PROPHECIES OF CHRIST (Spoiler thread)

[Watchman]

ELDERS: We need to be SPOILED.

[Red Dragon Thorn]

Get excited. Large batch spoilers coming soon^(tm)

[Bobbert]

Demanding new cards? Sounds like we're spoiled already!

Hahahahaseriously though give us some more reveals.

[goalieking87]

Demanding new cards? Sounds like we're spoiled already!

Hahahahaseriously though give us some more reveals.

Maybe a new “mob” card for the raging Redemption fans?

[Red Dragon Thorn]

I'm going to need to take refuge from these spoiler seekers.

This seems like a good spot to go:

Spoiler (hover to show)

[Watchman]

I'm going to need to take refuge from these spoiler seekers.

This seems like a good spot to go:

Spoiler (hover to show)

Glad to see an updated CoR! That’s a brought protect ability on the site side, which obviously includes during battle. Should it be protected in territory instead? An ITB ability won’t work on this, making it harder to win a battle.

[Gabe]

Glad to see an updated CoR! That’s a brought protect ability on the site side, which obviously includes during battle. Should it be protected in territory instead? An ITB ability won’t work on this, making it harder to win a battle.

It only protects from one type of ability (albeit one of the most common abilities). If you build your deck around too many discard abilities that site might wreck you. But if you diversify your removal, including ways to deal with Cities/Sites, you should be OK.

[Kevinthedude]

I'm going to need to take refuge from these spoiler seekers.

This seems like a good spot to go:

Spoiler (hover to show)

Is protection from discard functionally different from protection discard abilities or is the wording convention going back to the other way of writing things?

[Gabe]

I'm going to need to take refuge from these spoiler seekers.

This seems like a good spot to go:

Spoiler (hover to show)

Is protection from discard functionally different from protection discard abilities or is the wording convention going back to the other way of writing things?

It's the same thing. There just isn't room for the word abilities.

[Kor]

I'm going to need to take refuge from these spoiler seekers.

This seems like a good spot to go:

Spoiler (hover to show)

Sorry it only protects OT humans.

[ChristianSoldier]

I'm going to need to take refuge from these spoiler seekers.

This seems like a good spot to go:

Spoiler (hover to show)

Glad to see an updated CoR! That’s a brought protect ability on the site side, which obviously includes during battle. Should it be protected in territory instead? An ITB ability won’t work on this, making it harder to win a battle.

While you're right that ITB usually won't work on it, if for some reason you add City of Refuge to battle (say you need to use it for access) an ITB would interrupt the protect ability... at least if I'm reading the rules for Interrupt the Battle right.

[Kor]

Glad to see an updated CoR! That’s a brought protect ability on the site side, which obviously includes during battle. Should it be protected in territory instead? An ITB ability won’t work on this, making it harder to win a battle.

It only protects from one type of ability (albeit one of the most common abilities). If you build your deck around too many discard abilities that site might wreck you. But if you diversify your removal, including ways to deal with Cities/Sites, you should be OK.

At the very least pretty much all decks run Christian Martyr/Angel of the Lord...protecting from those is very strong!  Although it IS symmetrical...

[The Guardian]

Might we see some decks that don't run AotL/CM because they plan to run City of Refuge? Makes for some interesting dom selection choices...

[Kor]

Might we see some decks that don't run AotL/CM because they plan to run City of Refuge? Makes for some interesting dom selection choices...

As much as I’d like to believe that, seems more likely those decks just 3 Woes it for a turn.

[Watchman]

Might we see some decks that don't run AotL/CM because they plan to run City of Refuge? Makes for some interesting dom selection choices...

As much as I’d like to believe that, seems more likely those decks just 3 Woes it for a turn.

Then your opponent will now activate Fall of Man so you can’t play your dominants the next battle. 😁

[TheHobbit13]

Seems good with aocp

[Watchman]

Cool new Daniel cards. A couple of questions about some of them:

Spoiler (hover to show)

Shouldn’t silver brigade be repped on this since half of the Daniel heroes are silver (and would seem appropriate given eternal judgment)?

Spoiler (hover to show)

If Nebie blocks and captures a human to the fort, does that human immediately get discarded? I assume so since it doesn’t say “each upkeep” when the discard happens.

[Kor]

For the furnace, I know at least it used to be that if a fortress describes both how cards are added and removed that was the only way you could add or remove them.  Yet in the LoR article it sounds like you can use furnace to clean up otherwise captured characters even though it describes how to add (block with neb) and remove (discard or release and search).  Am I missing something?

[The Guardian]

Shouldn’t silver brigade be repped on this since half of the Daniel heroes are silver (and would seem appropriate given eternal judgment)?

That option was discussed, but we decided to hold off on adding Silver & Orange to this card.

[Watchman]

Shouldn’t silver brigade be repped on this since half of the Daniel heroes are silver (and would seem appropriate given eternal judgment)?

That option was discussed, but we decided to hold off on adding Silver & Orange to this card.

May I ask what the reason(s) were?

[The Guardian]

IIRC, we were satisfied with the current power level of the card without adding additional brigades to make it stronger. We also discussed the possibility of making a Silver/Orange version in a future set down the road.

[Josh]

Spoiler (hover to show)

Does the first sentence need the word "instead"?  Seems the definition of "Instead" adds complication when you could simply say "If you hold a card here, discard it." 

Plus, that flows better with sentence two, which has a legitimate Instead ability.

[thecoolguy]

picture this


Pauls belt to capture a Daniel hero put it in fiery furnace. to release it to get out a dominant

[thecoolguy]

does anyone else think the LR Daniel soul be a cloud hero because al the other reprints are getting a cloud identifier and the Cloud Daniel is cloud too

[RedemptionAggie]

For the furnace, I know at least it used to be that if a fortress describes both how cards are added and removed that was the only way you could add or remove them.  Yet in the LoR article it sounds like you can use furnace to clean up otherwise captured characters even though it describes how to add (block with neb) and remove (discard or release and search).  Am I missing something?

Does the first sentence need the word "instead"?  Seems the definition of "Instead" adds complication when you could simply say "If you hold a card here, discard it." 

Plus, that flows better with sentence two, which has a legitimate Instead ability.

To answer both of these, I think the first sentence needs the instead to avoid describing how cards are removed. If you instead the hold, it was never there.

Nebby capturing directly to the Fort made it a bit of a pain to make it work like want.