Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: DaClock on January 05, 2010, 01:18:28 AM
-
Thank you for not saying that Negate = Interrupt + Prevent. The improved definitions should clear up a lot of misconceptions for new players.
-
looks good
-
Well, at least we know it's coming now...
-
One small thing that could be added.
In the section for Draw, it may be appropriate to mention the hand limit in there, as Rob as made that an official rule now.
-
One small thing that could be added.
In the section for Draw, it may be appropriate to mention the hand limit in there, as Rob as made that an official rule now.
Good catch.
-
Tim,
Thanks for taking the time to do this man! :) I also wanted to point out that you did a superb job of not using a "For example". This was suprisingly more helpful for me than I thought it would be. Great job, can't wait to read the finished version. :)
-
Is this going to include a card index section that says what categories cards are in (and conversely, what cards are in categories)?
-
This section of the REG seems to be well made. I like how everything you need to know about an ability is found on a single page, and is written in a way that is easy to understand. I do hope that there will also be a list of cards. I would imagine each card having it's own page with a picture of the card, the special ability of the card (with hyperlinks to the almanac on appropriate keywords), and any "play as" or "errata" that might exist.
As a small suggestion, I think that the "Return" ability encompasses too much and should be split apart into a few different keywords. For instance "Withdrawl" for return to territory or hand, "Restack" for return to top of deck or bottom of deck, and "Shuffle" for shuffling back into the deck. Lumping all 5 of these different actions into 1 keyword seems imprecise.
Edit: Also, I see that you put in your idea of making "hold" a special ability on all cards, which would make it a special ability for a temple to "hold" an artifact. I'm not sure that this is a good idea to change.
-
I really like this... it's gonna be easy I think just searching for key words. Would another clause to the activate an artifact section be good, saying that an "activate an artifact on a ______" ability doesn't negate the need for the artifact to match qualifications for that fortress? Or is that unnecessary... I just say that cause there was a long thread about this recently.
-
Perhaps in the "Cannot be Negated" section you could clarify that a "[Something] cannot be negated" special ability inherently has "cannot be negated status" itself as well? I know that confused me for the longest time.
-
That applies to CBP and CBI as well. Those abilities themselves CBN, although the rest of the ability is governed by the CBP or CBI.
-
Can we be able to search for a specific card by card title? I.E. I put in "John" I get "John" not Banding, Cannot be blacked.
-
Cannot be blacked.
That could be the funniest freudian slip I have ever heard!..... :D :D :D
-
Hey,
Is this going to include a card index section that says what categories cards are in (and conversely, what cards are in categories)?
We are working on a card list/card index update that will classify cards by the new set of abilities.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Thanks for the response - I wouldn't want to lose that feature. (I assume that all Play As and Errata entries would have to be intact, so the card index would exist, but the categories I wanted to make sure about.)
-
"Play as" is getting more attention. Previously, we reworded cards that were hard to understand. The new release will include more play as to show what keywords are meant to be used and include parenthetical comments in brackets (e.g., default conditions that are not explicitly printed on a card). Errata is what it always was - fixing something that was a problem.
The card list will be listed a little differently, sorting cards by "set" in addition to alphabetical and by special ability classification. Since the existing REG has card listings up-to-date, I likely won't put out a teaser. I'll put a draft when it is ready.
Mike
-
Was pre-block CTB always this yumtacular or is that a new update?
-
Was pre-block CTB always this yumtacular or is that a new update?
Do you mean the "cannot be interrupted after a blocker is presented" part of it? If it's not an update, it must be a clarification, because I had never heard of that rule, and had often played it differently.
-
Was pre-block CTB always this yumtacular or is that a new update?
I had never heard of that rule, and had often played it differently.
I've also played that differently, and think we still should. Pre-block CTB SHOULD be able to be negated. Pre-block is too powerful already without adding more teeth to it.
-
Hey,
Was pre-block CTB always this yumtacular or is that a new update?
It is a change.
"A choose opponent ability used before a blocker is presented cannot be interrupted..." is a fairly natural extension of the "All play an enhancement abilities cannot be interrupted" rule.
Just like you can't unplay cards, you can't unblock.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Is it just me, or are we taking a HUGE step backward (maybe two or three) with how converting SA's work? Going from something as clearly defined as "does not specifically target Heroes" to something as painfully vague as "does not go against the nature of a Hero?" Come on.
-
Hey,
Is it just me, or are we taking a HUGE step backward (maybe two or three) with how converting SA's work? Going from something as clearly defined as "does not specifically target Heroes" to something as painfully vague as "does not go against the nature of a Hero?" Come on.
The "does not go against the nature of a Hero" was written with the intention of it being a sort of identifier. In all likelihood that statement will be reverted back to the status quo before the official release.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Ah, good. Had me worried for a moment.
-
So you're telling me HPP no longer protects Sadducees from Crown of Thorns?
-
So you're telling me HPP no longer protects Sadducees from Crown of Thorns?
Where do you get that idea? This seems to say the opposite.
Protection from effects protects from game rules that result in those effects and from cards with special
abilities that result in those effects.
HPP's "protect from discard" clause is a protection from an effect which would protect from game rules that results in that effect.
-
Ah, I misread that clause. I thought it said that protection protects from effects, not game rules that would result in those effects.
*EDIT* I went back and re-read it. It was the first clause that was confusing:
Protection from cards only protects from being targeted by the special abilities of those cards, not from
game rules influenced by those cards.
-
Right. If HPP said "Protect your pharisees/sadducees from discard by Artifacts" then it wouldn't protect from Crown of Thorns, since Crown of Thorns isn't really discarding them, it's just influencing the game rule of characters being discarded when their toughness reaches zero.