Author Topic: So out of curiousity, why does Rob refuse to ban cards? (Read 5711 times)

Chronic Apathy · « **on:** March 20, 2011, 10:32:24 PM »

I'm just curious about this. With cards like Thad that everyone complains about, and cards like ANB that have broken the game on more than one occasion, I'm wondering why Rob has maintained a policy of not banning cards. I'm certainly not complaining or anything, I'm just curious.

JSB23 · « **Reply #1 on:** March 20, 2011, 10:35:51 PM »

It's for the children.
Don't ask me I don't understand what he means either

The Schaef · « **Reply #2 on:** March 20, 2011, 10:47:44 PM »

Because it has been possible to solve the problem without taking that step.

At one point that may not be possible. But so far, it has not been necessary.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #3 on:** March 21, 2011, 01:05:26 AM »

Quote from: The Schaef on March 20, 2011, 10:47:44 PM

At one point that may not be possible. But so far, it has not been necessary.

Also out of curiosity, what point was that?

To answer the OP's question, Cactus has fewer sets every year, so fewer big things like this happen. Then they fix it all in the next set (hopefully).

The Guardian · « **Reply #4 on:** March 21, 2011, 01:16:41 AM »

In addition to what Schaef stated, I believe another reason Rob has mentioned in the past is that he does not like the idea of a new player opening a pack and getting a great card only to later find out that it has been banned from tournament play.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #5 on:** March 21, 2011, 08:51:56 AM »

Quote from: JSB23 on March 20, 2011, 10:35:51 PM

It's for the children.
Don't ask me I don't understand what he means either

Quote from: The Guardian on March 21, 2011, 01:16:41 AM

I believe another reason Rob has mentioned in the past is that he does not like the idea of a new player opening a pack and getting a great card only to later find out that it has been banned from tournament play.

What does that have to do with children? That would make me angry.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #6 on:** March 21, 2011, 09:30:07 AM »

Quote from: The Guardian on March 21, 2011, 01:16:41 AM

In addition to what Schaef stated, I believe another reason Rob has mentioned in the past is that he does not like the idea of a new player opening a pack and getting a great card only to later find out that it has been banned from tournament play.

Wouldn't you also be quite disappointed to find that the card you see doesn't actually do what it says? Sure, your deck might at least be legal, but it'll be a piece of junk if the card you base it around has been errata'd to a pulp.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #7 on:** March 21, 2011, 09:43:35 AM »

Quote from: BubbleBoy on March 21, 2011, 09:30:07 AM

Quote from: The Guardian on March 21, 2011, 01:16:41 AM
In addition to what Schaef stated, I believe another reason Rob has mentioned in the past is that he does not like the idea of a new player opening a pack and getting a great card only to later find out that it has been banned from tournament play.
Wouldn't you also be quite disappointed to find that the card you see doesn't actually do what it says? Sure, your deck might at least be legal, but it'll be a piece of junk if the card you base it around has been errata'd to a pulp.

Interpretation of a card is quite a different scenario. I may be disappointed that Jacob's Ladder does not allow me to rescue my own Lost Soul cards like I thought it did, but to be told that you can't even have that card in your deck because it is banned sends a different message (I just wasted my money on that pack).

Errata is reserved for cards that try to do more than they were intended. If a player is at that point, then they should have access to the REG.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 21, 2011, 10:06:02 AM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on March 21, 2011, 09:43:35 AM

Errata is reserved for cards that try to do more than they were intended. If a player is at that point, then they should have access to the REG.

Not necessarily--nor even commonly. Sometimes "mistakes" are made when cards are created that have nothing to do with players magnifying or twisting a card's intent. Errata are used to fix those problems also.

As a simple example, the original ANB errata limited ANB to only working during rescue attempts. How was playing an ANB during a battle challenge (like you could with every other card in the game that didn't contain an explicit restriction) trying "to do more than they were intended." The different errata given to Sin in the Camp would be further examples of this same thing.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #9 on:** March 21, 2011, 01:25:43 PM »

Also: why doesn't Rob do set rotation?

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #10 on:** March 21, 2011, 01:27:41 PM »

Same answer.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #11 on:** March 21, 2011, 02:06:04 PM »

you cannot compare this game to any other tcg/ccg because believe me its not even close- although I love seeing the game move into a more cost:effect direction though i feel instead abilities should work like Cov of Eden+Suicidal and Chamber+IamHoly.
plug:

Yavneh
Type: Site • Brigade: Green • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: When this site is occupied and you use a search ability, You may place a 1/3 grey NT human Pharisee token into the Field of Battle. • Identifiers: Jew • Verse: • Availability: Token FTW booster packs ()

Men of the Great Assembly
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Black/Grey • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: If used by a Pharisee or Sadducee, place on High Priest Palace. If you control 20 or more Pharisee/Sadducee, you win the game. • Identifiers: NT, False Religious Practice • Verse: • Availability: Tokens FTW booster packs ()

Other games dont mind abuse of abilities aka going off because they 1) most of the time did it on purpose for all the players like me,kirk,sauce,crustpope,ringwraith and any other johnny who doesnt mind losing as long as they at least have an attempt to combo off

and 2)have the resources to fund a rotation of sets on a quarterly/bi-yearly basis if that was even the vision for the game. If Cactus wanted to, Im sure they could limit/restrict and rotate sets but Im guessing and glad that they want to include all sets into the game for all cards to be enjoyed by the players during the tournament season.

The Schaef · « **Reply #12 on:** March 21, 2011, 02:09:01 PM »

Quote from: SomeKittens on March 21, 2011, 01:25:43 PM

Also: why doesn't Rob do set rotation?

There's less than 3,000 cards in the entire set, and none so broken as to warrant a ban so far, even when included in the entire card catalog. If there's no severe cause to ban, there's even less cause to rotate sets out of the mix. Especially for a company like Cactus, who only does one set a year (and not always a full-size expansion), whereas the larger card games crank out 2-4 new sets a year.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #13 on:** March 21, 2011, 02:44:05 PM »

The main argument I see for set rotation is reprints. Stuff like Split Altar and misprints like Disciples Gabriel could be redone so that they do what they're supposed to do. There's also open divisions where you still can use any card.

CJSports · « **Reply #14 on:** March 21, 2011, 02:47:12 PM »

Quote from: BubbleBoy on March 21, 2011, 09:30:07 AM

Quote from: The Guardian on March 21, 2011, 01:16:41 AM
In addition to what Schaef stated, I believe another reason Rob has mentioned in the past is that he does not like the idea of a new player opening a pack and getting a great card only to later find out that it has been banned from tournament play.
Wouldn't you also be quite disappointed to find that the card you see doesn't actually do what it says? Sure, your deck might at least be legal, but it'll be a piece of junk if the card you base it around has been errata'd to a pulp.

Cough:ANB:Cough

JSB23 · « **Reply #15 on:** March 21, 2011, 03:15:57 PM »

Quote from: The Schaef on March 21, 2011, 02:09:01 PM

There's less than 3,000 cards in the entire set, and none so broken as to warrant a ban so far, even when included in the entire card catalog.

Thaddeus and TGT say Hi

The Schaef · « **Reply #16 on:** March 21, 2011, 03:52:06 PM »

Quote from: SomeKittens on March 21, 2011, 02:44:05 PM

The main argument I see for set rotation is reprints. Stuff like Split Altar and misprints like Disciples Gabriel could be redone so that they do what they're supposed to do. There's also open divisions where you still can use any card.

[shrug] We do that anyway. People just don't use the obsolete cards.

drb1200 · « **Reply #17 on:** March 21, 2011, 04:17:44 PM »

Quote from: JSB23 on March 21, 2011, 03:15:57 PM

Quote from: The Schaef on March 21, 2011, 02:09:01 PM
There's less than 3,000 cards in the entire set, and none so broken as to warrant a ban so far, even when included in the entire card catalog.

Thaddeus and TGT say Hi

Um...NJ?? Thad and TGT are fine.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #18 on:** March 21, 2011, 04:38:12 PM »

Quote from: JSB23 on March 21, 2011, 03:15:57 PM

Quote from: The Schaef on March 21, 2011, 02:09:01 PM
There's less than 3,000 cards in the entire set, and none so broken as to warrant a ban so far, even when included in the entire card catalog.

Thaddeus and TGT say Hi

My prediction: Thad becomes far less popular/effective upon the official release of a certain EC with a toughness of 10 that has a CBN ability to kick him and everyone else out of battle, can wear a weapon that is currently one of the best counters to Thad if you can find a way to keep it around, and will prove to be incredibly hard to get rid of with a generic character that can recur him, and be recurred. All we have to do is wait for Regionals...

CJSports · « **Reply #19 on:** March 21, 2011, 04:56:57 PM »

Thaddeus would be protected from goliath once he gets his disciples out wouldn't he?

Professoralstad · « **Reply #20 on:** March 21, 2011, 05:03:10 PM »

Quote from: CJSports on March 21, 2011, 04:56:57 PM

Thaddeus would be protected from goliath once he gets his disciples out wouldn't he?

If he can get all 11 out (or 8 and Crown of Thorns) then yes. I didn't say it was foolproof, but if you can manage to keep the number of Disciples down to reasonable levels, then Thaddeus is owned.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #21 on:** March 21, 2011, 06:17:01 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on March 21, 2011, 05:03:10 PM

... if you can manage to keep the number of Disciples down to reasonable levels ...

Lol...

JSB23 · « **Reply #22 on:** March 21, 2011, 06:18:57 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on March 21, 2011, 05:03:10 PM

Quote from: CJSports on March 21, 2011, 04:56:57 PM
Thaddeus would be protected from goliath once he gets his disciples out wouldn't he?

If he can get all 11 out (or 8 and Crown of Thorns) then yes. I didn't say it was foolproof, but if you can manage to keep the number of Disciples down to reasonable levels, then Thaddeus is owned.

You only need 7

SomeKittens · « **Reply #23 on:** March 21, 2011, 06:27:51 PM »

7 of 11? Hmm, sounds familiar...

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #24 on:** March 21, 2011, 07:29:21 PM »

Goliath will make it easier to keep from being overrun by Disciples early, but won't really do much mid-late game. If you don't have 7 Disciples out by turn 6ish you've probably already lost anyway.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #25 on:** March 22, 2011, 11:16:03 AM »

Quote from: JSB23 on March 21, 2011, 06:18:57 PM

Quote from: Professoralstad on March 21, 2011, 05:03:10 PM
Quote from: CJSports on March 21, 2011, 04:56:57 PM
Thaddeus would be protected from goliath once he gets his disciples out wouldn't he?

If he can get all 11 out (or 8 and Crown of Thorns) then yes. I didn't say it was foolproof, but if you can manage to keep the number of Disciples down to reasonable levels, then Thaddeus is owned.
You only need 7

Hmm, I thought Thaddeus said less than X not X or less. I was mistaken. Still, if you can target the right Disciples early (i.e. many decks will have multiple copies of Thad, Matthew, and James Son of A, but probably only one Peter or Andrew (and definitely only one Simon the Zealot) then you have a chance of keeping the numbers down.

In response to Pol, I was referring more to T2. Thad is much more manageable through other means in T1 IMO.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #26 on:** March 22, 2011, 11:33:27 AM »

I vote we change the rules and give experience credit for a successful taunt. That'd make it even easier.

slugfencer · « **Reply #27 on:** March 23, 2011, 12:24:38 PM »

So now since immunity works vs thad (per recent threads), if Goliath is wearing his armor in battle he would be immune to pumped up 11 discipled crowned thad, correct?

Goliath’s Armor (FF)
Type: Evil Enh. • Brigade: Black • Ability: 0 / 5 • Class: Weapon • Special Ability: Bearer is immune to purple brigade. Cannot be negated. • Play As: Bearer is immune to purple brigade. Cannot be negated. If placed on Goliath, Goliath may hold until discarded. • Identifiers: OT, Depicts a Weapon • Verse: I Samuel 17:5-6 • Availability: Faith of our Fathers booster packs (None)

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #28 on:** March 23, 2011, 12:35:40 PM »

Correct. And since the immunity is CBN--Goliath would win the battle.*

*More specifically--I do not know how to get around CBN immunity.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #29 on:** March 23, 2011, 01:02:48 PM »

Coat of Many Colors + Plague of Frogs
Discard his armour in territory.
Attack with a red disciple.
Don't play disciples.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #30 on:** March 23, 2011, 01:44:06 PM »

and grapes/aotl or grail

SomeKittens · « **Reply #31 on:** March 23, 2011, 02:01:30 PM »

As well as Ark of the Covenant. (Who uses that anyway...)

JSB23 · « **Reply #32 on:** March 23, 2011, 04:03:18 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on March 21, 2011, 04:38:12 PM

and will prove to be incredibly hard to get rid of with a generic character that can recur him, and be recurred.

Nazareth says hi

Professoralstad · « **Reply #33 on:** March 23, 2011, 04:10:27 PM »

Neither Nazareth nor Thaddeus will stop Philistine Armorbearer from retrieving Goliath from the discard pile. And even Philistine Outpost (which can be used in triplicate in T2) can discard itself to get PAB back, if Nazareth is stopping you from discarding from your deck.

Obviously, all of this is speculation until Goliath is released. But hey, I'm entitled to my opinions right?

And of course, since Goliath can potentially shut down every other common T2 offense all by himself (except Red of course

) a Philistine player should easily have room for 2-3 copies of Goliath's Armor.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #34 on:** March 23, 2011, 10:46:59 PM »

Quote from: slugfencer on March 23, 2011, 12:24:38 PM

So now since immunity works vs thad (per recent threads), if Goliath is wearing his armor in battle he would be immune to pumped up 11 discipled crowned thad, correct?

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on March 23, 2011, 12:35:40 PM

Correct. And since the immunity is CBN--Goliath would win the battle.*

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on March 23, 2011, 01:02:48 PM

Coat of Many Colors + Plague of Frogs
~~Discard his armour in territory.~~
~~Attack with a red disciple.~~
~~Don't play disciples.~~

Quote from: RTSmaniac on March 23, 2011, 01:44:06 PM

~~and grapes~~
aotl
~~or grail~~

Quote from: SomeKittens on March 23, 2011, 02:01:30 PM

~~As well as Ark of the Covenant. (Who uses that anyway...)~~

There you go. Crossing out all of the options that either don't meet the conditions that Slug Fencer put forward or don't result in Goliath beating Thad we see that you have a huge list of choices.

If you have Angel of the Lord in your hand you are most likely going to win a battle against a lone blocker. If you are one of the three people in the world you use Coat of Many Colors and happen to have both it and Plague of Frogs in your hand at the same time you also have a shot provided your opponent doesn't have Joseph in Prison or Bringing Fear or any other interrupt. Color me impressed.

Quote from: Professoralstad on March 23, 2011, 04:10:27 PM

And of course, since Goliath can potentially shut down every other common T2 offense all by himself...

Except the Garden Ladies because Phillies have absolutely no protection against territory destruction, nothing to stop pre-block ignore, and the thing that helped them stave off this trouble previously (the Outpost) got hurt badly in this regard by Nazareth.

slugfencer · « **Reply #35 on:** March 23, 2011, 11:25:32 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on March 23, 2011, 12:35:40 PM

Correct. And since the immunity is CBN--Goliath would win the battle.*

*More specifically--I do not know how to get around CBN immunity.

Cool. So another question that I don't understand--since the immunity works vs supathad, I know red dragon immunity is easily killed by reach/aoc. So CBN immunity (goliaths armor/balaams disob) vs supathad can that be reach/aoc'd? I ask because I am wondering if thad's special powers wipe out that CBN stuff like it normally does (king zed/dungeon won't work vs thad even tho it CBN)? Hope this makes sense?

Thanks!

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #36 on:** March 23, 2011, 11:44:15 PM »

Quote from: slugfencer on March 23, 2011, 11:25:32 PM

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on March 23, 2011, 12:35:40 PM
Correct. And since the immunity is CBN--Goliath would win the battle.*

Cool. So another question that I don't understand--since the immunity works vs supathad, I know red dragon immunity is easily killed by reach/aoc. So CBN immunity (goliaths armor/balaams disob) vs supathad can that be reach/aoc'd?

No. Reach/AoC works against Red Dragon because you are interrupting the Dragon's immunity with reach. Since Goliath's Armor/Balaam's Disobedience are CBN, reach cannot interrupt the immunity they confer.

Quote

I ask because I am wondering if thad's special powers wipe out that CBN stuff like it normally does (king zed/dungeon won't work vs thad even tho it CBN)?

King Zed + Dungeon won't work because Protect (Thad) beats CBN (DoM). (And CBN beats Negate and Negate beats Protect.)

One interesting side effect of all this is that you can play negates to your hearts content when blocking Thaddeus (unless they target a CBN card). So, say your opponent has an OT artifact active and 8 disciples out when he makes a rescue with Thad. If you block with Philistine Priests (5/5) it will negate the OT artifact even though Thaddees is protecting it from ECs with toughness less than 8. Kinda cool, huh? I only wish I could figure out how to take meaningful advantage of this loophole.

Korunks · « **Reply #37 on:** March 24, 2011, 08:12:45 AM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on March 23, 2011, 11:44:15 PM

One interesting side effect of all this is that you can play negates to your hearts content when blocking Thaddeus (unless they target a CBN card). So, say your opponent has an OT artifact active and 8 disciples out when he makes a rescue with Thad. If you block with Philistine Priests (5/5) it will negate the OT artifact even though Thaddees is protecting it from ECs with toughness less than 8. Kinda cool, huh? I only wish I could figure out how to take meaningful advantage of this loophole.

Actually I am not sure you can target the artifact. I was under the impression Negate only beats Protect if its is negating the protect itself. So in your example, wouldn't you be unable to target the artifact for negate and deactivation because of Thad? If I am wrong I would like to know.

Josh · « **Reply #38 on:** March 24, 2011, 08:19:53 AM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on March 23, 2011, 11:44:15 PM

One interesting side effect of all this is that you can play negates to your hearts content when blocking Thaddeus (unless they target a CBN card). So, say your opponent has an OT artifact active and 8 disciples out when he makes a rescue with Thad. If you block with Philistine Priests (5/5) it will negate the OT artifact even though Thaddees is protecting it from ECs with toughness less than 8. Kinda cool, huh? I only wish I could figure out how to take meaningful advantage of this loophole.

If you had an EC that could negate James the Less' ability, that would kick Thad out of battle (although not stop his ability), leaving you to block a 1/4 hero. You'd need a CBN/CBP negate on the EC... Like 12FG and... I can't think of any others that woudn't be negated by James.

Oh, and Blue Tassels is an OT artifact... That could be helpful if Thad is in battle

Only problem is, if James is in battle too... Philly Priests won't work

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #39 on:** March 24, 2011, 11:13:17 AM »

Quote

I was under the impression Negate only beats Protect if its is negating the protect itself.

That impression is incorrect. Protection does nothing against negation ever.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #40 on:** March 24, 2011, 11:24:36 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on March 24, 2011, 11:13:17 AM

Quote
I was under the impression Negate only beats Protect if its is negating the protect itself.
That impression is incorrect. Protection does nothing against negation ever.

Correct. Negates don't target cards (even, albeit confusingly, when the ability is "negate a card"), negates only target special abilities. Protecting a card doesn't protect the SA. The only "protection" abilities have from negates are CBN/I/P abilities.

Korunks · « **Reply #41 on:** March 24, 2011, 11:25:41 AM »

Thank you for the correction. Glad I haven't ruled that wrong at a tournament.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #42 on:** March 24, 2011, 11:27:27 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on March 24, 2011, 11:13:17 AM

Quote
I was under the impression Negate only beats Protect if its is negating the protect itself.
That impression is incorrect. Protection does nothing against negation ever.

Pol is correct.

<interrupt-the-board>
From a meta-game design question all the way to round a discussion of the implications of PoA vs 12FG. Pretty sweet, n'est-ce pas?
</interrupt-the-board>

Quote from: jmhartz on March 24, 2011, 08:19:53 AM

Oh, and Blue Tassels is an OT artifact... That could be helpful if Thad is in battle

Blue Tassels... D'Oh.

How could I have forgotten that?

News:

Author Topic: So out of curiousity, why does Rob refuse to ban cards? (Read 5711 times)

Chronic Apathy

The Schaef

The Schaef

The Schaef

drb1200

Rawrlolsauce!

slugfencer

Rawrlolsauce!

slugfencer