Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Runix

  1. As noted above, your opponent still controls the Khopesh even if you Stygian Eye the character. My favorite solution for dealing with the Khopesh as Hastur is Guardian Beast - they can't trigger the Khopesh (see the FAQ, cannot trigger it if the attached character is invulnerable), and can't put another in play because it's unique. Problem solved. Only issue is that you have to wait until your turn to lock it down, which can be problematic in some situations.
  2. OK, working my way through the question on The Marked in play at the same time as The King in Yellow Folio. From the FAQ 1.11: Even if not triggered at the same time, multiple lasting effects may affect the same card at the same time. The order in which the lasting effects take place is irrelevant – the net sum result of all lasting effects is applied to the card . . . Lasting effects that affect other character attributes (such as icons) work in the same fashion. The problem here is, it's not a "sum" - one effect is to add [Terror][Terror], but the other effect is to remove all. The above would seem to apply to anything with the commutative property (that should warm the heart of a certain high school math teacher - thank you Mr. Shaw), but that is not the case here. The order of application is important. But, also from the FAQ: When card effects, passive abilities, or forced responses would resolve simultaneously, all cards that are affected resolve in the order determined by the active player, one at a time. The player must fully resolve each effect before the next effect takes place. That would seem to apply, as it is a combination of two passive effects. I really don't like this, though, as it would imply that the "active player" can determine the outcome simply by resolving the effects in different order - which means that the number of icons a character has would depend on whose turn it is! I think we're going to need an official clarification on this one.
  3. Thanks for the spoilers! Not much else going on in the forums as those of us who weren't able to make it to Gencon wait for a review of the action over the weekend (hint hint) . . . I'll have to take some time to review these cards in greater depth, but this seems like a very powerful expansion pack, and I think we will definitely be seeing more Conspiracies in play. Yog, Silver Twilight, and Agency have some very solid Conspiracies now . . . and it rather sounds like the designers are regretting not making "Elder Thing" a subtype. I really like Pushed into Beyond for Yog. Spell/Event recursion just got more powerful, as if it wasn't already. Yog also now has a very reliable answer to Khopesh, which is great. But getting to the really good stuff . . . dboeren said: Hastur: The Marked, Character, Cultist, Lunatic, cost 3, A1. Non-Ancient One characters lose all T icons. Disrupt: If you control 2 or more insane characters, drive The Marked insane to cancel a character ability just triggered. Then, that character goes insane. *The Necronomicon, Support, Tome, Relic, Attachment. Cost 2. Attach to a character you control. Shuffle all other copies of The Necronomicon back into their owner's decks. Disrupt: When attached character would become insane, shuffle The Necronomicon into your deck to make each character with lower skill than the attached character also go insane. In the Court of the Dragon, Conspiracy, steadfast 2 H, cost 0, TTTA. If you win this conspiracy, take control of each insane character in play. For an insanity deck, this is just amazing. The Marked plus Lost to the Madness will send virtually the entire board to the madhouse, against anything but a Willpower-heavy investigator deck. If the Hastur deck is built with that combo in mind, e.g. including cards like Arkham Asylum and Descendent of Eibon, it could make for some very easy story wins. One question would be how this combines with support cards or events that grant Terror icons, like The King in Yellow Folio - does The Marked's effect resolve first, or does the support card's effect resolve first? It's the difference between this card being a so-so combination with The King in Yellow (hey, at least it's a Terror struggle and not an Investigation) and an incredible combination depending on whether or not the Terror icon gets added before or after it's removed. Same issue with Library of Nalanda. The Necronomicon is not quite as impressive, although it's an obvious choice for attachment to someone like Alyssa Graham, and combined with The Marked could cause some serious chaos. Also, since it's "lower skill" and not "printed", there's a Syndicate combination with their skill-lowering cards waiting to happen. The Conspiracy should be a very easy Conspiracy for Hastur to win, and if there has been any success on the insanity front, goes a long way toward putting Hastur in firm control of the game. On the other hand, it can go horribly wrong if the other side wins it, so it's something of a gamble - Professor Sam Campbell, in particular, will have himself a very long laugh if this Conspiracy hits the table.
  4. I haven't played recently since my computer crashed and I've been recovering , but LackeyCCG is where the people here meet to play. Relevant thread here: www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp and here: www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp
  5. I have a very similar deck, although I also include Carl Stanford, who is simply a very solid all-around character but who also benefits from having Cultists handy for sacrificing. I also include Get It Off!, which is handy for dealing with nasty support attachments, particularly Snow Graves. Also, Yig is a natural addition, particularly as he boosts your non-Terror resistant Serpents for free.
  6. AUCodeMonkey said: I agree with you 100% Penfold. It's hard to sacrifice Serpents when, on turn 3, my Initiate of Huang Hun keeps 3 guys off the board every turn kthxbai :-D Initiate is the reason any good Serpents deck has Uroborus in it. I know what you're getting at, but the reality right now is that most "Spock" decks are Shub or Hastur based, and many have Cthulhu splashed in, for all the reasons I outlined above.
  7. I agree with dboeren. The cost of two domains is just a bit high. The main counterpart to this deck is a Single Glimpse recursion, using The Large Man, and that only costs you one domain. Your deck has both, but it's just a lot cheaper bringing back Single Glimpse than it is to bring back the Skull.
  8. This is a very experimental deck, not intended to be competitive, and probably not ever going to be competitive. But great fun, I think. The genesis for the idea was when I throwing Nodens into a couple of my decks on a whim - both because I like the lore, but also because he can be handy for clawing your way back when you're behind. In looking at a couple of recent cards - Ritual of Exclusion and Magical Theorist in particular - I thought, hey, there might be an interesting idea here. The idea is simple: flood out characters and tomes, power up Ritual of Summoning through sacrifice and/or Magical Theorist, then doom drop either Nodens or Azathoth on the battleground (with the Initiate of Huang Hun standing by to pick up the god of idiots before he loses you the game). After you've cleared the board, fish the characters out of the discard pile with Ritual of Exclusion (powered by Initiate of Huang Hun and/or Master of the Myths) and coast to easy victory. And then I remembered Dr. Peaslee. Granted, the Azathoth - Peaslee combination ( ) is not going to go off very often, but when it does, it's very likely game over - and the deck is stacked to get the big boys into play as quickly as possible, so it's not impossible. Anyway, here's the list, comments are welcome. The Doom Drop Character Hapless Graduate Student (THBtS) x3 Research Assistant (***) x3 Rich Widow (PT) x3 Samantha Grace (TTftS) x1 Seeker of Mysteries (SoA) x3 Initiate of Huang Hun (CotJE) x3 Museum Curator (TWB) x3 Magical Theorist (TUP) x3 Marcus Jamburg (***) x2 Master of the Myths (IT) x3 Professor Nathaniel Peaslee (Core) x3 Nodens (KD) x3 Azathoth (SoA) x2 Support Celaeno Fragments (WaB) x2 Dreamlore Documents (IMoD) x1 Pnakotic Manuscripts (TOotST) x2 T'tka Halot (WaB) x2 Ritual of Exclusion (TUP) x2 Ritual of Summoning (TOotST) x3 Event Magnetic Spike (NN) x3 Conspiracy A couple of notes: Samantha Grace is in there to help slow things down a bit, and because I like her, mainly because she's so annoying if the other side doesn't have any way of getting rid of her. Master of the Myths can be a cheap sacrifice in a pinch, because he costs only one to put into play, and you can Ritual him back. There's a ton of support retrieval to keep the Rituals and Tomes in play. And Magnetic Spike is my Neutral-Ground-b-Gone. If I really wanted to tune it, I'd probably just focus on either flooding/sacrifice or Tomes/Magical Theorist, but right now I'm just playing around, so it's not a particularly finely-tuned deck. P.S. Hastur is kryptonite to this deck.
  9. Argh! Didn't get to my post quickly enough to edit it. Oh well, enjoy the free laugh, I guess, you all know what I mean.
  10. Konx said: I don't know if you were around at the very beginning of the LCG, but back then the most effective strategy was rush (namely, Agency/Hastur rush). Back then EVERYONE was complaining that the combination of dogs+wouding+ cheap characters was unbeatable. Result? I won Stahleck with a deck designed to beat rush. Now the situation it's just the opposite: everyone complaining about destruction. You just need to find a rush deck that simply doesn't care about destruction. Destruction, to be effective, requires 2-3 rounds and often it's not enough to be in full control (and with full control I mean a situation where virtually any card played by the opponent it's useless in changing your path to victory). Thanks, and I appreciate the perspective from a veteran player. My counter-argument would be this: I think control and destruction are the dominant meta-strategies at this point, and both are enhanced by a number of cards that have slowed down the pace of the game, which has allowed them to gain eminence over rushing strategies. Specifically, cards like Black Dog, Master of the Myths, and Ya-te-veo can stall a rush deck long enough to allow control or destruction strategies time to kick in. That means that support removal really is in fact critical, because control decks and destruction decks can buy the time they need to get their powerful support cards into play. From the very broad perspective of the metagame, I certainly understand the rock-paper-scissors approach which has been prevalent in CCGs since the early days of Magic. Of course, there is always a risk if one of the rocks or papers or scissors just gets to be too powerful. But there is also a risk if certain strategies include Swiss Army knives that work against rocks and papers and scissors equally well. In CoC, a lot of factions have some interesting and unique tools that make for distinctive strategies, but Shub, Cthulhu, and Hastur have the Swiss Army knives that can deal with just about any situation: cards like Burrowing Beneath, Deep One Assault, and Power Drain. That disrupts the metagame and leads to deck compositions that clearly and consistently dominate others, which is boring for competitive play and casual play alike.
  11. I think B_P is right, and that's how I read it, as the FAQ does say "control or own". Stygian Eye transfers control but not ownership. Really handy for dealing with perpetual annoyances like Carl Stanford. Also note that Canopic Jar likewise prevents additional copies of a unique player from being put into play, as the card is still in play and still owned by the original player, even if it is no longer under his control. So you can put Mr. Jamburg into the Jar (have to destroy him first, of course) if you don't want to see him any more.
  12. Metagame After reading through a number of tournament reports, reviewing listed decks, reading through the various discussions here, and testing my own decks while doing some face-to-face play, something is becoming very clear to me: support removal is currently a key component of the metagame. The reasons for that are fairly complex, and I'm not sure I understand all of them. But one important reason could be the addition of some support cards in recent cycles that are extraordinarily powerful, and that have effects that dramatically influence play for both players. For reasons of their own, the developers' efforts to shape the metagame have often come down to introducing powerful support cards to shape the direction of play. Examples: Khopesh of the Abyss to deal with flooding; Flux Stabilizer to deal with bouncing and resurrections; Snow Graves to deal with discard pile fishing; etc. The Problem Why is that a problem? Quite simply, because certain factions are able to remove support cards, and others aren't. Factions that can remove support cards are therefore able to retain control of the game, while factions that lack support removal are not. What is more, many of the support card effects are triggered effects, so having "slow" support removal - e.g., available only during your turn - is not good enough. It has to be ready, on-demand support removal, or very bad things can happen. Ideally, support removal would be able to target both attachments and locations - splitting removal between attachments and locations is card-inefficient and very often less reliable (removing problematic attachments by directly targeting characters does not work on Snow Graves, for instance). Bottom line, direct support removal is optimal and virtually indispensable. Two Factions Unfortunately, direct support removal is readily available to only two factions: Cthulhu and Shub-Niggurath. Virtually every tournament-competitive deck I have seen listed includes either one or the other, and with their ubiquitous support removal cards: Deep One Assault (arguably the best card in the game) and Burrowing Beneath (Thunder in the East is also good, but not as reliable as it is Operations phase only, ditto for Grasping Chthonian). Other factions have support removal that is either unreliable, inadequate (e.g., Silver Twilight's Lodge Housekeeper - congratulations, you have removed a support card for exactly one-half of a turn), or almost entirely missing - good luck removing support with that Miskatonic deck, you're going to need it. Case Study: The Temple of Mutual Sacrifice Consider, as a case study, how one would deal with a simple but brutally effective deck - a Cthulhu deck stacked full of Serpents, with Temple of R'lyeh and Sibilant Cry. (Yes, I know; "There he goes complaining about the Serpents again" . . . but seriously, this deck is going to rampage over some unprepared players.) Serpents are flooded out as fast as possible until the Temple of R'lyeh can be put into play, then everything is sacrificed clearing both players' boards (which can be done in one fell swoop in any given action window once the Temple is up), then all the Serpents are popped out of the discard pile with Sibilant Cry and walk to an easy win. What do? "Snow Graves" is the obvious answer. Except that any half-competent Cthulhu player is going to stack the deck with Deep One Assault and Get It Off, which means he can easily pop off the Snow Graves as soon as he's ready to clear the board before bringing the snakes back from the dead. Likewise for Flux Stabilizer, etc. That means, realistically, that the only way to shut down the combination is to destroy the Temple - but it has to be on-demand (so that the player can respond when the Temple goes up in the Cthulhu player's Operations phase), and would almost certainly have to be an event card, as anything else - say, a Ritual of Inferno or a Crazed Arsonist - is going to get Deep One Assaulted (again: best card in the game) before the combination gets put in place. Looking at that, it becomes perfectly clear: you need on-demand support destruction, or just this type of a combination will be absolutely ruinous. That means you either play Cthulhu or Shub-Niggurath, or some combination including them, or you get ruined. *Three Factions, Actually OK, actually, there is another choice, and that is to play Hastur and have a Power Drain ready (or just have a two-resource domain with Hastur match available, and just get this look on your face as if you have a Power Drain in hand, that works too). Hastur is a bit of a special case, in that they have a lot of unique effects - especially related to event cards - that give them a lot more control over the game. Hence, even though Hastur doesn't have that powerful on-demand remove-this-support-card-now effect available, they have a lot of other interesting tools in their toolkit that lets the faction deal with nasty strategies. Power Drain is one obvious example, but in this case they could also, for instance, focus on rendering as many of the Serpents insane as possible, which means they can't be removed by the Temple of R'lyeh as they aren't Cthulhu faction matched while insane. But that's very specific to Hastur. The other factions, generally speaking, do not have the same kinds of unique tools to deal with difficult situations. Conclusion The bottom line is, as important as support cards are, removing them as soon as possible is critical to controlling the flow of the game, and only two factions are really able to do that consistently: Cthulhu and Shub-Niggurath (while Hastur is an honorable mention, as they can frequently deal with difficult situations in other ways). That means that any serious competitive deck is going to have to have one or more of those factions. That stinks, as it limits the versatility of the game and limits the options on deck-building. I realize that the decision was made to have each faction have some flavor, by limiting certain things - support removal, event cancellation, etc. - to certain factions. But you can't do that and then introduce powerful support cards and event cards into the game - particularly support cards, whose effects are persistent. At some point, if the developers want to balance the game out across the factions, they are going to either have to spread the support removal around, which will necessarily reduce the unique flavor of the factions, or they are going to have to bring the hammer down hard on the more powerful of the support cards, and stop using support card effects to try and balance the metagame.
  13. No updates to the restricted list? Interesting. Not sure why the designers fix Apeirophobia but let the far more problematic Glimpse of the Void and Khopesh of the Abyss stay as they are. If the designers are going down the errata-for-balance-purposes route, there are a whole slate of cards that could use serious adjustment.
  14. .Zephyr. said: The only thing it lacks is yog event and support recursion to recycle apeirophobia, but i don't think its possible to just insert some yog cards here and hope the distribution will be good enough… Alyssa Graham can be used to bring Apeirophobia back. She doesn't increase total card draws, but in the right circumstances you can guarantee that you get it back for next turn. Very powerful, and in fact I think her most powerful ability is event recursion; sort of a Hastur version of The Large Man. I think this is still a relatively powerful concept, even with the rule clarification on Alyssa Graham. A forced sacrifice for both players every turn lets you get ahead, because you're ready for it (with Midwife and other supporting cards) while the opponent isn't. Unfortunately, I think the deck will have to be retooled after the new FAQ comes out. I suspect that at least one of those cards, but possibly more than one, will end up on the restricted list, and with Diseased Sewer Rats already on the roster, something else will have to go.
  15. Interesting deck. I admit I'm becoming more interested in Shub, as they have a lot of interesting strategic options available, and discard pile fishing is definitely one of their strong suits. Magnus is a particularly good addition, as he is fantastic at quickly feeding both discard piles. One possible addition would be Black Dog. One potential problem with these Rube-Goldberg type decks is that they need time for the machinery to get set up. Bouncing blockers like the Black Dog or Master of the Myths really help that, by buying time in the early phase of the game. I would favor Black Dog here, as it's faction-friendly and may get a character or two of the enemy's into the discard pile to allow Opening the Limbo Gate to get triggered.
  16. This is fairly close to the Twilight/Yog deck I've been testing, and I think it's a strong combination, and I'm sticking with that assessment even after getting hammered by AGoT DC Meta's Shub/Yog deck. Eltdown Shards, in particular, can be a devastating addition if you get it on a good character and are able to get to the story phase on a regular basis. Faceless Abductor is a really nice card as well, given that - unlike the Twilight bouncing cards - you can trigger its ability on demand as an action. Really forces the other player to keep his head down during the story phase, as a timely abduction can really turn around the struggles on a given story.
  17. I really like Hastur and Yog, but one caution: both are weak on support removal. You will need some ready means of support removal, as right now there are several very powerful support cards that really need to be removed quickly for any control deck to stay in control.
  18. piszcadz said: does this strike anyone as sounding particularly like a CoC faction combo or play style? What you're probably looking for is a Hastur/Yog deck. Hastur is excellent for countering events, disabling or taking control of characters, and forcing discards; Yog has some direct destruction abilities and some exotic abilities that synchronize well with Hastur. Cthulhu and Shub also have some destruction abilities that could work well in a control deck.
  19. It seems likely we are to get a new FAQ at some point, and since there is nothing more likely to provoke bitter disagreement than the restricted list, I thought, why not start the festivities early! What may be more interesting than the usual what-should-be-banned debate, however, would be to revisit what's currently on the list, and see if any are candidates for coming off. Itinerant Scholar: I have no idea why this is even on the list. Basically doubling use of a domain - at the cost of a cost 2 character and the use of a lesser domain - does not strike me as game-changing, particularly given that other factions have very similar domain refresh abilities. I would consider this a candidate for removal from the list, and Miskatonic could certainly use the help. Things in the Ground: I am under the vague impression that this is a critical card in some exotic Yog combo; maybe in a milling deck in combination with Curse of the Stone? It is hard for me to see how it's game-breaking, particularly given that it has the same effect on all players. The main argument I can see for keeping it restricted is that the milling it provides is too cheap - but I don't find that to be a compelling argument, given how few tournaments have been won by milling decks. As such, I think this is also a candidate for consideration for removal from the restricted list. Diseased Sewer Rats: The argument made against this card is that it provides wounding too cheaply and too early in the game - and I agree. Say, I wonder if any other cards meet that criteria . . . also, it's neutral, which makes it especially problematic, as it's easy to include in any deck. Keeping it restricted makes sense to me. Negotium Perambulans in Tenebris: The main issue I see with it is that there are (currently) no ways to remove Conspiracy cards, and it requires a very specialized card (Foiled!) to counter, so it's very difficult to deal with. Cards that create serious problems for a wide range of strategies and that are difficult to counter directly are prime candidates for restriction, so I would argue keeping this card where it is. Descendant of Eibon: I don't find this to be as compelling of a card, but a lot of people here whose opinions I respect do. It can, under some circumstances, be a very cheap character to get into play or to return to the hand, so I think keeping it restricted is a reasonable choice. Nyarlathotep: I can see this card causing considerable headaches for multi-faction decks and for decks that rely on fine-tuned combinations of cards . . . and I think that's a good thing. Perhaps it does that too well, so I can see both sides of the argument for keeping it restricted or removing it from the list, although I lean toward removing it from the list. Guardian Pillar: I don't see this as game-changing as much as I see it as too cheap for what it does - an amazing, hard-to-remove blocker - and too easy to include in a deck given that it's neutral, so leaving it restricted makes sense. Doppelganger: I do not see what the issue with this card is, particularly given that there are cards that take direct control of a character, which is arguably much more powerful than simply making a copy of an existing character (while the opponent keeps control of the original). Cost is not an issue, as it simply reflects the cost of the copied character. And it's limited to non-unique characters. It does bounce back into the hand, but only if the copied character is destroyed. I can see removing this from the restricted list unless there's something I'm missing. Khopesh of the Abyss: Speaking of too-cheap wounding, this is it right here. I will set aside the debate over restricting it versus banning it, other than to say that the fact that there's a debate says something about the power of the card. I've actually found it possible to deal with, as long as I know in advance that it's out there and can make an appearance, but still, an enormously powerful card that that has changed deck-building, and as such is a prime candidate for remaining in the restricted list. Initiate of Huang Hun: I'm not sure this card is as powerful as it's been made out to be. It is a solid card for Silver Twilight, but not game-changing in my view. It's restricted to the Operations phase, and basically gives you an untargeted bounce for a cost of 2. Good, but nothing to write home about. Lord Jeffery Farrington is much better in my view, as he's targeted and has better icons, even if he costs 3 - and he can be recursed with only a little bit more effort than the Initiate. I suppose I could see leaving him on the restricted list, but it may make sense taking him off - particularly if another core Silver Twilight character gets added (say, I wonder who that could be? hmm . . . )
  20. .Zephyr. said: While i do like the fact that much more cards are strong enough to include them in actual decks (previous expansions have much more junk cards that are way too weak) i think some cards need real drawbacks. I agree, although at this point the drawback with some of the cards mentioned will likely be that they will end up on the restricted list. I admit that I love Apeirophobia, as it turns Hastur into a faction to be feared (ha!), which was not previously the case. But it's still way too good. Building a deck around Apeirophobia and forced discard is fine; but right now I can easily see it getting added to other decks that are neither primarily Hastur nor primarily control decks, which is a problem. That's an indication that it may be a candidate for the restricted list. I disagree on Stygian Eye. It is powerful, yes, but has enough limitations to keep it in check. It's unique, it requires a [Terror] or Willpower to be anything more than a one-turn card, can be removed with support removal, and returns the character control back after it leaves play. It is not - like Apeirophobia - the sort of card where a player would be tempted to add it to a deck that isn't primarily Hastur or control themed just to try and get it in play.
  21. One other clear example of power creep, although admittedly a minor one, would be Song of Suffering, which is a direct, across-the-board upgrade to Sedated. Again, it's not much, but there's simply no denying that the card released later is better in every possible way to the card released earlier. Also, is there a Great Old One whose version in the Core Set is better than a later-released version? One specific area where the power creep is most visible, however, is wounding. The earlier cards were very stingy with wounding particularly as relates to targeted wounding. Compare the Khopesh with Riding Shotgun from the Yuggoth cycle, which requires an Event card, a cost of 2, winning a {Combat} struggle, and exhausting a character with a [Combat] icon. With the Khopesh, at the cost of one 2 resource attachment, you get one free wound on any target, and more if the attached character has built-in Toughness or if you're willing to sacrifice it. It's not even a comparison. The Khopesh is the most efficient source of targeted wounding in the game by a long shot, far ahead of anything released previously. That's power creep in action.
  22. piszcadz said: just a quick thought: to beat this type of deck, you usually have to survive the initial onslaught(s)(s)(s). if you can, and if you manage to stabilize, you can gain a foothold in the game that burn decks will find difficult to overcome. their strength is really the early game. so plan for early defense and then kick ass later. I agree. Good thing I have card sleeves, or my three copies of Master of the Myths would have been worn through by now (although thinking about it, Black Dog may be a better defense against most of the Serpents). Right now my strategy against Serpents is, more or less, to use bouncing blockers or chump blockers to keep them at bay until my more powerful characters can get on the board to put an end to the nonsense.
  23. Yipe said: However, such decks have limitations. While they can chew through certain opponents, they struggle when confronted with non-standard deck designs. Our regional championship is a good example. We had 3 mono-Cthulhu decks in our tournament, with 2 making it to the quarterfinals. One didn't get past that point, and the other lost in the semis. I don't think it's mono-Cthulhu that will cause the problems. I think it's dual-faction decks that are long on Serpents but have some help from another faction to offset Cthulhu weaknesses that will dominate: e.g., 40 Cthulhu with lots of Serpents, and 10 from Hastur (Power Drain, Stygian Eye, Byakhee Attack, etc.), for a rock solid deck that can deal with just about any other strategy, and with little skill at that, as it virtually plays itself. Here's hoping I'm wrong. I echo all the concerns by posters above me on power creep. I really enjoy seeing how new cards expand the game, but right now it seems that the developers may be slipping into an unfortunate cycle of trying to deal with power creep by adding more power. The imbalance between monster and investigator factions is one area that clearly needs attention, but if the preview cards to Seekers of Knowledge are any indication, it would appear that the developers are going to try to address that by handing out Willpower and Toughness like candy to the investigator factions. That could actually make things worse, as then the monster factions will need new and super-powered cards just to catch up. Is a redesign of some of the more problematic cards in circulation completely out of the question? At any rate, if there's anything good to come out of this, it's that the Serpents are a veritable test of fire for my existing decks. I've already revamped my decks several times just to try to figure out how to deal with them. And now that I'm thinking of it, this may be the chance to finally put that Canopic Jar to use - the Serpents can't hear the Sibilant Cry when they're trapped inside that!
  24. I have a small used set of the old cards that I bought on the super-cheap. It's interesting to go through and take a look at them. I find some of the characters to be a bit underwhelming, but many of the support cards, particularly some of the neutral supports, to be very interesting and quite powerful. I don't really play with them, however, because I do want to stay attuned to the current metagame.
  25. Carioz said: Question: given the huge overpresence of Mono-Cthulhu and Cthulhu split decks at regionals, how many of them did win? If I am not counting wrong, just 2 Cthulhu split. So the overefficiency of Serpents (and Khopesh) didn't prove so overpowering, after all. I have not followed the tournament scene very closely, but from what I have read here, Cthulhu consistently does well, even if they have not dominated. But then, in tournaments a lot of players have gone in "blind", not knowing exactly what other players would be bringing to the table. From what I gathered from the reports, there were a vert significant number of Cthulhu destruction decks (some mono, some multi-faction), but a number of them were caught by surprise by event recursion decks and so forth, so the winning brackets had more diversity than the tournament as a whole. I'm not sure that will happen again. It's relatively straightforward to build a solid Serpents deck and splash in a little color from other factions (Power Drain, Snow Graves, etc.) to deal with specialized decks. But it also bears in mind that much of the strength of the Serpents deck is very recent. Feathered Serpent's been around for some time, and has been recognized fairly consistently as a very strong card. Disguised Threat has also been around, but I don't think it's seen as much play prior to now simply because there weren't that many Serpents; with a whole slew of new ones in the recent cycle, that's changed. Padma is brand-new, and with dboeren, I'm very concerned about using her to trick in a very early Ancient One, which could really upset balance. But specifically, I think Uroborus could be the card that really kicks Serpent decks into overdrive. He's incredibly easy to get into play - all you have to do is suicide a cheap Serpent, and you can drop all the copies of Uroborus in your hand on the board - and once in play, he doesn't leave it for long, coming back readily out of the discard pile. As I noted above, it very effectively defeats bouncing ("leaves play" could mean simply returning one of your Serpents to your hand, so the Initiate of Huang Hun is a waste of a card against a Serpent deck) and effectively mitigates destruction with its back-from-the-discard-pile feature.
  • Create New...