Author Topic: Breaking a Promise and Wayward Wanderer  (Read 1333 times)

browarod

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Breaking a Promise and Wayward Wanderer
« on: September 02, 2010, 02:36:01 PM »
0
I don't have references for these cards yet because I want to see if the mechanics for them are usable or not before I go hunting for verses to fit them.

Broken Promise
[Black Territory-Class Evil Enhancement | 2/2 | Verse unknown]
Negate and discard a Covenant in play or Land of Redemption.

NOTE: Some people were concerned about the Covenant in my other new card idea thread being too powerful since it could be placed on your GoYS in LoR, so here's a counter for it.

Wayward Wanderer
[Brown Evil Character | 5/7 | Generic | Verse unknown, something about finding the truth with a friend or similar]
If defeated in battle, place on a Lost Soul. If that Lost Soul is not rescued by the end of your opponent's next turn, convert it and this card to blue brigade generic heroes named "Servant of the Lord" with abilities 8/8.

NOTE: I also debated making a hero ability similar to this where if the hero lost a battle it could convert a LS to a hero, so idk which would be better.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2010, 08:50:51 PM by browarod »

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: Breaking a Promise and Wayward Wanderer
« Reply #1 on: September 02, 2010, 03:18:42 PM »
0
Promise Broken is more the part of speech used for that kind of card (or Broken Promise; see Rejected Advice, Mistakes Made, etc.). Just have it say "Discard an active covenant in play or Land of Redemption." You may want to make it "Negate and Discard" so it's more widely useful than just being a direct counter to Love Cov.

I love Wayward Wanderer, but it needs this identifier to prevent abuse: -May not be in a deck with fewer than 63 cards-
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

browarod

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Breaking a Promise and Wayward Wanderer
« Reply #2 on: September 02, 2010, 06:26:57 PM »
0
Edited the enhancement.

As for the EC, why does it need the restriction? The minimum LS count is 7. This + Burial still leaves the requisite 5 needed to win.

Offline joeycauldron

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 544
  • ad astra per aspera
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: Breaking a Promise and Wayward Wanderer
« Reply #3 on: September 02, 2010, 08:19:59 PM »
0
For WW I would say the next two turns.
Mawwage, Mawwage is whot brwings us togethwa today, Mawwage...  ...ane Love, twue love...

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: Breaking a Promise and Wayward Wanderer
« Reply #4 on: September 03, 2010, 12:28:27 AM »
+1
7 LS, one off with Wayward Wanderer, 2 with SoG/NJ, one with Burial, leaving 3. Your opponent will be unable to win without SoG/NJ, and if you get Judas' Plot up after they AotL but before they SoG/NJ, they're locked. They're also locked if you snipe SoG or NJ (easy to do if you dedicate a defense to it), if you let them rescue 2 and then activate Altar of Ahaz, if they're not running N.T. Females or the FbtN LS (or you neutralize that soul), or if you Discard a soul by some other means (harder than the rest, but not too terribly difficult to set up with Jephthah or that Demon guy).

There are workarounds through the lock, but this card would make The Amalekite's Slave a staple (fewer staples is a good thing), and make JT almost a staple (since the Hopper can be sniped with Harvest Time or Woman at the Well). The other ways around this lock are useless against any other type of deck, and any strategy whose counters are only useful against that particular strategy is broken.

Another one of the problems is that it takes very few cards to work and can be splashed into almost any deck to make it much better (this was a big problem with TGT). Of the cards needed to make the lock viable, SoG, NJ, Burial, and the restrictive LS's are already in almost every deck, so a player would only need to add WW and a way to play Confusion to any deck and it'd be much better. And since WW is Brown, a Brown or Brown/PG defense with Manasseh would have an easy time of picking off SoG without sacrificing any normal defense in case the lock doesn't work.

Even without the lock strategy, just splashing WW into any deck would create a soul drought, letting you stall. This would be a bad thing as speed would have even more guns in its arsenal, and many speed decks splash Haman's Plot and Gibeonite Trickery anyway. Restricting it to 63 cards or larger would solve both the problem of speed splashability and easy soul lock.
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

Offline TheKarazyvicePresidentRR

  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15781
  • Currently undead
    • -
    • Southeast Region
Re: Breaking a Promise and Wayward Wanderer
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2010, 02:34:59 PM »
0
Pol is right. I can lost soul lock as is, let alone with that.
Not quite a ghost...but not quite not.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal