" on that point. While we believe this decision will improve the game, it has the added bonus of flowing in the direction that most new players already understand it.

I've heard this before and I understand the point but I think it misses something. In my experience, new players do not intuitively conclude: that you can band to opponents' characters, that AoC will discard your own evil characters, that Hamans Plot or Head of Gold can target heros or evil characters, etc..... Once a player understands the rules of targeting (Any, All, default to in play, etc) then it logically makes sense that SoG would rescue a lost soul in your own land of bondage. This rule change creates another rule exception to the mechanics of the game. I think a new player taught the general targeting rules would then be confused as to why SoG won't rescue their own soul. Of course it is not that big a deal to learn one extra rule but when there are many exceptions it can become difficult and burdensome to try to remember them all (which takes away from fun and fellowship). So I heavily favor more streamlined, consistent, top down, not changing rules.

I think it is also unfortunate that several? elders stated that these rules were only being tested this year and there would be no rule changes until after Nationals but then thats not what happens. All official rule changes only happening once a year is best. It is less difficult for people (including hosts) to keep up with, especially those without much presence on here. I originally thought Aug/Sept would be best, but considering that issues with the new set don't come up/get resolved until later then maybe Jan/Feb. would be best. Enough time to hash out the issues but be before main tournament season. I haven't seen a single rule change in the past several years that couldn't wait until the next scheduled update.

Arrthoa · « **Reply #209 on:** March 24, 2012, 09:57:34 AM »

I am fine with all the rulings but #2 is the one I dislike the most. I played at my playgroup and we used the new rules. Twice it was 4 RS to 4 RS I could have won both times if my NJ could have rescued my souls.

Wings of Music · « **Reply #210 on:** March 24, 2012, 01:50:27 PM »

I like #2 it's made several of my games much more exciting.

I am Knot a Blonde! · « **Reply #211 on:** March 24, 2012, 03:11:51 PM »

I would like to point out the fact that South Florida has yet to play a game of redemption since the rule change. Of course, we did not say "we quit bcause of the rule change"... but we just so happened to not play as much when the rule change came into effect.... interesting...

lp670sv · « **Reply #212 on:** March 24, 2012, 03:18:44 PM »

I've only played a few games because we already had a tournament scheduled for 2 days after these came out. haven't play a game since. Has absolutely nothing to do with the rules. What's your point? That South Florida may or may not be boycotting redemption because of the new rules?

Master KChief · « **Reply #213 on:** March 24, 2012, 03:51:03 PM »

I think he's just saying it was a coincidence.

Arrthoa · « **Reply #214 on:** March 24, 2012, 09:17:24 PM »

Quote from: I am Knot a Blonde! on March 24, 2012, 03:11:51 PM

I would like to point out the fact that South Florida has yet to play a game of redemption since the rule change. Of course, we did not say "we quit bcause of the rule change"... but we just so happened to not play as much when the rule change came into effect.... interesting...

My group is over on the west coast of Florida and it is just casual play no tournement stuff, but we still play according to any rule changes. Plus we try to meet with those on the east coast.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #215 on:** March 25, 2012, 12:08:07 AM »

Quote from: Arrthoa on March 24, 2012, 09:17:24 PM

My group is over on the west coast of Florida and it is just casual play no tournement stuff, but we still play according to any rule changes. Plus we try to meet with those on the east coast.

Central Florida plays by the rules, too. We just cross our arms and make grumpy faces when we have to make rulings we don't like.

--------------------

BTW, is South Florida or West Florida interested in hosting the Florida State Tournament this year? Central Florida is ready to host again if no one else can. We would likely have a June 29th & 30th tournament if that is the case.

Arrthoa · « **Reply #216 on:** March 25, 2012, 12:44:11 AM »

West Florida has no tournement hosts in its group but, there are two hosts I know of on the east coast that we have met with, delarosajon and I believe discipledrew

Jmbeers · « **Reply #217 on:** March 25, 2012, 03:06:42 AM »

@Galadgawyn and what he was saying about creating timeouts (my quote button isn't working?)

Anyways: I just hosted a local with 10 T1 players and 4 T2. We didn't have one timeout in the entire tournament. The closest we got was a booster game that was in its final round when a player won but nothing close timeout in the open categories

cookie monster · « **Reply #218 on:** March 25, 2012, 03:40:04 PM »

I personally do not like #2 at all, it weakens SoG and NJ. These are supposed to be the best cards in the game, but now there are others that might be better. Who is better then God? what will be better then the Holiest city, New Jerusalem?

Jmbeers · « **Reply #219 on:** March 25, 2012, 04:39:37 PM »

SoG is still the best card in the game. I can't see a debate at all to vote for a better card. But even then Jesus told us and his Disciples that we would do greater things than he did. Its through the power of God that we do but it is still through us. So there is actually an argument for other cards being "as good" as SoG.

uthminister [BR] · « **Reply #220 on:** March 26, 2012, 10:06:04 AM »

And now Rob knows what Moses felt like when he had to deal with all of the complainers in the wilderness. I applaud the rule changes as they were thought through, given a chance to play test through the player community, and with all things considered; implemented with confidence. Thanks for the strong leadership shown by Rob and the elders!

I am Knot a Blonde! · « **Reply #221 on:** March 26, 2012, 05:10:07 PM »

I will talk to the DeLaRosas about it, but, hoenstly the turnout will be much greater in central FL in my opinion because I would imagine it would be much harder for all of the youngins to make their way down here instead of 2 guys with jobs and me to make it up there. Just saying. But i will run the tournament idea by them, see what they think and let you know.

alpal455 · « **Reply #222 on:** April 01, 2012, 04:35:46 PM »

I dont understand why the changes are made now, I think that they should but introduced and officially said that these specific rule will be in effect after Nats.

Quote

1. Dominant cap is the same as the Site cap. You cannot include more dominants in a deck than you have lost souls.

I think the dominant cap is not a bad idea i would stay neutral to this change.

Quote

2. You cannot rescue lost souls in your own Land of Bondage. This used to apply only to your heroes. Now it includes dominants, too.

I dont understand the reason behind this rule, it goes against the SA on Son of God "Rescue ANY Lost Soul in Play." That means even your own.

Quote

3. Hosts are allowed to run their (local and district level) tournaments with this even more restrictive deck building rule for dominants:
Type 1: Max 2 good and 2 evil doms in deck
Type 2: Max 3 good and 3 evil doms in deck

Thats just plain mean. So I would have my 2 good dominants probably be SoG and NJ and if someone plays confusion and there goes both good dominants. Why would you even want to restrict people to that much?

Quote

4. Evil dominants cannot be played in the first round. This MAY also apply to good dominants, but that part is still being clarified.
Rather, Mayhem gets the following errata: If it is not the first round, each player must shuffle hand to draw six.

Well now Mayhem is only gunna be worth $5, 1st round Mayhem is the only reason its in peoples decks, besides getting it the 1st round it is never used. When I get Mayhem not in the first round I find myself usually discarding without using it. And once again I dont get the reasoning behind this.

All of these new rules are restricting the game to much, these rules remind me of our government, taking our freedoms away.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #223 on:** April 01, 2012, 04:56:30 PM »

Quote

I dont understand why the changes are made now, I think that they should but introduced and officially said that these specific rule will be in effect after Nats.

The reason is that Cactus, rightly, didn't want to have another Natz that was more determined by FTM ratio than anything else.

Red · « **Reply #224 on:** April 01, 2012, 07:56:42 PM »

A rebuttal to Alpal.

1:nothing to refute.

2:It stops speed. Simply. And for the record SoG can't rescue a few lost souls anyway(*/4 NT only) Also Any does not mean All, and Any can be restricted/protected from and insteaded.(examples include any card that lets you choose a target and can be restricted/protected/insteaded.)

3:Would someone PLEASE take that down. It's confusing people. And yes it's a horrible idea.

4:Do you understand why Mayhem was played anyway? Anyone who had it in his deck for just FTM was an idiot. Mayhem screws with hands, and gens souls. That was it's intended purpose and it still does that.

Final statement: These rules do not restrict our freedoms as players, instead the rules increase our freedoms. due to making balanced decks viable again.

News:

Author Topic: MAJOR RULE CHANGES - In effect NOW. Tell everyone! (Read 36538 times)

Chronic Apathy

Chronic Apathy

Chronic Apathy