Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Buhallin

  1. There are two sets. Both have the same art but with different styles. GenCon: Full bleed cards with minimized text boxes Release Kit: Done in a comic book cover style. Both sides put the hand size/HP in a Marvel-style box in the upper left, and the hero sides have the hero name done in the cover style from their books.
  2. Mark walked up to the door. Mark opened it. Mark went in and sat down in his chair. Mark turned on his computer. Mark got up and started the coffee maker, then Mark poured Mark a cup of coffee. Poor use of pronouns can lead to ambiguity, but the idea that they should just never be used or automatically introduce ambiguity is pretty ludicrous. I'm always amazed at the pretzels FFG's fans will bend themselves into to avoid admitting there was ever a bad rule written. Is it possible that excess damage hangs around after it's dealt, waiting to see if there's some use? And you can look back after defeating a minion to apply an "If you defeat a minion" effect which didn't exist when the minion was defeated? Sure, but it's completely counterintuitive and utterly absent from the rules. It's also just plain bad rules design. Effects which aren't active when an event occurs don't get triggered. That's pretty fundamental to every sane rule system out there. Heck, they even demonstrate in a number of other cards how they SHOULD template this to handle the "isolated sentences" structure, but even with all the other correct examples you can't admit they just screwed this one up.
  3. I can't seem to find anything that puts a timing priority on framework effects vs. triggered abilities, but generally abilities go before framework effects. Even if they don't that would leave it simultaneous and up to you for which to resolve first.
  4. How pronouns are used and arranged has a very big impact on the clarity of their use, which was your main point. Not in itself, no. But if people have managed an understanding of those several thousand cards across many games it kind of points to it not being all that badly worded. I'm not actually sure what you're referring to here. You're suggesting that separating a sentence into abilities is bad because they have to be parsed in isolation. If you do that with Relentless Assault and follow the rules by completely resolving each sentence before moving to the next, the Overkill doesn't work. If you take the ability as a whole ability and apply all the sentences, including the later conditional, it's fine. I think that structure is fine, you're claiming it's not, and the rules suggest it's not. How exactly am I lying about anything? I'm not sure what the point of the context-less quote is (see? context-less sentences in isolation are bad) but my point was that they typically use parentheticals for this kind of modifier. Which I happen to think is really ugly, but it at least is consistent with the rules. Relentless Assault doesn't seem to be, and doesn't work. Is there actually some answer to that here, or are we down to technical nitpicking and vague accusations of dishonesty?
  5. 1) Yet they are still part of grammar. Whether you use pronouns or not, the idea that different sentences are only parsed in isolation without any sense of context, relation, or modification isn't really true. 2) The vast majority of Arkham cards are structured that way. Same with LOTR. So if this "should" be done that way it's been wrong for a couple thousand card texts. 3) I don't think it's problematic, but you do And arguably, the rules do. It uses separate sentences for the conditional portion of the ability, just like Overzealous. If you resolve each sentence in isolation before moving on to the next you wouldn't have Overkill when dealing the 5 damage. Basically, the Overkill portion wouldn't work. <shrug> We can debate grammar all day I suppose, but IMHO considering all sentences of an ability together is necessary and honestly better. Trying to avoid that with excessive commas and parentheticals is just going to get ugly. If there is specific sequencing to be had due to multiple effects that can be included in the text in other ways - Magic does it with paragraphs, "then" is overloaded in FFG games but does the job too, bullet points, whatever. Pretending that sentences don't exist within the larger context of the ability just leads to confusion.
  6. Yeah, not really. Actually, not even a little bit. Sentences can and do refer to the overall context of whatever you're discussing (an ability in this case), and you can and must understand how every sentence in the ability works together. Heck, basic pronoun usage makes this not true. Take a look at any number of Arkham cards (like any weapon) for good examples where this doesn't hold. Sentences being parsed in isolation does not mean that they don't relate to the overall context of what is going on. You also don't typically stop at a sentence, resolve everything, then move on. Take Overzealous as an example - "Draw the top card of the encounter deck. That card gains Surge". If you drew and completed the card before moving on to the next sentence it would be resolved (and gone) before it gained Surge. You can't just start reading and executing each sentence before moving on to the next. This holds true for some cases even in Champions. Like Relentless Assault, although they don't follow their standard templating there (compare to For Justice for a very similar effect). See what I did there?
  7. This is true, but good design will make things clear to the players in the simplest way possible. Considering player expectations based on grammar and common rule patterns is important. The rules could say that "additional damage" is always dealt to your hero instead of the target, and you could follow the rules as written, but that doesn't mean it would be a good rule or good templating. In this case, this particular bit of templating ignores both player expectations and common grammar.
  8. "Additional" is a modifier word. In this case they're using it even though you're not modifying anything at all. You could remove "additional" there and it wouldn't change the (Caleb-described) effect at all. That's bad templating.
  9. Honestly, it should be the only interpretation. Otherwise, "additional" is wholly irrelevant there. If later sentences don't have the ability to modify previous ones, the text is going to get astonishingly overloaded with parentheticals. But I'm honestly not surprised. FFG always has, and apparently continues to, suck at templating. I'm not sure why I keep hoping that their next game will be the one where they finally get it together, but I do. Oh well. Maybe they'll finally get it together with their next game.
  10. IMHO I haven't found solo or multiplayer to be easier or harder, just different. Solo you have to be very aware of small threat thresholds, but villain damage thresholds are smaller as well. Big damage cards (Swinging Web Kick) have a much larger proportional impact. Same goes for the "Spend X to discard" villain cards, much more painful when you've only got one hand to pay them out of. Multiplayer presents different challenges - you're getting more encounter cards to deal with, and while everything happens per-hero each hero isn't as good at handling each thing, so whoever is (e.g.) Justice has a much higher hill to climb as they're trying to mitigate threat from 4 players rather than just themselves, an aggression rush can't overwhelm nearly as quickly, etc.
  11. The key there is "additional damage". That modifies the original (single) damage rather than being a separate instance.
  12. That sounds right to me. I really like First Watch. Playing normally in 4-player games, the ability to distribute goes beyond just "Who gets the monsters?" Being able to target something as simple as Grasping Hands vs. Rotting Remains is good. Being able to target a Shapes in the Mist or Realm of Torment would have saved us in a few games. Sending bad treacheries to the player who can cancel them is big. Certainly there will be those times when it just doesn't work, but overall it seems incredibly versatile.
  13. I've always had great results from them for missing/damage and even just lost parts. Most of that was pre-Asmodee, though I have had a few issues since which have still been resolved quickly and easily. I actually had to contact their customer support today concerning a pre-order (their system is in transition and finding it's a mess) and I had a response in about an hour. If you can report back to the OP, there's an automated response when you submit the comment to them, it may take a bit after that but it should work out well. Just send photos of the bad cards.
  14. A similar interaction can occur with Quickstrike. I hit this when I drew Shadow of the Past and the Vulture showed up while I was Peter Parker... Quickstrike attacks your hero, so if you're in alter-ego when it happens you're safe from it.
  15. I don't see them doing custom packaging or cardboard prints just to add extra dials for this particular villain, but I guess we'll see.
  16. Not sure how they'd do that in a standard blister.
  17. I think one of the differences here is that the difficulty is much more granular. You have three villains and 5 sets, plus expert mode, which creates a pretty diverse scale of difficulty. For those of us from Arkham and LOTR who are used to the "Okay, that was trivial on to... WTF just happened here?!?" scaling it can feel pretty trivial just bumping up one or two steps. I do wish they had done a better job laying out exactly what those difficulties are - we get numerics for the modular sets, but not much else. Something like Spirit Island does with a grid of combinations would have been welcome.
  18. I offered up a similar comment as sarcasm on the simultaneous resource spending, never thought I'd see someone seriously make the statement. This directly contradicts the actual rules. The simultaneous resolution rule applies to separate effects, which are basically the same as abilities. You can speculate that a similar rule would extend to different elements of a single ability, but you're speculating at best, and outright inventing rules at worst. Thanks to the aforementioned resource rule we know the game has at least some truly simultaneous events, which are far more disparate than resolving multiple removals due to a single ability. Honestly there's more to support the idea that it would be simultaneous than there is to support treating it like different effects, but it isn't strongly defined either direction. Definitely going to need FFG input, but until then the simultaneous removal (and hence blocked by the Crisis) seems like the most in line with the rules, although that doesn't always mean much where FFG is concerned.
  19. This isn't really at issue. The question is how you resolve things timing-wise if you remove threat from multiple schemes at the same time. Do you resolve them one at a time in the order of your choosing (so you can clear the Crisis first, then remove from the main) or is it all simultaneous (meaning the Crisis is still in play when the removal happens)? Same could apply to other effects as well, such as Black Panther using Energy Daggers to kill a minion with Guard. There are rules that cover how to resolve different abilities which trigger simultaneously, but nothing that covers a single ability that affects multiple targets.
  20. This would be my instinct as well, although I'm not sure if there's anything explicit in the rulebook that covers this sort of "simultaneous" effect.
  21. I see a lot of people talking about how easy Rhino is... pretty sure that's the point. He's Journey Down the Anduin or The Gathering - an intro game to learn it. IMHO a lot of this is also because they've done the difficulty better. It's much finer grained than in the previous co-op LCGs where you go from trivial intro to crushingly hard (Midnight Masks, Escape from Dol Goldur) in the space of a game or two. The villains and modular sets both provide different ramps, as does the expert mode. If you're trivially beating Expert Ultron with MODOK then yeah, you're probably above the curve for the game. But not having an Escape from Dol Goldur in the core set strikes me as a feature, not a problem. Kind of hard to say that half the cards are junk if we haven't seen how the card pool grows. Possible that our expectations of efficiency aren't properly calibrated yet. I generally disagree about the double resource cards, but I do think Fury's not great in this one.
  22. One other consideration here is that Webbed Up is much better in larger games, where you can only stun the villain once.
  23. You also only have one copy of Mockingbird since she's unique. It's all well and good to compare them in a vacuum, but how often you'll be able to use them is an important consideration.
  24. Paying the resources at once, sure. Combining that with triggering of card effects, not so much. If that's what was happening, sure But it's not - you're talking about interleaving the timing on paying for the card and resolving effects from playing it. This is mixing multiple discards and triggered abilities and making them all go off at the same time. IMHO it would make for much tighter timing if each card were discarded or effect was triggered individually until the cost was paid, with each resolving completely. As it stands the timing is going to get really weird once we have multiple resource effects going off at the same time. <shrug> Probably just paranoid about it because it's very different, and I tend not to trust FFG to handle these sorts of things.
  25. There’s got to be another piece to this... Photonic Blast is 3 resources for 5 damage. Even if you played all 3 (for 9 resources? how?) that’s 15, an Energy Channel makes 25. What am I missing?
  • Create New...