The Fall of Man - Cards and Info

[redemption collector 777]

Looked at the final card prints and have some suggestions:



Rubble and Dust SA:

that has contents , or has a card placed on , equipped to , or activated on it


1.  I don't see any point of putting the word "or" in the red highlighted part above in the special ability. All the commas along with the last "or" word seems to still represent the same thing.



2.

The Fall of Man
Convert a male and a female hero to brown this turn

Forbidden Fruit
Convert all Heroes in battle to pale green this turn



Thinking these abilities should say " Convert a male and a female human hero to brown this turn"

and Convert all human Heroes in battle to pale green this turn.


Cards like leading others astray (crimson)  say "convert a human hero" along with some other cards.



I do know that the R.E.G says non-humans can not be targeted for convert abilities unless it says it can , but it would be nice if the those abilities put the word"human" in it so players do not have to remember that R.E.G rule as much.


Anyone think these changes are necessary??

Thoughts??

[RedemptionAggie]

The first "or" on R&D allows us to shorten the set of non-contents. If you remove it, the last 3 entries probably need to be "a card [placed on/equipped to/activated on] it".

[YeshuaIsLord]

The Fall of Man
Convert a male and a female hero to brown this turn
Forbidden Fruit
Convert all Heroes in battle to pale green this turn

Thinking these abilities should say " Convert a male and a female human hero to brown this turn"
and Convert all human Heroes in battle to pale green this turn.

Cards like leading others astray (crimson)  say "convert a human hero" along with some other cards.
I do know that the R.E.G says non-humans can not be targeted for convert abilities unless it says it can , but it would be nice if the those abilities put the word"human" in it so players do not have to remember that R.E.G rule as much.

Anyone think these changes are necessary??
Thoughts??

Makes sense to me

[redemption collector 777]

The first "or" on R&D allows us to shorten the set of non-contents. If you remove it, the last 3 entries probably need to be "a card [placed on/equipped to/activated on] it".

What do you think about changing the convert abilities to include the word "human" in it??

[Gabe]

The first "or" on R&D allows us to shorten the set of non-contents. If you remove it, the last 3 entries probably need to be "a card [placed on/equipped to/activated on] it".

What do you think about changing the convert abilities to include the word "human" in it??

The definition of convert covers this (it's been that way for years). Human is not necessary but has been used in the past for clarification.

[RedemptionAggie]

The first "or" on R&D allows us to shorten the set of non-contents. If you remove it, the last 3 entries probably need to be "a card [placed on/equipped to/activated on] it".

What do you think about changing the convert abilities to include the word "human" in it??

If the card is printed with "human", it can only ever target humans, even if that default for convert gets changed or removed. I think it's more probable that future converts are worded like Falling Away (CoW), with a convert for humans and something else (underdeck or withdraw, probably) for non-humans, but there's a slim chance the default could change.

[redemption collector 777]

The first "or" on R&D allows us to shorten the set of non-contents. If you remove it, the last 3 entries probably need to be "a card [placed on/equipped to/activated on] it".

What do you think about changing the convert abilities to include the word "human" in it??

If the card is printed with "human", it can only ever target humans, even if that default for convert gets changed or removed. I think it's more probable that future converts are worded like Falling Away (CoW), with a convert for humans and something else (underdeck or withdraw, probably) for non-humans, but there's a slim chance the default could change.

Okay I see. Makes sense to me.

[Watchman]

Why is Forbidden Fruit also considered a good enhancement?

[Kor]

Why is Forbidden Fruit also considered a good enhancement?

Because it’s the fruit of knowledge of good and evil?

[Watchman]

Why is Forbidden Fruit also considered a good enhancement?

Because it’s the fruit of knowledge of good and evil?

Right; good point. I forgot about the “good” part of that. I was only thinking of “Forbidden” Fruit and the fact that when they eat it they “will surely die.”

[kariusvega]

My appreciation for this set is growing steadily.. Can't wait for it to ship and to play!

[thecoolguy]

I am loving the new LR what do you guys think is the last 2?
I think that it is
- Uriah , The hittite or Jeil
- Dungeon om Malichiah

[The Guardian]

They were just correctly guessed and revealed a few moments ago...they have been added to the first post! 

[thecoolguy]

Oops well there goes that 

[EmJayBee83]

Redirect isn't negate and sometimes will do things you don't want it to, which is when you have to argue about it lol. It's a higher risk/reward option than a negate.

It is also completely shut down by Ram's Horn, which adds to the risk.

[Ironisaac]

Redirect isn't negate and sometimes will do things you don't want it to, which is when you have to argue about it lol. It's a higher risk/reward option than a negate.

It is also completely shut down by Ram's Horn, which adds to the risk.

I'd love it if that made a comeback lol.

[Gabe]

Redirect isn't negate and sometimes will do things you don't want it to, which is when you have to argue about it lol. It's a higher risk/reward option than a negate.

It is also completely shut down by Ram's Horn, which adds to the risk.

I'd love it if that made a comeback lol.

Can it really be called a "comeback" if it was never used in the first place? 

For reference, because I imagine some people have no idea what we're talking about...

Spoiler (hover to show)

[goalieking87]

Redirect isn't negate and sometimes will do things you don't want it to, which is when you have to argue about it lol. It's a higher risk/reward option than a negate.

It is also completely shut down by Ram's Horn, which adds to the risk.

I'd love it if that made a comeback lol.

Can it really be called a "comeback" if it was never used in the first place? 

For reference, because I imagine some people have no idea what we're talking about...

Spoiler (hover to show)

Ooh, with the changes to artifact piles, would this ability remain active the entire game after deactivating it as long as the card is still in play?

[The Guardian]

No--it's essentially a modifier that says "Enhancements used by holder cannot be redirected" which is basically the same concept as Asherah Pole.

[adevine]

Redirect isn't negate and sometimes will do things you don't want it to, which is when you have to argue about it lol. It's a higher risk/reward option than a negate.

It is also completely shut down by Ram's Horn, which adds to the risk.

I'd love it if that made a comeback lol.

Can it really be called a "comeback" if it was never used in the first place? 

For reference, because I imagine some people have no idea what we're talking about...

Spoiler (hover to show)

Ooh, with the changes to artifact piles, would this ability remain active the entire game after deactivating it as long as the card is still in play?

What changes??

[Gabe]

Ooh, with the changes to artifact piles, would this ability remain active the entire game after deactivating it as long as the card is still in play?

What changes??

There are no recent changes. A long time ago the face down artifacts were considered "out of play".

[kariusvega]

Just wondering why the 6/ soul is 6/ or less..

Shouldn't it be "6/ or more"? How is a weak guy going to carry him? lol

Spoiler (hover to show)

Just wondering the logic here

[Sunglasses]

Because they have initiative and can move faster

[The Guardian]

The idea was to have a card the complemented that */4 or greater LS.

It's certainly not going to be a top tier LS, but it could be fun to try a "restricted souls" strategy with this, female only, */4, NT Only, OT Only, etc.