Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Quote from: Redoubter on December 05, 2011, 11:27:52 PM

Quote from: I am Knot a Blonde! on December 05, 2011, 11:10:48 PM

then you could say the same thing about any charachter. What if my charachter's ability was "rescue 5 lost souls"? but could be negated.. would it not still be OP? exactly. I could see how this charachter in itself could be used to win entire games. Heck, even tournaments.

I really do like to hear criticism of these cards with some examples of problems, but hyperbole on either side gets testing nowhere.  This character, by himself, cannot win blocks, he cannot discard dominants that are still in decks (where they usually live, especially turn 1), he has no protection on his card to stop even the easiest anti-EC card, he is prevented by many cards, he has no recursion, and he cripples your hand unless you happen to be playing what your opponent is playing.

I was not mean in my response, and I gave specific examples to back up my claims.  Can we keep emotion and hyperbole out (on both sides), please?  I really think this is a great idea for a theme and want to find ways it could work.  Not having cards that can do good things (especially when they're restrictive to the holder like this one) does not help anyone.

I'm just wondering how I didn't see your first post, you made a lot of the points I was trying to make and I probably wouldn't have posted again if I had seen you had.

Quote from: browarod on December 06, 2011, 12:41:23 AM

I think if it required another Thief in play it would be a great card. As it is, I think it might be just a tad into the OP range.

This might be a good way to limit the card, I have no problem with it.

I don't think it's OP. 2 cards is a pretty big price and dominants need to be nerfed anyway. The one qualm I have about it is it isn't a to ability. I'd like for it to say "give opponent two cards from your hand (except a dominant) to look at opponent's hand and blah blah blah". Otherwise if I get 4 of them up and band them into battle in t2 and only have a few cards in my hand (which isn't uncommon), I can take/discard 4 of your cards and only give you a couple.

There actually IS no problem.  You give AFTER you take, so if you don't have enough cards, you have to give back what you took.

Example:  I block with him with 0 cards in hand, take one, have to give 2, so I give it back.  Or I have 1 card, take his, and give back that card PLUS the one in hand (as long as it is not a dominant).

If you made it a 'to' ability you might actually MAKE it OP 

Making it a to ability does not make it op in the slightest and I fail to see how it can.

Ha! My broken quote broke yours!

And yeah, that may be best.

Quote from: Drrek on December 06, 2011, 09:46:41 PM

I think the rational at the time was we wanted to weaken doms a little bit, but I don't remember that's just a guess.

It was 2am.  There WAS no rationale.

So what's the final verdict everyone?  Are we putting on the requirement of having another thief in play in addition to removing the discard a card, or are we just removing the discard a card?  Once I have it fixed up, I could submit the theme to the player made expansion.