Jump to content

Rabbitball

Members
  • Content Count

    207
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from Simplegarak in Purge Oponent's cards from my archives   
    This is one of the reasons that I was pushing for a Keyforge Comprehensive Rulebook: to set the definitions of terms to the point where 90% or more of judges will come to the same ruling (and the remaining 10% can be educated relatively quickly).
  2. Like
    Rabbitball reacted to OldAmber in KeyForge GEM Troubleshooting Discussion   
    Yes and no.  Let's be clear - every game has its official rules and in every official game the number of rounds are set before the first round is played.  You and others bring up MTG and in section 10.2 of their official rules it plainly says "The number of rounds should be announced at or before the beginning of the first round; once announced, it cannot be changed.".  Pokemon has the same rule.  More importantly to the conversation, KeyForge has this same rule.  In the KeyForge Organized Play Rules on page 7 you will find "The organizer must announce the number and type(s) of rounds and what size any progression cuts will be before the start of the tournament."   The reason is that it gives the same fairness to every player registered. 

    As a retail location, you can run the non-sanctioned and non-official games (Casual in GEM terms) with your own flavor and variations, but sanctioned play must be consistent and follow the sanctioning body's rules.  Even though a retailer may wish to have different accommodations for late players, as the sanctioning body we have rules and we code them into our software.
    All of this is not only already in the GEM Client, but GEM also uses the rules to automatically re-pair the round if needed, add the player as a Bye with a win, add the player as a Bye with a forced loss, or pair the late player with an existing Bye so that they can both play.  I think that is a LOT of flexibility for the Organizer.  If pairings are already advertised and players are seated, the re-pair is not automatic and the Organizer gets to choose to re-pair - just not over and over to get a desired pairing or manually pair specific players arbitrarily.  If the Organizer chooses to enter a late player, the Organizer gets every legal option - but for any rounds where the player where the was absent, losses are automatically awarded.  If a player wants to enter after a round starts playing and the Organizer decides to allow that player to enter, the Organizer gets all of the legal options at that point and the player is paired for the next round.  GEM actually already gives the organizer more options than you listed above. 
    I have run an incredible number of sanctioned events in card and video games from 8 players to over 1,000 players and I have never once changed the number of rounds after the play has started.  Even setting the sanctioning body rules aside, when the rounds are timed, play has begun, and tiebreakers include mathematics for the number of rounds played, round modification can cause tournament integrity issues - which is why every major game with an Organized Play component has this same rule for their official sanctioned events.
    That makes my other point in terms of the fairness of having a predictable event.  I have noticed that no matter the size of the event, only about half of the players are listening to the announcements.  Chances are, even had the judge known, there would have been several players who would still have been surprised.
    Yup.  And that is why GEM allows you to go back to a previous round and change the outcome.  Click the prior round, click Reset, click the correct winner.  Done.  If the correction affects the current pairing, the round is automatically repaired.  Literally 3 clicks and the miss-entered result is fixed and the pairings adjusted.
    Thanks - I plan to make GEM the envy of all other games.  But please understand that I am an advanced organizer too.  Beyond that, as the sanctioning body, we have rules for our game which we must code into the software tasked with insuring our rules are followed.  While we are not attempting to be a retail store game app (which might help a retailer avoid or nudge some of the rules that are not convenient for customer service in a retail environment), we do allow for a whole set of Casual games (which are not allocated and do give somewhat more flexibility).
    For our Organized Play (officially sanctioned events), we have extensively considered, established, and published a set of Official Rules, just like every other sanctioning body for every other game.  We use the exact same software at our own premier events (like the Vault Tour) which we give to retailers for their events, so it must enforce the rules we set which are focused on ensuring ethics, fairness and tournament integrity.  We award allocations to retail stores whom we trust to run events according to those published rules and we give them the GEM Client to make staying within those rules a little easier.
    All that said, I hope you have also seen that I have taken the needs I have experienced at my FLGS, large Cons, and giant premier events and rolled them into the rules document to create a system that satisfies your hunger and gives you that sweet tasty treat that you desire.  Everything above you said GEM should do, it does, and more - and if you load the 1.3 release in a couple of weeks I think you will be amazed at how much more of a GEM it is!

    Thanks for taking the time and thought to write your post.  I think it is important that you cared enough to bring your thoughts forward, make suggestions, and give us the opportunity to share our perspective and communicate with the community.  I hope I have made this understandable and given you even more confidence in GEM.

    Jeff Brower
    GEM Client Lead
  3. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from Simplegarak in Going To Time   
    In Magic events, they are considered good customer service but sometimes you can't do it because of other distractions. I haven't had the chance to use the GEM, but it looks like the only official timer is on the app. I would probably find a way to get a more visible timer in place when the store I frequent starts doing their Chainbound events.
  4. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from Simplegarak in Going To Time   
    When judging Magic events, I usually gave time warnings when I wasn't busy doing something else.
  5. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from Simplegarak in Using an Opponents Safe Place Artifact   
    It gets weirder when your opponent has no creatures and only a Mighty Javelin. Nexus either stays home or turns traitor on someone. Even weirder when there are no other creatures on your side.
  6. Thanks
    Rabbitball got a reaction from robohobbit in Anger and Stunned Creatures - Brad Clarifications   
    Almost:
    0. A card is eligible to be used if it falls in one of these categories:
    0a. The card is ready and of the active house.
    0b. The card is ready, not of the active house, but has an Omni: ability.
    0c. The card is ready or becomes ready and is given permission to be used in at least one manner by another ability.
    1. Declare intended use of card: fight, reap, Action: ability, Omni: ability, or remove stun. If the card is eligible to be used only because of 0b, the only use available is the Omni: ability.  If the card is eligible to be used only because of 0c, this choice may be limited by the ability that grants it permission to be used.
    2. If card in question is a stunned creature, replace intended use with remove stun
    3. Check legality of use:
    3a. Fight is legal if there is an enemy creature to fight against. Choose an enemy creature to now fight.
    3b. Reap, Action: abilities, and Omni: abilities are legal unless prohibited by another ability.
    3c. Remove stun is legal if the creature is stunned.
    4. If the use is legal, exhaust the card and perform the use. Otherwise, the use does not happen.
    Did I miss anything?
  7. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from saluk64007 in Anger and Stunned Creatures - Brad Clarifications   
    Almost:
    0. A card is eligible to be used if it falls in one of these categories:
    0a. The card is ready and of the active house.
    0b. The card is ready, not of the active house, but has an Omni: ability.
    0c. The card is ready or becomes ready and is given permission to be used in at least one manner by another ability.
    1. Declare intended use of card: fight, reap, Action: ability, Omni: ability, or remove stun. If the card is eligible to be used only because of 0b, the only use available is the Omni: ability.  If the card is eligible to be used only because of 0c, this choice may be limited by the ability that grants it permission to be used.
    2. If card in question is a stunned creature, replace intended use with remove stun
    3. Check legality of use:
    3a. Fight is legal if there is an enemy creature to fight against. Choose an enemy creature to now fight.
    3b. Reap, Action: abilities, and Omni: abilities are legal unless prohibited by another ability.
    3c. Remove stun is legal if the creature is stunned.
    4. If the use is legal, exhaust the card and perform the use. Otherwise, the use does not happen.
    Did I miss anything?
  8. Haha
    Rabbitball got a reaction from Wandalf the Gizzard in How rare are Maverick cards?   
    A Sanctum Pit Demon?! "Now, folks, we need to remember that the Sanctum respects all repentant worshipers, so please do not exorcize our latest congregant..." 😏
  9. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from Brekekekiwi in Anger and Stunned Creatures - Brad Clarifications   
    From the rulebook:
    STUN, STUN STATUS CARD When a creature becomes stunned, place a stun status card on it. The next time that creature is used, the only effect of it being used is the creature exhausts and the stun status card is removed instead of anything else happening. The creature does not reap or fight, and any “Reap:,” “Fight:,” or “Action:” abilities on the creature do not resolve. If a card effect causes a creature to be used while it is stunned, the creature is exhausted and the stun status card is removed, just as if the creature had been used normally.
    How does this not explain what is going on?
  10. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from TheSpitfired in Anger and Stunned Creatures - Brad Clarifications   
    Almost:
    0. A card is eligible to be used if it falls in one of these categories:
    0a. The card is ready and of the active house.
    0b. The card is ready, not of the active house, but has an Omni: ability.
    0c. The card is ready or becomes ready and is given permission to be used in at least one manner by another ability.
    1. Declare intended use of card: fight, reap, Action: ability, Omni: ability, or remove stun. If the card is eligible to be used only because of 0b, the only use available is the Omni: ability.  If the card is eligible to be used only because of 0c, this choice may be limited by the ability that grants it permission to be used.
    2. If card in question is a stunned creature, replace intended use with remove stun
    3. Check legality of use:
    3a. Fight is legal if there is an enemy creature to fight against. Choose an enemy creature to now fight.
    3b. Reap, Action: abilities, and Omni: abilities are legal unless prohibited by another ability.
    3c. Remove stun is legal if the creature is stunned.
    4. If the use is legal, exhaust the card and perform the use. Otherwise, the use does not happen.
    Did I miss anything?
  11. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from TwitchyBait in Anger and Stunned Creatures - Brad Clarifications   
    Almost:
    0. A card is eligible to be used if it falls in one of these categories:
    0a. The card is ready and of the active house.
    0b. The card is ready, not of the active house, but has an Omni: ability.
    0c. The card is ready or becomes ready and is given permission to be used in at least one manner by another ability.
    1. Declare intended use of card: fight, reap, Action: ability, Omni: ability, or remove stun. If the card is eligible to be used only because of 0b, the only use available is the Omni: ability.  If the card is eligible to be used only because of 0c, this choice may be limited by the ability that grants it permission to be used.
    2. If card in question is a stunned creature, replace intended use with remove stun
    3. Check legality of use:
    3a. Fight is legal if there is an enemy creature to fight against. Choose an enemy creature to now fight.
    3b. Reap, Action: abilities, and Omni: abilities are legal unless prohibited by another ability.
    3c. Remove stun is legal if the creature is stunned.
    4. If the use is legal, exhaust the card and perform the use. Otherwise, the use does not happen.
    Did I miss anything?
  12. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from saluk64007 in What cards do you play, that NEVER gets played against you?   
    That's not how anyone else I know has interpreted that. The issue was if you had, say 5 Æmber in your pool and 1 on Safe Place if you could skip forging a key in step 1 as a result. The ruling is that you can't because you have the capability to forge thanks to that added Æmber. It says nothing about whether they can be used additionally when you have a forging option at another time. 
    EDIT: I just looked over the rule you quoted, and it's listed as part of the rules for Step 1, Forging a Key. So by context, it's limited to that specific step of the game. By the Golden Rule, a card can break the printed rules of the game, so it makes no sense that a rule that's printed within the context of a specific step of the game would have any impact outside the step and would affect the workings of a card, which by definition breaks the rules.
  13. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from saluk64007 in Anger and Stunned Creatures - Brad Clarifications   
    From the rulebook:
    STUN, STUN STATUS CARD When a creature becomes stunned, place a stun status card on it. The next time that creature is used, the only effect of it being used is the creature exhausts and the stun status card is removed instead of anything else happening. The creature does not reap or fight, and any “Reap:,” “Fight:,” or “Action:” abilities on the creature do not resolve. If a card effect causes a creature to be used while it is stunned, the creature is exhausted and the stun status card is removed, just as if the creature had been used normally.
    How does this not explain what is going on?
  14. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from TwitchyBait in Anger and Stunned Creatures - Brad Clarifications   
    From the rulebook:
    STUN, STUN STATUS CARD When a creature becomes stunned, place a stun status card on it. The next time that creature is used, the only effect of it being used is the creature exhausts and the stun status card is removed instead of anything else happening. The creature does not reap or fight, and any “Reap:,” “Fight:,” or “Action:” abilities on the creature do not resolve. If a card effect causes a creature to be used while it is stunned, the creature is exhausted and the stun status card is removed, just as if the creature had been used normally.
    How does this not explain what is going on?
  15. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from SKderu in Anger and Stunned Creatures - Brad Clarifications   
    Nothing you haven't already seen. I'm doing a labor of love to try to fix all these on my own right now.
  16. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from TwitchyBait in Going To Time   
    I see it more as "I'm winning; I should make sure this doesn't go to time where a tiebreaker (which is really a modified coin flip) will decide the game, possibly not in my favor." And from what I'm seeing about this game in particular, this seems to be a corner case where it didn't work out as expected.
    Let's look at each individual piece and see what it represents and if it is contributing to the idea of being more likely to reward the one who would have won had there been no time limit and how it impacts time decisions:
    1. Active player completes turn. If there is a Key Charge or similar card that would be used to win, it still can be. This is appropriate and good. If this doesn't end the game, there is still the chance of earning enough Æmber to forge afterward, which means there is incentive to generate Æmber and reduce the opponent's total. 
    2. If game still not finished, other player gets one turn. It is here that the other player is incentivized to take the "net Æmber lead" assuming there's no more than one key difference between the players.
    3. Now each player gets to forge one key at 6 (no more, no less) if they can, and we go by Most Keys/Most Æmber, most "potential Æmber" and then "first player". Clearly, most keys should be the first tiebreaker, as that is the goal of the game. Most Æmber is a good second tiebreaker, as that is what you need to forge keys. The "most potential" is an abstraction of how quickly you can get to the goal of forging another key, so that makes sense. The only thing that seems a bit strange is the first player tiebreaker, but that seems to be a balance against the debilitating first turn rule that limits you to playing or discarding one card on the first turn. 
    So what happened here? Let's assume the worst that the opponent could not have stopped the key forging on that turn and instead used the tiebreaker to "go wide" and generate a net Æmber lead. In this case, it's not what would have happened had the game not gone to time. But as I mentioned above, if someone is winning, it is to their advantage to complete the game.
    It is possible that the opponent would have played differently had it been a normal turn and not a tiebreaker turn, and the key could have been stopped. At that point, who knows what would have happened, so it's hard to speculate. All we know is that it was a tiebreaker turn.
    Some people will ask why the opponent even gets a turn in this case. This to me makes sense, because without it, I could deliberately stall out the game just before my opponent wins and crank out a net Æmber lead on my finishing turn. It would be your situation just with a different player doing it. So if we are going to be faced with the same possibility no matter what happens, I would rather have it on the person not taking the final turn. Why? Because the way it is now incentivizes players to play quicker so that they are less likely to be the one taking the turn at the moment the round ends.
    Now if I had my way, I'd go to chess clocks, but that's another story for another time.
  17. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from blinkingline in Going To Time   
    Again, I don't know what happened, so I don't know if you were just unlucky or if your opponent slowrolled you into a favorable position. If it were up to me, I would just use a chess clock on the game, and if one person  runs out of time, all their turns become automated, and if both run out of time, the game ends according to the end of game procedure. I have little sympathy for anyone who takes most of the match time in an attempt to ride out the clock. It's hard to judge when there's a shared timer, but blatantly obvious when each person gets their own timer. I don't mind people wasting their own time, but when they waste everyone's time, I get concerned.
  18. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from blinkingline in Going To Time   
    That's a bit of the balancing penalty in the event that someone is trying to stall the game. I don't know what happened in your game, but if I'm in the lead, it's to my advantage this way to play faster so that time is more likely to end on my opponent's turn. 
  19. Thanks
    Rabbitball got a reaction from Wandalf the Gizzard in Infinite Shard of Life   
    I don't have access to a specific delineation of which cards fall under which categories, but it would fall into something like this:
    3 houses, 12 cards per house. If later rules cause a house to go over, either the latest cards are removed (as a block) and we try again or random unpaired cards are removed until we are back down to 12. 
    One card set so far (Master of X) can represent a choice of cards from within it. When the algorithm picks "Master" in the Dis section, it randomly chooses which of the three Masters you get.e p
    Some cards can only be obtained when the algorithm chooses the appropriate card that represents the whole block (Horseman of Pestilence triggers the whole Horseman block, Timetraveller triggers Help from Future Self, etc.) 
    Other cards trigger additional cards but don't specify how many of the other card can be present, such as a Troop Call requires at least one Niffle and Niffle Queen requires at least one Niffle Ape. 
    Some cards have a limit as to how many can appear per deck. There may even be an overall limit (I think 5 per deck is the highest I've heard of), but other cards are lower.
  20. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from dpuck1998 in What cards do you play, that NEVER gets played against you?   
    Are you sure? They both say "You may spend Æmber on [this card] when forging keys." The card text doesn't limit when that applies. Is there a ruling I missed about this?
  21. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from CaptainJaguarShark in Using an Opponents Safe Place Artifact   
    It gets weirder when your opponent has no creatures and only a Mighty Javelin. Nexus either stays home or turns traitor on someone. Even weirder when there are no other creatures on your side.
  22. Haha
    Rabbitball got a reaction from Whiz Canmaj in What cards do you play, that NEVER gets played against you?   
    I know it's a rare, but I have only seen One Stood Against Many used against me once, even though I find any way I can to use it. My first five decks had Sanctum and two of them had this card so I use it a lot. Even better when paired with Shield of Justice or Potion of Invulnerability 😇
  23. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from CaptainJaguarShark in Masterplan getting Destroyed. What happens?   
    By that logic, when Masterplan is returned to the hand via Whispering Reliquary or Grasping vines, the card will be under Masterplan in your hand. Have fun with that one.
  24. Haha
    Rabbitball got a reaction from Simplegarak in decksofkeyforge.com update, Chains, SAS for unregistered decks!   
    I prefer Terms of Redress: Thou shalt wear pants. 😆
  25. Like
    Rabbitball got a reaction from Simplegarak in decksofkeyforge.com update, Chains, SAS for unregistered decks!   
    No metric is going to measure everything. Part of what it can't measure is how well a player navigates the nuances of a particular deck. You seem to be handling it well; better than what SAS or ADHD might suggest. So take pride in that.
    I think what they aren't measuring is your effectiveness with the Soul Snatcher. Turning Bad Pennys into repeatable Æmber generators is normally done with Seeker Needles; you are doing it with Soul Snatchers and your way it doesn't matter if you attack or your opponent does. Add to that the idea of sacrificing your underpowered creatures for Æmber, and this probably explains your overperforming the SAS/ADHD ratings.
×
×
  • Create New...