Cactus Web Site special offer: Orders over $75 will receive a free Angel of God 2023 National Promo card while supplies last.
I'm assuming you could have this and the no ability sites in the same deck?
Why did the new Egypt site not become a city?? But Samaria did?? (was it because the Egyptian theme already have Ramses as a city??)
Quote from: redemption collector 777 on October 07, 2018, 09:55:53 PMWhy did the new Egypt site not become a city?? But Samaria did?? (was it because the Egyptian theme already have Ramses as a city??)We reserve making a city card for locations that were literally a city. AFAIK Egypt is a country which contains several cities, but not a city itself. Same can be said for places like Assyria and Canaan.
If DoN is placed on Book of Covenant what happens? Asking since BoC protects contents but not itself.
If a card is held by another card and the underlying card is relocated, the held card is generally relocated(regardless of protect effects) to the same location that the underlying card is relocated to and remains there.The exception to this rule is:1 Lost Souls held in Sites are returned to the general Land of Bondage and do not follow the underlyingSites when the Sites are relocated.
I’m in support of TTB without Unity.
If hand control Rome is still a thing I could see it being good there.
I'm not concerned about potentially losing this in a Daniel deck. It's clearly designed for Romans, and with Romans it should stay. It can keep the CBN. Romans need a boss character, and what better way to encourage civilization defenses than cards like Alex, BabyMerchants, and the like?
Part of the reason we're reprinting the Daniel beasts is so that they can function in a purely Daniel based defense. While I'm definitely open to changes, I'm not willing to sacrifice their functionality together in a Daniel deck. Apart from being unsynergistic, none of the old ones are bad and even still see play in their respective themes.
I thought it went without saying, but I was thinking of how gross TTB would be in Booster Draft as-is. Also, I thought we were trying to move away from splashing?
I've never known anyone who's wanted to use all the beasts in the same deck. That's five brigades...
The other Dominant that Gabe mentioned is next on the spoilers menu for this week. Will this card take one of your coveted Dominant slots?Spoiler (hover to show)
Spoiler (hover to show)
And something to throw out for discussion, would it be better or worse if “negate” is added to the rescue?
But as it stands it can target evil OT human prophets (such as Balaam). The wording would need to be changed to “your good OT human prophet.”
Quote from: Gabe on October 08, 2018, 04:16:31 PMSpoiler (hover to show)At first I was happy to see the band put before the discard so it would happen before SI but then I remembered the band will still come after the discard anyway because of the ordering rules for adding a character to battle. Perhaps it would be better to put the discard part before the band on the card itself to prevent people making the mistake I initially did?
Quote from: Kevinthedude on October 08, 2018, 05:34:07 PMQuote from: Gabe on October 08, 2018, 04:16:31 PMSpoiler (hover to show)At first I was happy to see the band put before the discard so it would happen before SI but then I remembered the band will still come after the discard anyway because of the ordering rules for adding a character to battle. Perhaps it would be better to put the discard part before the band on the card itself to prevent people making the mistake I initially did?I'm pretty sure those rules only apply to characters, so this would be band then discard. I'm still not sure that's what we want.