Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Deck Building & Design => Type 1 Deck Advice => Topic started by: sepjazzwarrior on May 18, 2017, 11:13:16 AM
-
has anyone used this in a high-level deck yet? has it been effective? to me it seems like a big cost to pay to get a lost soul that can't win you the game...
-
Yeah, it's good, but i don't think that it is good enough to make a whole deck around it. If it didn't have the "if you have fewer Redeemed Souls" part, i think it could be a force to be reckoned with, but, as it is, it is a card that probably won't make it into most decks. could be nice in a t2 deck with 4 sowers though.
-
I think a lot of the rescue a soul cards have mega potential
Does this work with widows tables? ;) pretty sure you could double rescue with eternal inheritance and toss in a Christ's triumph for a finisher which could be something like 3 souls I know there is a mega combo winding up with these somehow
Keep in mind if you use an enhancement to rescue a soul or the hero they do fail their rescue attempt which allows you to use Christ's triumph
-
I think that is only the case with eternal inheritance because it makes the rescue a battle challenge.
-
I think a lot of the rescue a soul cards have mega potential
Does this work with widows tables? ;) pretty sure you could double rescue with eternal inheritance and toss in a Christ's triumph for a finisher which could be something like 3 souls I know there is a mega combo winding up with these somehow
Keep in mind if you use an enhancement to rescue a soul or the hero they do fail their rescue attempt which allows you to use Christ's triumph
How are you getting a Hero in battle after playing Sow?
-
Well Christ's triumph... if it works the way he say it does.
-
Oh I didn't recognize that card name, I see the idea now. I still am not sure how that would do anything since if you play EI first you don't fail a rescue because the battle is a battle challenge not a rescue and if you play SRR first then your Hero is chilling in your LoR and can't exactly go back out to battle.
-
The EI/Christ triumph combo was ruled a legal combo because the battle starts as a rescue and EI changes the battle to a battle challenge, it counts as a failed rescue since EI rescues the soul (like SoG) and not the hero.
-
Considering that there is no minimum number of cards to discard (like with Primary Objective), I think this card has potential in the right type of deck. A character-heavy deck might only have to sacrifice 2-3 cards if you can play it at the right time.
Combine that with a couple defensive artifacts like Writ, Charms, HHI, etc and you'll even have some blocking options for the opponent's turn.
-
what if you have no hand? could you still use it? I believe you have to have at least 1 card to use it...right?
-
According to the Sinning Hand ruling, you can discard a hand of zero cards.
-
Do you think a compendium or reference containing these rulings would be helpful? Or is there a reason Redemption doesn't codify these things?
-
The ultimate goal is to have things defined such that rulings can be deduced and questions answered from definitions rather than just having a huge list of rulings.
If we look at the REG entry for hand we have this:
A player’s hand is where a player holds all of the cards that are not in their deck or discard pile but have not been played.
Since it does state that a player must be holding a card to have a hand, we can deduce that the "hand" is a location and therefore it exists even if there are zero cards in it (likewise, your deck is still your deck even if it has zero cards at a given moment). As such, you can discard a hand with zero cards to satisfy SR&R.
That being said, it was probably not the best idea for me to reference the "Sinning Hand ruling" instead of laying out why the Sinning Hand ruling was made. :P
-
That makes sense
-
It says "fewer redeemed souls than your opponent." Does zero redeemed souls qualify as "fewer" if your opponent has one redeemed soul, or do you need at least one redeemed soul (and your opponent has two or more) for it to qualify?
This played on Thomas or John the Apoc. would be excellent against cards like Gams Speech and Kinsmen's Agreement.
-
It says "fewer redeemed souls than your opponent." Does zero redeemed souls qualify as "fewer" if your opponent has one redeemed soul, or do you need at least one redeemed soul (and your opponent has two or more) for it to qualify?
This played on Thomas or John the Apoc. would be excellent against cards like Gams Speech and Kinsmen's Agreement.
0 is fewer than 1, yes. I've seen Grapes played plenty of times with 0 redeemed souls.
-
It says "fewer redeemed souls than your opponent." Does zero redeemed souls qualify as "fewer" if your opponent has one redeemed soul, or do you need at least one redeemed soul (and your opponent has two or more) for it to qualify?
This played on Thomas or John the Apoc. would be excellent against cards like Gams Speech and Kinsmen's Agreement.
0 is fewer than 1, yes. I've seen Grapes played plenty of times with 0 redeemed souls.
Grapes is worded differently than Sow. I've played Grapes if it's tied or if I have zero souls and my opponent has zero souls as well, but with Sow it says "fewer redeemed souls than your opponent" vs Grapes "doesn't have the most redeemed souls." Sow would not work if it was a tie whereas Grapes would.
-
So did we ever find out if Grapes of Wrath can be played with 0 lost souls or a tie?
-
So did we ever find out if Grapes of Wrath can be played with 0 lost souls or a tie?
It can be played and you may begin a new rescue because nobody has the most.
-
Thanks I thought so.