Author Topic: A Smaller Game (Read 20067 times)

Xonathan · « **on:** February 29, 2016, 04:43:26 PM »

Playing T2 recently has been a lot of fun. Longer games and huge decks has a lot of appeal for me, but I was thinking... What if there was a version of Redemption that had a very small deck made to play between 10 to 25 minutes.

Any thoughts?

I was thinking a very small Dom cap, three souls wins, no burial or NJ. Not sure on the number of cards per deck though, maybe thirty or so.

jesse · « **Reply #1 on:** February 29, 2016, 05:03:58 PM »

It would be interesting deck-building! Maybe to be fair it should be like T2 where you have to have an even number of good and evil cards. Otherwise I envision it being an all-offense FBTN band rush to 3. Sounds like it could be fun!

Xonathan · « **Reply #2 on:** February 29, 2016, 05:10:05 PM »

I like the even number of evil and good cards, probably the fairest way.

kariusvega · « **Reply #3 on:** February 29, 2016, 06:31:54 PM »

i do like this concept

KingLeo · « **Reply #4 on:** February 29, 2016, 06:36:32 PM »

In order to accomplish this I think that only no ability cards should be allowed!

Or even more exciting only cards with one sentence of an ability or less!

KingLeo

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #5 on:** March 03, 2016, 01:56:44 AM »

I'm excited about this idea. Perhaps I can play around with some cards and see what numbers feel the most fun

Ironisaac · « **Reply #6 on:** March 03, 2016, 08:52:04 AM »

I think that it would be really fun to do a draft like this. i see it as you get a random tin and those are the only ability cards you get. all the other ability cards can only have max 2 sentences. You would then draft 2 limited/unlimited, 2 prophets, and a box of your choice. Thoughts?

uthminister [BR] · « **Reply #7 on:** March 03, 2016, 09:23:14 AM »

At the very least something like this would be good for doing game demos...

The Guardian · « **Reply #8 on:** March 03, 2016, 10:26:03 AM »

Another possible way to structure it would be having a set list of what cards you get to use.

5 Heroes
5 GE
5 ECs
5 EE
5 Lost souls
2 Artifacts
1 Fortress
1 Covenant
1 Curse

Xonathan · « **Reply #9 on:** March 03, 2016, 11:50:00 AM »

I like that

KingLeo · « **Reply #10 on:** March 03, 2016, 12:18:40 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on March 03, 2016, 10:26:03 AM

Another possible way to structure it would be having a set list of what cards you get to use.

5 Heroes
5 GE
5 ECs
5 EE
5 Lost souls
2 Artifacts
1 Fortress
1 Covenant
1 Curse

Lazarus
thankful leper
seeker of the lost
generous widow
watchful

convincing miracle
taking Egypt's wealth
faith as mustard seed
repentance and restitution
meeting messiah

arts three nails
chariots

the new covenant

add a defense and here is the never ending offense in this version hahahaha

The Guardian · « **Reply #11 on:** March 03, 2016, 12:21:45 PM »

Okay, my Curse is Covenant with Death.

KingLeo · « **Reply #12 on:** March 03, 2016, 12:47:31 PM »

haha rip my offense XD

Josh · « **Reply #13 on:** March 03, 2016, 01:03:56 PM »

My thoughts/comments for small decks:

I'd want a rule that restricts players from placing LS in sites. Sitelock would be a pain to worry about with so few slots available. But I still want to let players use sites for their abilities if they choose (i.e., Nazareth).

I don't think I'd like any deckbuilding restrictions beyond "Good cards must equal evil cards".

I'd prefer no Dominants and no Liner LS.

Some cards are going to go way up in power. Jephthah, off the top of my head.

This may end up being a boon for combo decks, since your opponent can't play offense-heavy, your deck is smaller so you draw your combo pieces faster, and you don't have to worry about SoG/NJ.

Minion of Jesus · « **Reply #14 on:** March 04, 2016, 03:15:39 PM »

Quote from: jmhartz on March 03, 2016, 01:03:56 PM

My thoughts/comments for small decks:

I'd want a rule that restricts players from placing LS in sites. Sitelock would be a pain to worry about with so few slots available. But I still want to let players use sites for their abilities if they choose (i.e., Nazareth).

I don't think I'd like any deckbuilding restrictions beyond "Good cards must equal evil cards".

I'd prefer no Dominants and no Liner LS.

Some cards are going to go way up in power. Jephthah, off the top of my head.

This may end up being a boon for combo decks, since your opponent can't play offense-heavy, your deck is smaller so you draw your combo pieces faster, and you don't have to worry about SoG/NJ.

I think this is probably best. Also, maybe exile a few cards from use, like Zebulun, Watchful Servant...

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #15 on:** April 05, 2016, 11:04:52 PM »

OK, so I just tried this with my daughter recently and we had fun.

We used:
4 GC
4 GE
4 EC
4 EE
4 LS
4 others (sites, forts, arts, covs, curses, hopper LS)
0 doms (and no 2/3-liner)

We played to 3 LSs for victory, and because the games were short we were able to play many times. I was surprised and pleased how similar the feel was to regular redemption. The games were all close (1 LS differential). Every game one player decked out on the final turn, so basically all the cards got used in each game. There were some fun battles, and some interesting twists. Overall it was just a great experience.

uthminister [BR] · « **Reply #16 on:** April 06, 2016, 09:06:27 AM »

Very cool. I will have to employ this strategy when I do any future conventions. Quick games are good to demonstrate and explain.

Ironisaac · « **Reply #17 on:** April 06, 2016, 11:03:11 AM »

GC:
tAUtO, Gideon, thankful leper, watchful servant
EC:
priest of Zeus, Demetrius the silversmith, Hellenistic Jews stoic philosophers
GE:
Sams edict, repentance and restitution, Convincing miracle, kindness
EE:
seek and destroy, abandonment , pride of simon, abom,
Art:
Samaritan water jar, chariots, shrine.
Fort:
Areopagus
Ls:
female only, revealer, nt only, forced draw

Any suggestions?

Xonathan · « **Reply #18 on:** April 06, 2016, 11:10:27 AM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on April 05, 2016, 11:04:52 PM

OK, so I just tried this with my daughter recently and we had fun.

We used:
4 GC
4 GE
4 EC
4 EE
4 LS
4 others (sites, forts, arts, covs, curses, hopper LS)
0 doms (and no 2/3-liner)

We played to 3 LSs for victory, and because the games were short we were able to play many times. I was surprised and pleased how similar the feel was to regular redemption. The games were all close (1 LS differential). Every game one player decked out on the final turn, so basically all the cards got used in each game. There were some fun battles, and some interesting twists. Overall it was just a great experience.

How many cards did you draw?

Josh · « **Reply #19 on:** April 06, 2016, 01:57:11 PM »

The first deck that comes to mind (assuming that DAEs are 1/2 GE and 1/2 EE):

Heroes: Isaiah, Ezekiel, Micah, Seraph
GEs: Live Coal, Swords Into Plowshares
ECs: Astrologers, Chaldeans, Assyrian Survivor, ASA
EEs: Scattered, Mist
DAEs (1/2 GE, 1/2 EE): Drawn Sword, Forest Fire, Razor, Siegeworks
Others: I Am Holy, Hidden Treasures, Hopper LS, CWD

The Guardian · « **Reply #20 on:** April 06, 2016, 02:26:32 PM »

Quote from: jmhartz on April 06, 2016, 01:57:11 PM

The first deck that comes to mind (assuming that DAEs are 1/2 GE and 1/2 EE):

Heroes: Isaiah, Ezekiel, Micah, Seraph
GEs: Live Coal, Swords Into Plowshares
ECs: Astrologers, Chaldeans, Assyrian Survivor, ASA
EEs: Scattered, Mist
DAEs (1/2 GE, 1/2 EE): Drawn Sword, Forest Fire, Razor, Siegeworks
Others: I Am Holy, Hidden Treasures, Hopper LS, CWD

I would swap Mist for Invoking Terror otherwise that's a pretty formidable list for this format.

The Guardian · « **Reply #21 on:** April 06, 2016, 02:41:20 PM »

Here's mine

Heroes: AutO, Gideon, Angel w/ Secret Name, Jair
EC: King Manny, King Zed, King Amon, Gomer
GE: Edict, Trumpets and Torches, Capturing Canaan, Taking Egypt's Wealth
EE: Scattered, Dungeon, Gib Trick, Plot
Other: Gates of Jerusalem, CwD, Holy Grail, Hopper
LS: NT Only, Female Only, Wanderer, Awake

The Guardian · « **Reply #22 on:** April 06, 2016, 03:17:07 PM »

Another fun way to do this might be a best of 3, but you have to use completely different decks for each game--you would basically treat the 3 decks as if they were one T1 deck (of less than 100). So you could use the Green David in one deck and King David in another deck, but you could not use Gabriel (WA) in one deck and Gabriel (I) in another deck.

Ironisaac · « **Reply #23 on:** April 06, 2016, 03:21:23 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on April 06, 2016, 03:17:07 PM

Another fun way to do this might be a best of 3, but you have to use completely different decks for each game--you would basically treat the 3 decks as if they were one T1 deck (of less than 100). So you could use the Green David in one deck and King David in another deck, but you could not use Gabriel (WA) in one deck and Gabriel (I) in another deck.

Thats an interesting idea, i think i like it.

Josh · « **Reply #24 on:** April 06, 2016, 06:16:37 PM »

So have we all decided that we can't put LS in sites? Because otherwise I'm using 2-3 Silver sites and an Orange defense

Plus, Shrine + Hand Discard LS is too abusable with such small decks.

I really don't want to have to worry about sitelock when building one of these decks.

EDIT: I really like this idea. I'm willing to build some of these decks and do best-of-3, where all 3 decks would make a legal T1 deck (except for the ratio of LS to non-LS cards, since we're not quite following it right).

News:

Author Topic: A Smaller Game (Read 20067 times)

kariusvega