Author Topic: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs  (Read 2956 times)

browarod

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« on: August 18, 2013, 11:04:34 AM »
0


I originally had it place to territory, but felt that left it too vulnerable (you'd never have a chance to get to the 10 counters).

I chose 7 because then it's useful in T1 and T2 events (and I believe there is a game rule saying only your first 5 Souls count in T1 so it shouldn't screw with differential at all). Plus 7 is a holy number. :P

For those that don't know: AWC = Alternate Win Condition (a way to win the game other than the primary way from the rules)

Offline pilgrim14

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 221
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #1 on: August 18, 2013, 12:37:58 PM »
0
There needs to be a condition to play this.
"Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase" Martin Luther King, Jr.

browarod

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #2 on: August 18, 2013, 12:48:16 PM »
0
There needs to be a condition to play this.
Care to provide reasoning, or even a suggestion of possible condition?

The round requirement is open to changing (and I'm thinking 15 might be better, or maybe 11, haha), so please feel free to provide details. ::)

Offline Drrek

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
  • The Bee of the Sea
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #3 on: August 18, 2013, 12:50:27 PM »
0
I'd say this definitely needs at least some condition, and has the potential to be way to powerful in type II.
The user formerly known as Easty.

browarod

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #4 on: August 18, 2013, 12:51:55 PM »
0
I'd say this definitely needs at least some condition, and has the potential to be way to powerful in type II.
That's the biggest reason I was thinking of upping the round requirement (though not so high as to make it unplayable in T1). Also, it has a condition, you need to have 10 counters on it. ::)

Specific suggestions would be most helpful for those saying it needs further limiting.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2013, 12:57:09 PM by browarod »

Offline Prof Underwood

  • Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8597
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #5 on: August 18, 2013, 01:22:13 PM »
+1
Any AWC needs to at least have a counter, and I can't think of one for this.  Perhaps it would require playing it on a specific hero who would also have to be set aside for the duration of the turns.  Then Darius Decree would be able to stop it (unless you put the hero in Kerith Revine).  And if the hero was in KR, then Assyrian Seige Army would be able to stop it (unless you never attacked).  And if you never attacked, then a side battle would be able to stop it.

Of course the chances of someone having a side-battle card and ASA in their deck is pretty small, but at least it makes it possible to counter this AWC.  I actually like the overall idea, and think it's creative.  I just don't want it to be broken.

Offline Master KChief

  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Greatness, at any cost.
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • GameStop
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #6 on: August 18, 2013, 01:31:14 PM »
+3
It does need a condition, AWC's by nature are supposed to be highly unplayable. As is, there would be absolutely no reason to splash this in every single deck just to put the game on a 10 turn clock.
"If it weren't for people with bad decision making skills, I'd have to get a real job." - Reynad

Offline ChristianSoldier

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #7 on: August 18, 2013, 01:34:22 PM »
0
I would at least suggest making it not a territory class, that way you need to make at least 1 attack in order to win with this card.
If you are reading this signature, thank a physicist.

Offline Master KChief

  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Greatness, at any cost.
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • GameStop
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #8 on: August 18, 2013, 01:36:27 PM »
0
I was thinking that as well, also place in territory instead of set-aside. I still can't think of many cards that would discard this from territory, but it is certainly far greater than the pseudo-immunity granted by set-aside.
"If it weren't for people with bad decision making skills, I'd have to get a real job." - Reynad

Offline Jmbeers

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 849
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #9 on: August 18, 2013, 01:44:03 PM »
0
I like the idea of AWC's but this is not a good example of one. Frankly it ruins type two. Your entire offence is dedicated to searching for this card and you play it first turn. Game over. In T1 you have a 100+ turtle with ways to search out the card and a 70+ card defense. Best two decks in the game.
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.

Offline TheJaylor

  • Trade Count: (+18)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3119
  • Fortress Alstad
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • Redemption with Jayden
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #10 on: August 18, 2013, 02:13:57 PM »
+1
I like the idea of AWC's but this is not a good example of one. Frankly it ruins type two. Your entire offence is dedicated to searching for this card and you play it first turn. Game over. In T1 you have a 100+ turtle with ways to search out the card and a 70+ card defense. Best two decks in the game.
On the plus side, at least people will be playing defense.

Offline Alex_Olijar

  • 16plus
  • Trade Count: (+15)
  • *
  • Posts: 8124
  • This guy is my mascot
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #11 on: August 18, 2013, 02:14:46 PM »
+5
This is literally the most unfun card I've ever seen. This is 100x worse than tgt. I feel like people forget how unfun getting locked out is.

Offline Josh

  • Trade Count: (+46)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3187
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #12 on: August 18, 2013, 03:17:32 PM »
0
As is, it can be searched for TC by A Soldier's Prayer x4 and Consider the Lilies x4.  And the only requirement to play it is a hero in territory and your opponent doesn't have DD or CWD active? 

There may be a way to make an AWC card for Redemption, and you have selected a good Bible verse IMO, but as is, I don't think this is it.
If creation sings Your praises so will I
If You gave Your life to love them so will I

Lamborghini_diablo

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #13 on: August 19, 2013, 09:39:00 AM »
0
Place in set aside: If an opponent discards your hero, add a counter. If you discard a hero, remove a counter. If X is 7 or greater, you win the game.

X = # of counters on this card

browarod

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #14 on: August 19, 2013, 11:10:32 AM »
-3
Most games (at least in T1, I don't have as much experience with T2) are over in under 11 rounds so I don't see how this is specifically OP in that regard (and that's assuming you get it out turn 1). Yes, there are multiple ways to search for it but you'd have to play those themes (and honestly, if you're playing with CtL you're better off using TGT as you'll win a lot faster, lol).

As Koala pointed out, anything that makes people play defense isn't a bad thing (this coming from a guy that plays Gardenciples in T1MP as his primary deck/event :P ).

I'm fine with returning it to sit in territory, as I said the set aside was a last minute change. I'm also fine with increasing the round requirement as well, does anyone have suggestions on how long would make it not "OP"?

I find it hard to come up with an appropriate hero to use this (for those that suggested limiting it to that), though removing the TC aspect would also work I suppose.

For those that want a condition, I'm still looking for specific suggestions regarding that. :P

Thanks for the comments everyone, much appreciated! :D


Place in set aside: If an opponent discards your hero, add a counter. If you discard a hero, remove a counter. If X is 7 or greater, you win the game.

X = # of counters on this card
I like that because it would make your opponent second guess their Wrath of Satan or Haman's Plot (and because you could still win if they devastate your offense) but at the same time you could conceivably get this off in the early turns of the game (I played a game where I hit Creation of the World first turn with my Genesis offense and he hit Wrath of Satan first turn as well, I would have won right then if I'd had this version of the card out).
« Last Edit: August 19, 2013, 11:19:43 AM by browarod »

Offline Josh

  • Trade Count: (+46)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3187
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #15 on: August 19, 2013, 12:47:26 PM »
0
Place in set aside: If an opponent discards your hero, add a counter. If you discard a hero, remove a counter. If X is 7 or greater, you win the game.

X = # of counters on this card

I like this idea - game events, not turns, determine the win condition.  But it seems like filling a deck with 1/1 heroes and Second Seal x4 would be a good way to activate this   :)   Or attacking with Helez/Maharai/Asahel/Provisioned Eleazer and choosing your Goat With Horn to discard your 4 heroes...

My idea:

X = number of counters on this card
"If opposed during your rescue attempt, place in set-aside:  When that opponent draws (except Draw Phase) on his turn, add a counter.  When you draw (except Draw Phase) on your turn, remove a counter.  If X is 7 or greater, you win the game."

The reason I make draw abilities work only on the person's turn is so that you can't abuse Hur/Meeting the Messiah/etc. to win the game via forced draw.  The requirement to be played in an opposed battle accomplishes two things:  One, it makes it harder to play.  Two, it makes it so it only one opponent drawing adds counters.  Otherwise, this would be mad broken in Multi and TEAMS.  TGW anyone?
If creation sings Your praises so will I
If You gave Your life to love them so will I

Lamborghini_diablo

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #16 on: August 19, 2013, 01:23:21 PM »
0
My idea:

X = number of counters on this card
"If opposed during your rescue attempt, place in set-aside:  When that opponent draws (except Draw Phase) on his turn, add a counter.  When you draw (except Draw Phase) on your turn, remove a counter.  If X is 7 or greater, you win the game."

I would abuse side battles SO hard with this card.  :D

Offline Isildur

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4775
  • Mr. Deacon
    • -
    • Southwest Region
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #17 on: August 19, 2013, 04:32:21 PM »
0
Why is there no cost to adding a counter? In its current state this card is just a ticking time bomb...

Maybe something like discard 3 cards from your hand to add a counter or something like that.
3 Prophets Packs ftw

Offline STAMP

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+19)
  • *****
  • Posts: 5014
  • Redemption brings Freedom
    • -
    • Northwest Region
Re: Thousand-Year Reign - Because Redemption could use AWCs
« Reply #18 on: August 19, 2013, 05:26:42 PM »
+2
If Alternate Win Conditions become an option, then ANB and Sin in the Camp should be returned to their former glory.  :thumbup:
Final ANB errata: Return player to game.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal