Author Topic: Mechanic Idea on Some Covenants, and now a Lost Soul! - Updated 2/19/17 (Read 5845 times)

browarod · « **on:** February 15, 2017, 10:59:53 PM »

Since the mulligan idea hasn't been adopted, I thought about making a mechanic that fit into the game that could help alleviate bad draws. Therefore, I present to you: Insight-Class Cards

= If this card is in your opening hand, you may reveal it to exchange it with a card of matching type and alignment in deck.

Clarifications:
-This icon takes effect immediately after each player draws their starting 8, before Lost Souls are put down to determine first player.
-I think the art on Promise to Israel may have already been used on a card but I liked it.
-As with all my cards, please feel free to mention if you think any of the abilities are too powerful or need different balancing.

Bdog · « **Reply #1 on:** February 15, 2017, 11:06:55 PM »

The uno reverse symbol would look pretty cool, and it would be fitting.

browarod · « **Reply #2 on:** February 15, 2017, 11:16:52 PM »

Quote from: Bdog on February 15, 2017, 11:06:55 PM

The uno reverse symbol would look pretty cool, and it would be fitting.

Interesting idea! I'll try out some variations and see how it looks.

Xonathan · « **Reply #3 on:** February 16, 2017, 10:44:25 AM »

I think a dove symbol would work well and in the same spot as the cloud symbol in the CoW set.

megamanlan · « **Reply #4 on:** February 16, 2017, 11:17:23 AM »

Perhaps add that it has to be the same book as well? To make it a bit more fair?

browarod · « **Reply #5 on:** February 16, 2017, 11:31:37 AM »

Thanks for the icon suggestions everyone! I'd also like feedback on the card effects themselves.

Quote from: Xonathan on February 16, 2017, 10:44:25 AM

I think a dove symbol would work well and in the same spot as the cloud symbol in the CoW set.

That's also a neat idea, I'll look into it. Thanks!

Quote from: megamanlan on February 16, 2017, 11:17:23 AM

Perhaps add that it has to be the same book as well? To make it a bit more fair?

I feel like that might be too restrictive. Some themes aren't confined to a single book and I don't want to punish them for that.

Josh · « **Reply #6 on:** February 16, 2017, 01:03:27 PM »

I love the idea!

As per the cards, I definitely think Promise to David's Kin is too strong. Throne offenses are just so powerful right now, and this card would take them even further. This card in my opening hand would not be exchanged for any card in my deck, not even SoG

It makes it much easier to get the Saul/David band in play from turn 1, so that Throne is triggering at least 2 times each block. It gets your kings back from discard if they die (quite common for Throne offenses where Saul/David are the only Purple kings). It's a battle extender if your king would be discarded, or it can save Throne itself (which is hard enough to counter, simply because the counter has to be drawn/used before Throne runs away with the game). And it underdecks itself instead of discard or banish. And it can't be negated.

browarod · « **Reply #7 on:** February 16, 2017, 01:13:06 PM »

I will admit I did pack a lot into PtDK and it's entirely likely it's too much. Which of the aspects do you think could stay and which could go? I can definitely make it discard or banish itself rather than underdeck for the instead, and I can change the CBN to CBI (so that preventing it can work). If it can't have both the search and protect, which do you think would be more beneficial for the offense to still have access to?

I could also change the search to something more like: "On activation, if you control no human Heroes, search deck (or discard pile) for a purple king."

Not set on the discard pile so that can be removed if it's still OP.

The Schaefer · « **Reply #8 on:** February 16, 2017, 03:08:33 PM »

Promise to the levites might be too strong. Using something like hypocrisy it would be pretty easy to trigger the once per game ability. I know you have to wait 4 turns but it can amount to another SOG rescue which is really strong. In T2 those 4 turns can go by pretty quick. It does require you to build around it though so maybe it's ok.

I think the insight class idea has alot of potential though. Great job and great ideas.

browarod · « **Reply #9 on:** February 16, 2017, 03:24:43 PM »

Quote from: The Schaefer on February 16, 2017, 03:08:33 PM

Promise to the levites might be too strong. Using something like hypocrisy it would be pretty easy to trigger the once per game ability. I know you have to wait 4 turns but it can amount to another SOG rescue which is really strong. In T2 those 4 turns can go by pretty quick. It does require you to build around it though so maybe it's ok.

I think the insight class idea has alot of potential though. Great job and great ideas.

Yeah that's the back and forth I had with the idea. In T1 4 turns is longer than a lot of games go so it seems balanced there. T2 games regularly go longer so it would be more likely to actually get you the dominant back, but 1 more dominant rescue is less of an impact when going to 7 than 5, but is definitely still powerful.

Thanks!

Josh · « **Reply #10 on:** February 17, 2017, 10:18:38 AM »

Quote from: Browa on February 16, 2017, 01:13:06 PM

I will admit I did pack a lot into PtDK and it's entirely likely it's too much. Which of the aspects do you think could stay and which could go?

I think I'd reword it like this:

"On activation, if you don't control a purple king, exchange a card in hand with one in deck or discard pile. If your purple king would be discarded by an opponent's special ability, you may banish this instead."

I still think this strengthens the Throne/I Samuel offense, but it should no longer be overpowered.

*****

I should point out that I'm not a fan of Promise to Israel, since it seems to encourage a defense-heavy/sitelock D with a minimalist Judges offense, and it offers an end-game hammer CBN that is quite strong.

browarod · « **Reply #11 on:** February 17, 2017, 12:42:48 PM »

Quote from: jmhartz on February 17, 2017, 10:18:38 AM

I think I'd reword it like this:

"On activation, if you don't control a purple king, exchange a card in hand with one in deck or discard pile. If your purple king would be discarded by an opponent's special ability, you may banish this instead."

I still think this strengthens the Throne/I Samuel offense, but it should no longer be overpowered.

That seems viable, I'll edit the card. Thanks for the suggestion!

Quote from: jmhartz on February 17, 2017, 10:18:38 AM

I should point out that I'm not a fan of Promise to Israel, since it seems to encourage a defense-heavy/sitelock D with a minimalist Judges offense, and it offers an end-game hammer CBN that is quite strong.

The idea behind this one was to give an alternate playstyle to judges and I was inspired by the site aspect of cloud Joshua (and I was able to find a promise-related verse referencing him). Currently, judges are usually just splashed into a speed-heavy deck (or form the basis of that sort of deck) so I wanted to give a use to them that was slower and took more setup. I can understand why you might not like it, but I think encouraging other deck types is not a bad thing. And while I admit defense heavy decks aren't always fun to play against, neither are speed decks that get set up 3 turns before you even know what's going on and win without really allowing you to block.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #12 on:** February 17, 2017, 12:46:45 PM »

On promise to israel just say judges have site access and its fine. And anything you make that helps purple kings is broken right now.

Josh · « **Reply #13 on:** February 17, 2017, 01:03:40 PM »

Quote from: Browa on February 17, 2017, 12:42:48 PM

The idea behind this one was to give an alternate playstyle to judges and I was inspired by the site aspect of cloud Joshua (and I was able to find a promise-related verse referencing him). Currently, judges are usually just splashed into a speed-heavy deck (or form the basis of that sort of deck) so I wanted to give a use to them that was slower and took more setup. I can understand why you might not like it, but I think encouraging other deck types is not a bad thing. And while I admit defense heavy decks aren't always fun to play against, neither are speed decks that get set up 3 turns before you even know what's going on and win without really allowing you to block.

It's not defense-heavy that I have a problem with, it's single-color sites

browarod · « **Reply #14 on:** February 17, 2017, 01:20:23 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on February 17, 2017, 12:46:45 PM

On promise to israel just say judges have site access and its fine. And anything you make that helps purple kings is broken right now.

Do you mean I should just take off the site negate portion, or do you mean you want the card to literally just say "Your judges have Site Access." ?

Quote from: jmhartz on February 17, 2017, 01:03:40 PM

It's not defense-heavy that I have a problem with, it's single-color sites

Well, for the effect to even work you have to either be running a 63+ card deck in T1, or your opponent has to be running a site that you can steal, AND you have to get all your sites out. There's tone of site access out there, is that not enough?

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #15 on:** February 17, 2017, 01:24:32 PM »

Quote from: Browa on February 17, 2017, 01:20:23 PM

Quote from: TheHobbit on February 17, 2017, 12:46:45 PM
On promise to israel just say judges have site access and its fine. And anything you make that helps purple kings is broken right now.
Do you mean I should just take off the site negate portion, or do you mean you want the card to literally just say "Your judges have Site Access." ?

I want it to say "judges have site access" and then the rest of the ability. So that your opponents judges have site access too.

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #16 on:** February 17, 2017, 01:30:36 PM »

Quote from: jmhartz on February 17, 2017, 10:18:38 AM

I should point out that I'm not a fan of Promise to Israel, since it seems to encourage a defense-heavy/sitelock D with a minimalist Judges offense, and it offers an end-game hammer CBN that is quite strong.

I love Promise to Israel. You can't just splash it in - You have to build around it, and in order to do that realistically you're playing at 70 to get enough sites, because you can't run 8 at 63 and assume nothing will happen to one along the course of the game.

browarod · « **Reply #17 on:** February 17, 2017, 02:10:03 PM »

Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on February 17, 2017, 01:30:36 PM

I love Promise to Israel. You can't just splash it in - You have to build around it, and in order to do that realistically you're playing at 70 to get enough sites, because you can't run 8 at 63 and assume nothing will happen to one along the course of the game.

That's pretty much exactly what I was going for!

Josh · « **Reply #18 on:** February 17, 2017, 03:31:49 PM »

Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on February 17, 2017, 01:30:36 PM

Quote from: jmhartz on February 17, 2017, 10:18:38 AM
I should point out that I'm not a fan of Promise to Israel, since it seems to encourage a defense-heavy/sitelock D with a minimalist Judges offense, and it offers an end-game hammer CBN that is quite strong.

I love Promise to Israel. You can't just splash it in - You have to build around it, and in order to do that realistically you're playing at 70 to get enough sites, because you can't run 8 at 63 and assume nothing will happen to one along the course of the game.

As written, you can do this at 50 cards via Promised Land, New Jerusalem, Dragon Raid, TEotE, etc.

Also, Building Egypt

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #19 on:** February 17, 2017, 04:00:28 PM »

You can play more access sites than souls? That's news to me

Josh · « **Reply #20 on:** February 17, 2017, 04:26:01 PM »

Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on February 17, 2017, 04:00:28 PM

You can play more access sites than souls? That's news to me

What I mean is, a 50-card deck can play 7 Egypt sites, Dragon Raid, and Promised Land. That's 9 sites to trigger Promise to Israel, since it doesn't specify single-color sites.

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #21 on:** February 17, 2017, 05:20:01 PM »

Quote from: jmhartz on February 17, 2017, 04:26:01 PM

Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on February 17, 2017, 04:00:28 PM
You can play more access sites than souls? That's news to me

What I mean is, a 50-card deck can play 7 Egypt sites, Dragon Raid, and Promised Land. That's 9 sites to trigger Promise to Israel, since it doesn't specify single-color sites.

Right, and my point was that to my knowledge the deck you describe is illegal as the Lost Soul >= Site rule also doesn't make a distinction between single and multicolor sites

Master Q · « **Reply #22 on:** February 18, 2017, 12:01:28 PM »

I like this idea a lot! A couple things:

Quote from: Browa on February 15, 2017, 10:59:53 PM

= If this card is in your opening hand, you may reveal it to exchange it with a card of matching type and alignment in deck.

So, If I got any of these cards in my opening hand, I'm taking this to say you could exchange them for another covenant (matching type=Artifact, matching alignment=good). Is this correct?

For the icon: Though I personally like the idea of a praying hands icon for this, it has the same potential problem a dove has; it doesn't make sense for an evil card. Instead of a light bulb or dove, I thinking maybe a candle? That way it's closer to in-period and doesn't look out of place if it was on an evil card. I also think it would work better on the spot where the cloud is, in case you have a warrior/weapon class/territory class card with this.

I get the idea of the promises, but all these cards should probably lose their activation identifiers, except for Promise to the Levites.

Promise to the Levites still seems too good, partially because Shrine to Artemis exists, partially because Gates o' Hell exists, and partially because it takes it straight to hand. I love it, but I don't think it would be allowed to fly. I could be wrong.

Promise to Sarah is too good. It exchanges rather than discards/banishes itself like You Will Remain, it doesn't require you to have a Hero out like YWR, it doesn't require the opponent to remove the Hero with an ability, and it protects the Hero from dominants (including your Grapes). Again, I like the idea, but it's just too much. Perhaps if the protected from dominants portion was removed and it specified that the opponent had to remove the Heroes with an ability it would be fixed.

Interesting idea on Promise to David's Kin: I'm thinking changing "your purple king" in the second part to "David or a descendant of David". Makes it a bit longer, though. You could probably remove the "by an opponent" part there to make it fit.

The others seem alright to me. Well done.

browarod · « **Reply #23 on:** February 19, 2017, 11:18:40 AM »

Thanks everyone for the feedback and helpful ideas/suggestions! I'll be going through these to rework some things and try to find a better icon. I have a couple other ideas for insight-class cards as well!

Quote from: Master Q on February 18, 2017, 12:01:28 PM

So, If I got any of these cards in my opening hand, I'm taking this to say you could exchange them for another covenant (matching type=Artifact, matching alignment=good). Is this correct?

Covenants at face value are covenants, artifacts, and enhancements. As such, with the alignment restriction, you could exchange any of the above covenants with either another covenant or a good enhancement but not an artifact (because they're neutral, not good). Covenants/curses are weird like that, as are DAE/Cs (which you could exchange for either a good or evil card), but most other card types could only exchange for the exact same type of card: soul for a soul, site for a site, good enhancement for a good enhancement, etc.

As to your other thoughts, great suggestions, thanks! While I'm reworking the insight icon I'll do some cleanup of the abilities.

browarod · « **Reply #24 on:** February 19, 2017, 01:00:55 PM »

Updates!

Changelog:
-Insight-class icon changed to a candle and moved to the bottom left corner of the art akin to where the cloud symbol is located.
-New card added - "Signs" Lost Soul
-Card updates:
---Promise to the Levites: Condition for setting aside the dominant changed from "if all your Heroes are priests" to "if you control 3 or more good priests".
---Promise to Sarah: Identifier removed. Condition changed from "If your last Hero is removed from battle" to "If your last Hero is removed form battle by an opponent's ability". Protection from dominants clause removed.
---Promise to David's Kin: Identifier removed. Instead ability changed from targeting "your purple king" to "David or his descendant". Added "Cannot be interrupted" to disallow weird interactions.
---Promise to Israel: Identifier removed.
---Promise to the Apostles: Identifier removed.

News:

Author Topic: Mechanic Idea on Some Covenants, and now a Lost Soul! - Updated 2/19/17 (Read 5845 times)

browarod

browarod

browarod

browarod

browarod

browarod

TheHobbit13

browarod

TheHobbit13

browarod

browarod

browarod