Jump to content

Penfold3

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1,180

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by Penfold3

  1. Posted

     Nothing rotates. The game is not set so you must have every card in existence to make a tournament winning deck. You can easily make two or three different top tier tournament decks from the same $200 purchase, no problem.

    I'd suggest a slightly different route than most people if you are looking into getting into the game socially with an eye for eventually going competitive. Here is my shopping list:

    Core set x1
    Secrets of Arkham x1
    Order of the Silver Twilight x1
    Rituals of the Order (entire cycle) x1
    Ancient Relics (first pack Shifting Sands) x1

    $130 on miniatures market.

    The reason why is this gives you a very wide variety of cards to play with, includes the most recent story deck (vastly superior to that in the Core set and the Secrets of Arkham in my opinion, but also gives you the choice to mix them together if you want), and it introduces the 8th faction Silver Twilight, in a number that puts them pretty much on the same competitive plane as the other factions. You'll get a good idea how each faction operates and what some ideal faction pairings are for deck building.

    When you are ready to give serious thought for tournament play I'd buy a second Core Set (a third is really not necessary unless you have a deck you absolutely must have a key card available in the core set x3) and the rest of the Ancient Relics cycle or the Revelations cycle.

     

  2. Posted

    ssjevot said:

     

    No, you can only use one response, due to the action time table.  The last action after your first response was the response you just played.

    This is incorrect. As long as tha effect does not include a limiter, you may trigger as many responses to any given occurrence in the game as you would like. The Response window opens up and each player can trigger responses going back and forth for opportunities until both players pass consecutively. The only rule is each response can only trigger to the same occurrence once. If you had a single character receive a single wound, you could only trigger card A once to it. If it received 7 wounds it could respond 7 times, assuming the language was similar to (after a character you control is wounded." You could also respond to the single wound to a single character with 7 different cards (even if several of them are copies of the same card) as long as none of them said (Limit once per) or (Limit one per).

    NOTE: the difference between once and one in the limits is based on whether it is a card ability, something being triggered in play, and a card effect, something being triggered out of play. A card that is triggered out of play has a limit that specifically prevents a card by that name from triggering that effect more than a specific number of times. A card triggered in play has a restriction to it using its ability more than the stated number of times. If that card leaves play and then enters play again, it is considered a new card with no memory of how many times it has triggered its ability.

  4. Posted

     It is number 2. For what it is worth, I sent Damon the links to the If Able discussions and he did confirm that it is an all or nothing tatement. He also said he does understand that conversational English does make some wordings in the game difficult to understand (his example was action and Action:) which is why they have a firm definition in the FAQ. He also said two interesting things, I am going to paraphrase because I got bitched out for doing direct quotes by some random admin guy, he has been slowly trying to make the game more intuitive and better defined for both casual and competitive players, and if the defintion of "if able" is causing this much of a problem he'll take a look into how much of an impact altering the definition will have on the game. And then, all cards with a "then" statement are intended for all parts of the previous sentence to have successfully resolved, this means with the effect  having effecting all cards or the game state as outlined. There was no intention from Eric Lang's design all the way through his for any other interpretation, with the possible exception of the designer immediately before him [i'm assuming he means Hata here]. He will try and make this more clear in the FAQ.

    So he is willing to at least assess the "if able" definition, but confirms that everything before the then statement must have resolved 100% on all cards and game state in order for the second part to resolve.

  5. Posted

    That is too **** bad. Can I ask what kind of support you are wanting expecting from FFG? They don't do a heck of lot of major support, I suspect that hwat you got was what everyone else got in the US for regionals. The foreign partners have their own programs that they do for their nationals and for the EU championship.

    Your decks were interesting and pretty innovative in comparison to what gets posted here on average. I for one will miss your thoughts.

  8. Posted

     HEre is my suggestion, figure out what is causing the problem for you and look that up. Trying to apply every possible FAQ entry to a card is going to be information overload and of course it is going to increase your confusion. English is my native language and I've played this game for close to six years and that would almost certainly cause confusion to me.

    If the question is how does a card that references "printed skill" work with an insane character, check the entry on "printed" in the FAQ. IF that does not resolve it (and in this case it did provide the answer) then look at the entry on "insanity." Stop complaining about the fact that the entry on insanity does not include that it keeps its name, that is wholly unnecessary to the topic and is about personal preference. This creates a level of animosity and increased confusion in regards to the FAQ none of which makes it easier for you to actually derive the answer you are looking for.

  9. Posted

     I think we can expect a human/monster pairing for these expansions. So we get Miskatonic at the end of the year, and then my guess is Hastur or Yog-Sothoth, then Syndicate (following the idea that thye "just released" a ST faction expansion) and the other side of Hastur/Yog. Then Agency followed by Shub Niggurath. Then Cthulhu followed by Silver Twilight.

    I suppose you could insert a thematic based box after each human/monster pairing.

  10. Posted

     But yes, the fact that Forgotten Shoggoth is a passive and effects the destination of all relevant cards before they leave play is how the card works. That it isn't a replacement effect is the real issue I was addressing in regards to how other cards would be affected with that card leaving play.

  11. Posted

     Good lord Zephyr, it is like you aren't even trying to understand the rules. Every single one of those questions is addressed in the FAQ. Khopesh is a very simple ruling, you can't put it on an invulnerable character because invulnerable characters cannot be wounded, cannot is absolute in this game, it means do not even try, and any effect that seeks to specifically wound such a character (as opposed to an effect that would cause mass wounding and does not call out the invulnerable character) cannot even be triggered, and it is a single effect that wounds both the attached character and the targeted character, so it cannot be triggered at all. This has been answered and clarified. Canceling the wound works because it is canceling the placement of the wound token, not canceling an effect that would wound a character. An effect that said cancel an effect that would wound target character would cancel the entire effect, and neither character would be wounded.

     

    And your wording is not any better, and in my opinion worse, "Try to choose?" What does that even mean. It doesn't say choose, it says try to choose. That passive language causes an entirely different problem, now every card is successful or fails entirely on the choose, rather than on the effect, which means no card could be played if you could fail to choose the card directed, but illegal targeting is rarely the problem with card effects, it is whether the effect itself can be resolved. If Able addresses a completely different problem… and for the record, removing if able from a number of cards would have very little effect in specific regards to whether the card effect resolves, but it does have a problem with whether or not the card effect could be triggered at all… and this is a case where the words of the card are added to make it easier to parse… and you are having a problem because of it, it wasn't that long ago you were directing for more words to be added to cards to make them easier to understand. You have pretty much just invalidated your own previous argument.

    I have a new policy thanks to you. I'm going to answer rules questions that come up once. I'm not going to defend or explain why that is the way it is anymore outside of the single explanation. It isn't worth the time or frustration and it certainly isn't worth the grief or arguments. You and everyone else can accept them or ignore them as you choose, but you've completely burned me out of caring whether you play the right way for the right reasons. There are other knowledgeable posters on the board. They can fill you in. I can't imagine how Damon deals with this sort of thing, but God bless him for having the patience I don't.

  12. Posted

     Resourcing alone pretty much destroys most arguments I've seen about deck building being the most important skill  in this game. I'm willing to bet that Giving Graham's deck to someone who has been playing for 6 months and giving Graham the 16th place deck from Liege would still have Graham winning 3 out of 5 times. It may be more competitive, but I have no doubt he'd come out the victor in a statistically significant showing.

  14. Posted

     This is why I said to read the FAQ. It is defined in there in a pretty darn easy to understand fashion.

    (2.19) “If Able”
    Certain card effects contain the text “if able.” For these cards all normal rules apply for choosing targets and triggering effects, with one exception: If there is no legal target during resolution, there is no effect.

    Do X if able = If X cannot be done nothing is done.

    So Do X, if able. Then Do Y. X must have happened successfully in it entirety, not partially, in order for Y to happen.

    Can you point out how with this definition of "If Able" from the FAQ could be interpreted in a fashion where Y will happen anyway? I'm not trying to be confrontational, my knowing this is the way it works may be interfering with my ability to see another side.

  15. Posted

     YEah, this is what I call inspired design. If the cards are not horribly difficult to pull off and have good, though possibly situational effects then I think they will see a fair amount of play socially. I think competitively it could be extremely interesting to see if anyone can find a way to really make them sing in a deck. The search your deck for two cards that MU gets is an example of a really sweet effect. I'm guessing that they probably have the best prophecy, since it is a mechanic introduced in their box, but I hope to see more of these as the expansions roll-out.

  16. Posted

     I understand the how and the why of it, I was referring to how it interacts with other cards from a a game terms perspective. An instead is a clear replacement effect, the very definition of it, and what this card does not not replace but redirects, so does it count as having been destroyed or sacrificed? I'd assume yes since that has to do with how the card leaves play not where it goes. That is all I'm trying to say, not being a replacement effect puts it in a different realm rules wise.

  20. Posted

     I would say this game is as much about play skill as it is about deckbuilding. 

    COCLCG you've popped into the game during the tournament season. Normally this group is more conversational and it is more about interesting deck ideas and and buzzing about the next expansion or latest spoiled card. Everyone right now is a little more buckled down because we're entering into GenCon with Liege around the corner.

  22. Posted

     And this is where you are going to continue to have problems. This is the same thing I was talking to Tom Capor about, you are stuck on trying to make the rules make sense by your use of words and logic rather than trying to understand what they mean in this context.

    Let's take a look at "A Single Glimpse"

    Play during your operations phase.
    Action: Choose an opponent. That opponent must sacrifice a character, if able.

    So we have an effect that can be triggered since the only condition is to "choose an opponent." Now the "if able" tells us that if the opponent cannot sacrifice a character there is no effect. So you as the player can trigger the effect and play the card even if it is going to have no effect. Why would you want to? Some Silver Twilight cards power up if you have fewer, or no cards in your hand or if it was the last card in your hand. A version Yog-Sothoth becomes cheaper for each Spell in your discard pile. The game is richer and more complex because you can trigger this card, even if there is no effect.

    Just because something doesn't make sense to you doesn't mean there isn't a reason for it.

  24. Posted

     Very good question… I would go so far as to say because it's response effect clearly states discarding it from the top of your deck as the trigger it is naming an out of play area that it can be triggered from, meaning Prism of Many Views essentially allows you to play your prophecies without having to actually draw them.

×
×
  • Create New...