Jump to content

KineticOperator

Members
  • Content Count

    1,225
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About KineticOperator

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Omaha, Nebraska, United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Sure you can. The X-Wing community is the best I have ever experienced, bar none and by a wide margin. It still is. But this was never because X-Wing players were inherently superior to players in other games, never because of some moral rectitude possessed by those owning a particular set of plastic space ships. It is like this because way back in the beginning, one guy (Doug Kinney) won a tournament and decided to make a conscious effort to take the game to a place that embodied "Fly Casual", and the community that existed decided to go there with him. Every tournament and every season, for that matter I would guess every store championship or league night, someone has done something unpleasant/toxic despite the overwhelming presence of awesome behavior and people. The difference has always been a willingness to take a step back from that, reset, and get back to making this a great community. I don't like what happened here. I appreciate that Sozin has realized his part in it, I hope and expect that the community and the individuals involved will once again take a step back, reset, and go back to "Flying Casual". See you guys there.
  2. Most card games, especially Magic but also other LCGs, have very little decision making beyond creating decks once you understand the game and the meta. You usually have clearly optimal plays to make, so does your opponent, and you find yourself predicting that "If I draw card X before they draw card Y, I will win. Otherwise, they will win." Every turn becomes an exercise in filling time until one of those cards is drawn, with the very rare game where neither win condition is drawn and play decisions are able to decide the game. Game of Thrones with it's constant board wipes has become a poster boy for this, for example. If you are knowledgeable enough about the game, you compound perfect knowledge of your deck with a 90% plus knowledge of their deck, and the game feels like it's on autopilot. Playing 3 core, I found a great amount of fun in that you decided the game 99% of the time based on the decisions you made with your cards, because little could be done that affected the board state too dramatically with a single card or 2 card combo. Unfortunately, I am finding that the more cards are out the less this is true. It's extremely annoying when you set up a game, play it, and find that you never really had any decisions to make because they simply out-drew the holy **** out of you. More cards are providing more opportunities. Yes, I realize that there aren't any straight up game-over combos but if you didn't draw equally well it's just the long road through purgatory rather than straight to the fires. Are you coming back from a 7 fate, 6 honor deficit? No, you really aren't, and taking another 20 minutes for that to play out is just a waste of time. Is it just me? Is it just something to accept, and move on to another game? Combo-licious top decking annoys me, and the more non-interactive (or virtually so) crap that comes up the more irritating it becomes. I realize this is something that others may enjoy, but I am not one of them and I feel like if this trend continues to escalate over the next few packs I might be cashing in and calling it already. Flame on, I feel like this post is begging for it, but if you have some insight I am missing I would appreciate it if you would share.
  3. Dragon dueling is much better at honor swings than you give it credit for. In any given conflict, Raitsugu can hit a smaller character, and force either an honor loss or the loss of the conflict when the small character is removed. Way of the Dragon means you can either push out two smaller characters, or gain honor a couple times. Good Omen does a great job of keeping Raitsugu in the game while honor-dueling, and if you are using Raitsugu in Political Conflicts his affect on the outcome is even more exaggerated as he duels out low-Mil high-Pol characters. Even more to the point, punting a small character in front of Raitsugu to save the 1 honor from an uncontested province is a way to lose the character early and still lose the extra honor. If you put Duelist Training into the mix, you have another way of forcing your opponent to either lose conflicts or lose honor. Yokuni does the same. I don't think that honor-wins are quite viable yet, but you really shouldn't underestimate the power of an additional honor bid or two every turn.
  4. From other FFG games, especially at higher levels of play. BOTH players are responsible for any forced interrupts. In this case, it is not correct to state that your "opponent forgot", or "your opponent missed his opportunity". Regardless of who benefits from the error you BOTH forgot. You correct it as best you can, and what you two did sounds like the best solution you had available. Something similar could be if you had forgotten to remove a fate from one of your characters. You couldn't go back and say "I forgot, so therefore the fate stays on". It's illegal, both players were responsible, you correct the board state as best you can and remove the fate when you realize it was missed. If you try to go down the "I missed it, but enough time has passed" road, you reach a point where cheating is encouraged because you can "forget" things and if your opponent doesn't see them immediately you can claim missed opportunity. In this case, had the character been "dishonored" and you had realized it, he would have been obligated to give up an honor as well. On the other hand, practically speaking there isn't much you can do 3 turns later/etc.
  5. L5R is a work of fiction, and I am referring to Japanese/Eastern fiction. In that context, "honor-dueling" and "honorable deaths" are absolutely central. They aren't "A theme", they are "THE theme" to be found over, and over, and over. "47 Ronin" is a perfect example where they ALL DIE, and by doing so prove the honor of their lord Oishi. Done, blocking, hopefully won't come across anything else quite so obstinately contrary and unwilling to address the points of people who disagree.
  6. Have you ever actually read ANYTHING Japanese, or Eastern in general? Challenging a clearly superior foe in order to dishonor them happens ALL THE TIME. Dying to demonstrate moral superiority is normal, expected, and revered. It really seems to me that you simply cannot get past your own assumptions and put yourself in a non-American (and incidentally, non-adolescent) mindset of "winning is everything". There is no honor for an inferior opponent in winning a duel, if it is demonstrated that he is inferior. The idea that it is a good thing for the "plucky underdog gets stupidly lucky and wins" is something that is almost uniquely American. Most people in the world admire someone who combines talent and hard work to become the best, and a random fluke allowing someone who has put less effort/skill into a match to win is seen as UNfortunate, and an affront to the way the world should work. It's like watching the bad-guy win. Listening to you is like every cultural-superiority, ugly-American overseas stereotype playing itself out over a game, in a setting that lets us see it play out in near real time. It's NOT all about winning, duels aren't even MOSTLY about winning. If you want all-or-nothing winners get the glory look at the conflicts, THOSE are where the warring sides in this game are all in and winning is the moral imperative. Duels are not deathmatches, they are not brawls, they are filled with cultural expectations, hidden meanings, rules both written and unwritten, and goals that are almost certainly far more complex than "hurr-durr, I hits 'em harder". Read the fiction, "Garden of Lies", that duel was instigated just to get Kitsuki Shomon to go to a party and be obligated to stay after winning!
  7. I agree, I may misunderstand which is the point of me posting. :-) The only potential way is for "Steward of Law" to be in play, and have both characters lack status of any sort. You couldn't target two of them legally, but could target either one legally.
  8. Though you didn't directly address it, for whatever reason your post made me realize there is a logic train that I did not see here that may be at play. If so, I will need to walk back everything I said. :-) You are welcome to chose two targets, as long as they both have the potential to be honored or dishonored. However, while your effect can initiate if it has the potential to change the game state, there is no actual requirement for it to do so. You would be able to target one honored and one dishonored character, because you could potentially remove the status from both of them and alter the game state. So the ability goes off. However, once it goes off you are under no obligation to do it that way, you could honor the honored character and dishonor the dishonored character if you wish. If not, if you are obligated to change the game state, then they simply put that requirement in the wrong place/needed to put it in both "targeting/initiation" and "resolution". You need to potentially change the game state in order to target, and you must actually change the game state when you resolve. Just putting it in the "targeting/initiation" portion of the check you wouldn't be obligated to actually change anything as long as you were potentially able to change it when you initiated the effect. JMO, and working to clarify my understanding. Not emotionally invested in any particular ruling.
  9. That logic fails with the example given in the bullet, even if we accept your use of the word "could". A character "could" bow despite the fact that it cannot at the moment by that logic, and would be a valid target. But even in this example, since it cannot bow at the moment it is targeted it is not eligible as a target. As far as ALL the targets, yes that is what they wrote. "All of its targeting requirements" as opposed to "any of its targeting requirements". If those requirements include choosing two targets, then both targets would have to be valid. The bullet point is quite clear in including all targets, "one or more", "enough valid targets", every bit of this bullet clearly makes the point that you must have enough valid targets to satisfy the condition. It doesn't say "at least one valid target" which would be the counterpoint. As far as "individually or as a whole, they could both be affected" is inaccurate, since a dishonored character can not be effected by a dishonor effect, neither can an honored character be effected by an honor effect. To use "Shameful Display" you must target in a way that BOTH targets are currently valid, following the example set. If "Shameful Display" read "bow two characters", and one of the only two characters in the conflict were already bowed, it would not work either. Just saying the response is inconsistent with the rules as written, and that the rules as written are quite clear.
  10. That's cool, except his answer on Shameful Display directly contradicts the rules. You cannot chose a target that will not be effected, and you MUST have all eligible targets for the effect, according to the rules reference. (Targeting, pg 15-16). 7th Bullet - A card is not an eligible target for an ability if the resolution of that ability’s effect could not affect the target at all. (For example, a bowed character cannot be chosen as the target for an ability that reads “Action: Choose a character — bow that character.”) 2nd Bullet - If an ability requires the choosing of one or more targets, and there are not enough valid targets to meet all of its targeting requirements, the ability cannot be initiated. This initiation check is made at the same time the ability’s play restrictions are checked. Note that the 2nd bullet states "one or MORE targets" and "meet ALL of its targeting requirements" (emphasis mine). If you don't have 2 targets both of which are capable of being honored/dishonored, then you cannot use Shameful Display. This isn't my personal interpretation, they laid it out in black and white put it in the rules and posted it on their site. Coming from X-Wing, I can state that getting answers from people that directly contradict the written rules is unfortunately not an uncommon occurrence. Having said all that, returning the mask works just fine. It does change the board state, and the dishonor effect is not targeted.
  11. To be blunt, the only real issue the OP seems to have is complete ignorance of math.
  12. I own a shop, and I guarantee you the larger barrier was a stale game due to low variety. If you don't get a game with enough variety early while the excitement is still there, those same people will move on to the next shiny thing. I would rather do it this way, and have a really cool launch followed by evolutions of an exciting game for a large player base, than 6 months of stale same-same play leading to a great game with no players left. Yup, it's a bit more expensive. Nope, still not even remotely in the realm of a CCG.
  13. It's 4 dice rather than 3. Also, you can reroll all the dice, just like anyone else does. Spend the TL....
  14. Opportunist, Sync Turret, K4 Droid, Moldy Crow, Engine Upgrade. Enjoy!
×
×
  • Create New...