Author Topic: Unknown Nation and Priests of Christ (Read 5814 times)

Master KChief · « **Reply #25 on:** June 14, 2009, 03:20:46 PM »

i agree as well. it seems pretty clear to me. UN might not say anything about a hand, but the REG clearly does.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #26 on:** June 14, 2009, 04:47:06 PM »

Going with ease of explaining, I vote that UN doesn't allow PoC to search for a dominant. I imagine the following conversation:

Me: I'll make a rescue attempt with Priest of Christ
Kid: I'll discard Unknown Nation to block with an EC from my deck.
Me: I'll search my deck and pull out Son of God
Kid: Wait, I didn't block from my hand, I blocked from my deck.
Me: Yeah, but you used your hand to pull it out of your deck.
Kid" So, in Redemption "hand" is a specific place, not just a part of my arm.
Me: Too bad, it still counts, and I'm playing SoG/NJ, so you lose.

This is NOT a conversation that I want to see happening.

Gabe · « **Reply #27 on:** June 14, 2009, 05:34:09 PM »

It seems like that REG quote should have been removed when "human interaction" was removed from the game with the release of Priests.

redemptioncousin · « **Reply #28 on:** June 14, 2009, 05:57:29 PM »

You know... the simple solution to this is just that every time you use unknown nation you have your trained dog take your favorite EC out of your deck... he doesn't have any hands and he's allowed to be at the table...

Mageduckey · « **Reply #29 on:** June 14, 2009, 06:04:11 PM »

This would be an awesome (yet terrible) combo, IMO, to be able to use Arianna and Confusion to steal your opponent's SoG or NJ or something. Very messed up, yet very effective. Please do tell, "Oh High Ones", if this works or not, for I'm thinking on building a deck to face my dad that will center around this combo.

Thanks!

Master KChief · « **Reply #30 on:** June 14, 2009, 06:56:32 PM »

i doubt it'll be let through. redemption never lets any cool combos go through.

Arch Angel · « **Reply #31 on:** June 14, 2009, 07:16:35 PM »

I have a question for you MKC. If you hate redemption oh so very much, why do you play? And more importantly, why do you attempt to spoil the favorable opinions that others have for the game? (ok, so that's technically 2 questions, lol)

sk · « **Reply #32 on:** June 14, 2009, 09:01:31 PM »

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on June 13, 2009, 09:18:12 AM

Quote from: sk on June 13, 2009, 07:49:35 AM
They changed the wording from the previously popular "Search for a card and add to hand. You may play next enhancement" type wording, which could have been more in line with the REG quote. Just doesn't seem accurate anymore.
"Search for a card and add to hand. You may play the next enhancement" wouldn't do the same thing. Answer to Prayer currently lets you add a character to battle.

In this case, you could also play a different enhancement. (IE: Play Answer to Prayer, search for Obedience of Noah, play Rueben's Torn Clothes. The current wording would make you play Obedience of Noah)

Eh, that wasn't the focus of my post.

Previous search cards have said to find a card, then add it to the hand, then optionally use it. Answer to Prayer says to fnd a card, then put in hand OR use it. Had this been the rule, the old wording should have remained.

Smokey · « **Reply #33 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:08:00 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on June 14, 2009, 06:56:32 PM

i doubt it'll be let through. redemption never lets any cool combos go through.

Depends on your definition of cool, and I also think that completly broken isn't the same as cool

Master KChief · « **Reply #34 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:17:06 PM »

Quote from: Arch Angel on June 14, 2009, 07:16:35 PM

I have a question for you MKC. If you hate redemption oh so very much, why do you play? And more importantly, why do you attempt to spoil the favorable opinions that others have for the game? (ok, so that's technically 2 questions, lol)

i have a question for you arch angel. did i ever say i 'hate' redemption? no? ok then, your point is invalid. moving on.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #35 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:17:42 PM »

Sk? That's Archangel.

Master KChief · « **Reply #36 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:29:13 PM »

fixed. i have no idea why i thought it was sk. no hard feelings sk!

Arch Angel · « **Reply #37 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:33:42 PM »

It's implied by your seeming distaste for any and every announcement or ruling made regarding the game. So the point stands.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #38 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:41:09 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on June 14, 2009, 10:29:13 PM

fixed. i have no idea why i thought it was sk. no hard feelings sk!

I'm sure your feelings of hate for Sk are only like, 0.04%. That's less than 0!

Mageduckey · « **Reply #39 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:42:35 PM »

I'm sure your feelings of hate for Sk are only like, 0.04%. That's less than 0!

No it's not - it's .04 ABOVE 0.

So, is it atleast permitted for now (until there is a ruling)?

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #40 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:43:48 PM »

It's a pun from an old topic where MKC stated that Magic banned less than 0% of it's card base.

The Schaef · « **Reply #41 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:44:59 PM »

The combo is banned in order to maintain a consistent policy of never letting the game do anything cool.

SirNobody · « **Reply #42 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:46:34 PM »

Hey,

Quote from: Arch Angel on June 14, 2009, 10:33:42 PM

It's implied by your seeming distaste for any and every announcement or ruling made regarding the game. So the point stands.

I find MKC's willingness to speak his opinion, especially when it is an opinion that isn't going to be well received, refreshing. There are far too many "yes men" on these boards, hearing a divergent opinion is nice from time to time. MKC is more knowledgeable about the CCG industry in general than the vast majority of people on this board, so he often has insight from a unique perspective that many of the rest of us lack.

Also don't misinterpret his choice to voice his opinions when he disagrees and not voice his opinions when he does agree as an indication that he disagrees with everything.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Smokey · « **Reply #43 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:47:45 PM »

Quote from: The Schaef on June 14, 2009, 10:44:59 PM

The combo is banned in order to maintain a consistent policy of never letting the game do anything cool.

I take it ET + AoCp being banned will follow soon?

SirNobody · « **Reply #44 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:51:38 PM »

Hey,

Quote from: Mageduckey on June 14, 2009, 10:42:35 PM

I'm sure your feelings of hate for Sk are only like, 0.04%. That's less than 0!

No it's not - it's .04 ABOVE 0.

Ah but he said 0! which as every good mathematician knows is 1, and .04 is quite definitely less than 1

Quote

So, is it at least permitted for now (until there is a ruling)?

In the long run no, this will not be legal. Making dominants reusable is very much against the direction TPTB intend to take the game.

But if you want to build the deck and use it against your dad at the next WildCard I'll be happy to play along and claim that it's legal.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

The Schaef · « **Reply #45 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:58:10 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on June 14, 2009, 10:46:34 PM

Also don't misinterpret his choice to voice his opinions when he disagrees and not voice his opinions when he does agree as an indication that he disagrees with everything.

His tone and choice of phrase often has more to do with it than what he chooses to critique.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #46 on:** June 14, 2009, 10:59:32 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on June 14, 2009, 10:51:38 PM

Ah but he said 0! which as every good mathematician knows is 1, and .04 is quite definitely less than 1

Woo-hoo for factorials!

As for the other, what ruling are we talking about? Are we no longer talking about Unknown Nation at this point?

Master KChief · « **Reply #47 on:** June 14, 2009, 11:05:07 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on June 14, 2009, 10:59:32 PM

Quote from: SirNobody on June 14, 2009, 10:51:38 PM
Ah but he said 0! which as every good mathematician knows is 1, and .04 is quite definitely less than 1

Are we no longer talking about Unknown Nation at this point?

apparantly not, my 'tone' (which is either non-existent or easily misconstrued on the internet, natch) and slight mathmatical errors are now the topic of discussion. i suppose hardly anyone on this board really matures.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #48 on:** June 14, 2009, 11:07:22 PM »

I figured it was better than listening to Maly and someone else run over the same points about 20 times followed by a lock.

Bryon · « **Reply #49 on:** June 15, 2009, 05:33:11 PM »

The main question is, "When does a searched card go to hand?"

a. always
b. only if no other destination is given

In designing some cards in the last couple sets, I worded some abilities (Assyrian Spoilers, etc.) "Play X from your discard pile." A couple of the other playtesters said it should be rewritten, since we don't really play cards from discard piles, or at least not with out searching for them first. And if the search happens, it should be stated. So the cards ended up something like, "Search discard pile for X and play it."

So, a second question that goes along with the first is, "Can cards be played from a discard pile without searching?"

Searching has a targetable zone (the deck or discard pile), and a target (the card you look for), and a destination (default is hand, but other options may be printed on the card).

Consider Dungeon of Malchiah vs Net. They both capture. Capture has to target a card, and has a default destination. Does the captured character go to your land of bondage first, and then in the Dungeon case gets transfered to the opponent's Land of Bondage? Or, does the captured hero go straight to opponent's land of bondage?

News:

Author Topic: Unknown Nation and Priests of Christ (Read 5814 times)

The Schaef

The Schaef