Author Topic: Son of God Reprint (Read 7376 times)

Korunks · « **on:** March 11, 2010, 11:06:16 AM »

Just what I would like to see, make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Type: Lamb • Brigade: None • Ability: None • Class: None • Special Ability: Rescue any Lost Soul in play, regardless of special ability. • Identifiers: None • Verse: Revelation 1:12-13 • Availability: I Deck, and J Deck

Jesus can reach anywhere and save us from our sin and bondage.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #1 on:** March 11, 2010, 11:12:23 AM »

True BUT sometimes he knows that person needs person X (/4 or NT) to reach that ls and help them. (Though not by themselves, he is there the whole way)

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #2 on:** March 11, 2010, 12:29:50 PM »

Quote from: Korunks on March 11, 2010, 11:06:16 AM

Rescue any Lost Soul in play, regardless of special ability.

I'm fine with this, as long as you say "May not be played with New Jerusalem."

12tipton3 · « **Reply #3 on:** March 11, 2010, 02:01:12 PM »

No dice. I am tired of all the complaints about NJ. if somebody has a speed deck that gets his dominants quicker, then that is fine. i see no problem with NJ.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #4 on:** March 11, 2010, 02:17:27 PM »

Quote from: 12tipton3 on March 11, 2010, 02:01:12 PM

No dice. I am tired of all the complaints about NJ. if somebody has a speed deck that gets his dominants quicker, then that is fine. i see no problem with NJ.

Everyone is complaining about Dominants (except maybe you). Most of those people are complaining about NJ (except maybe you) more than anything else. If we are going to make a dominant more powerful, we'd better give it a cost of some sort, and making NJ less likely to be played would make a lot of people happy.

12tipton3 · « **Reply #5 on:** March 11, 2010, 02:37:48 PM »

by that logic, you take away the most used, played, and excting stratagy of all. SPEED!!! By answering somebody's complaint about NJ, then I complain because it is a valid card. me and a few other people that I know, do not want to ban anything. NJ is a fine card. people can use it or not. if you don't like it so much, then don't use it. if you end up using it, then you defeat your own arguement by wanting it banned.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #6 on:** March 11, 2010, 02:43:58 PM »

Quote from: 12tipton3 on March 11, 2010, 02:37:48 PM

by that logic, you take away the most used, played, and excting stratagy of all. SPEED!!! By answering somebody's complaint about NJ, then I complain because it is a valid card. me and a few other people that I know, do not want to ban anything. NJ is a fine card. people can use it or not. if you don't like it so much, then don't use it. if you end up using it, then you defeat your own arguement by wanting it banned.

People use it out of necessity. Personally, I don't like NJ that much either. Also, a lot of people I know hate speed decks as well, because everyone uses them.

Another reason people want NJ gone, is because it takes less skill to win when you get 40% of your points by an instant card. slap down GoYS, SOG, NJ, then you only have three points left (t1). The other fix that people are striving for it to make it so you need 6 points to win.

Regardless, I like the ideas in this thread.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #7 on:** March 11, 2010, 05:04:58 PM »

Quote from: 12tipton3 on March 11, 2010, 02:37:48 PM

by that logic, you take away the most used, played, and excting stratagy of all. SPEED!!!\

I'm not taking it away, (well, I'm not doing anything myself, but...) I'm powering it down. Taking away is bad. Powering down is good.

Quote

By answering somebody's complaint about NJ, then I complain because it is a valid card. me and a few other people that I know, do not want to ban anything. NJ is a fine card. people can use it or not. if you don't like it so much, then don't use it. if you end up using it, then you defeat your own arguement by wanting it banned.

I never said I wanted to ban NJ. Banning is bad. Powering cards down through other cards is good, good, good. If a card is too powerful, the playtesters aren't just going to ignore it and keep making cards. They're going to take action, either by errata or by new rules or by the cards in the next set (or two or three, depending).

Master KChief · « **Reply #8 on:** March 11, 2010, 08:26:34 PM »

Quote from: BubbleBoy on March 11, 2010, 12:29:50 PM

Quote from: Korunks on March 11, 2010, 11:06:16 AM
Rescue any Lost Soul in play, regardless of special ability.
I'm fine with this, as long as you say "May not be played with New Jerusalem."

excellent idea. i like it.

also, banning is not bad. sometimes cards are created far too powerful, and the only way to stop them is to ban them. there is nothing wrong with that.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #9 on:** March 11, 2010, 10:12:27 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on March 11, 2010, 08:26:34 PM

also, banning is not bad. sometimes cards are created far too powerful, and the only way to stop them is to ban them. there is nothing wrong with that.

At this point, for this game, I would definitely say banning is bad. All the positive effects of banning can be accomplished through errata. Also, the Redemption community in general has come to appreciate Cactus' no-ban policy, and changing it now could have some bad consequences. I agree that banning is good for some things sometimes, but defintiely not all things all the time, and IMO not here and now.

The Guardian · « **Reply #10 on:** March 11, 2010, 11:48:42 PM »

Son of God
"Negate all special abilities on Lost Souls (except the Lost Souls card). Rescue any Lost Soul in play. Protect all Lost Souls from New Jerusalem."

Very intriguing idea...

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #11 on:** March 12, 2010, 12:56:14 AM »

perfect time for the plug:

Armegeddon
Evil characters may attack Land of Redemption to Fall Away redeemed souls during battle phase instead of making rescue attempt.
Rev. 16-16

-you can block this attack with an evil character
-GoYS stops it
-with Grapes you can do it twice

sounds good to me!

Master KChief · « **Reply #12 on:** March 12, 2010, 02:49:29 AM »

Quote from: BubbleBoy on March 11, 2010, 10:12:27 PM

Quote from: Master KChief on March 11, 2010, 08:26:34 PM
also, banning is not bad. sometimes cards are created far too powerful, and the only way to stop them is to ban them. there is nothing wrong with that.
At this point, for this game, I would definitely say banning is bad. All the positive effects of banning can be accomplished through errata. Also, the Redemption community in general has come to appreciate Cactus' no-ban policy, and changing it now could have some bad consequences. I agree that banning is good for some things sometimes, but defintiely not all things all the time, and IMO not here and now.

why would banning be bad for redemption? what bad consequences would there possibly be?

drb1200 · « **Reply #13 on:** March 12, 2010, 08:07:52 AM »

I have thought NJ must be dealt with some time. It is far FAR too powerful and does not allow enough strategy. SoG+NJ+AoTL=3 Lost Souls (most of the time anyway). That's ridiculous. That's 2 lost souls left to rescue. I don't think that any consequences would come out of banning NJ.

Master KChief · « **Reply #14 on:** March 12, 2010, 08:29:15 AM »

exactly. there's just no simple way to 'errata away' nj. i can see no harm whatsoever from banning nj.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #15 on:** March 12, 2010, 08:47:40 AM »

Quote from: Master KChief on March 12, 2010, 08:29:15 AM

there's just no simple way to 'errata away' nj.

No, there isn't. But we have told the cardmakers and playtesters that we want to power down Dominants (especially NJ), so let's see what they do before we get too drastic.

Quote from: Master KChief on March 12, 2010, 02:49:29 AM

why would banning be bad for redemption? what bad consequences would there possibly be?

By the way, I made a point of saying "could have consequences" because It's really more of a gut feeling. I know that a lot of people (I couldn't name anyone) are very thankful to Cactus that they have never banned a card, because it makes things a lot simpler, and easier for new players - any card you see can go in your deck without fear of being illegal. I like that feeling myself. Also, as with the stock market, if you suddenly make something worthless, it's price will plummet, and whoever has invested in it will be quite disappointed. I think that a lot of people would quit the game (or would fail to start or reenter) if we banned any cards, especially if we banned a card that has been used for 15 years.

Master KChief · « **Reply #16 on:** March 12, 2010, 10:10:50 AM »

newer players are very unlikely to see nj (if it weren't uber-powerful) as it is an old promo and unlikely to show up in anything outside a gift set (which is few and far between). as far as monetary value, it never really fetches more than 5 bucks. i don't perceive many players taking a hit to the wallet if nj is banned.

Ironica · « **Reply #17 on:** March 12, 2010, 10:22:57 AM »

One downside of banning a card is it starts a slippery slope affect. When there was a long discussion previously talking about banning NJ, it wasn't long until other cards were being mentioned to be banned. When he who shall not be named was banned from the boards, others were talking about others who thought they should be banned as well.

As for the value of it, it will hurt those who don't have a plethora of cards yet managed to get a few good cards to trade for NJ. If NJ get's banned, they would have wasted their few good cards for something to even out a table.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #18 on:** March 12, 2010, 10:24:34 AM »

Quote from: Ironica on March 12, 2010, 10:22:57 AM

As for the value of it, it will hurt those who don't have a plethora of cards yet managed to get a few good cards to trade for NJ. If NJ get's banned, they would have wasted their few good cards for something to even out a table.

I thought I said something similar to this, but you probably said it better.

ACe · « **Reply #19 on:** March 12, 2010, 10:42:58 AM »

My playgroup kids dont all have a NJ but if they did they wouldn't complain about losing as much. I take mine out when I play against them. I just got one of them NJ and now he has more confidence in his deck, even if he still loses. He would be sad if they banned cards. I for one quit yugioh becasue when i would get the awesome card they always banned it.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #20 on:** March 12, 2010, 10:50:43 AM »

Not only that, I'm pretty sure there would be a HUGE uproar if it was banned.

Master KChief · « **Reply #21 on:** March 12, 2010, 10:54:32 AM »

Quote from: Ironica on March 12, 2010, 10:22:57 AM

As for the value of it, it will hurt those who don't have a plethora of cards yet managed to get a few good cards to trade for NJ. If NJ get's banned, they would have wasted their few good cards for something to even out a table.

that's an entirely hypothetical situation that can be applied to virtually any card. goys used to carry a pretty good price. now it's reduced down in value to pretty much any other common ultra because of the ability to crack one in almost every other texp pack. what about those that traded hefty for a goys before texp came out? this is nothing out of the normal. it's called supply and demand.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #22 on:** March 12, 2010, 11:03:08 AM »

Quote from: ACe on March 12, 2010, 10:42:58 AM

I for one quit yugioh becasue when i would get the awesome card they always banned it.

This is a great illustration of why not to ban. If you're going to ban a card you'll need to do it almost immediately after it is realeased, or else people will start to put their life savings into these powerful cards and then suddenly realise that they are worthless, which is an extreme discouragement.

Also, when you ban one card, you will start to ban cards more and more and you won't be able to stop. Then people will start having to keep track of what cards they can use and which they can't, and already having to deal with admittedly comlex rules, a lot of newer players will probably just turn away from the game.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #23 on:** March 12, 2010, 11:04:31 AM »

Quote

One downside of banning a card is it starts a slippery slope affect. When there was a long discussion previously talking about banning NJ, it wasn't long until other cards were being mentioned to be banned. When he who shall not be named was banned from the boards, others were talking about others who thought they should be banned as well.

You disprove your own argument. When Colin was banned, was anyone else banned? No. Banning NJ would be the best improvement this game has had in years, and the "slippery slope" argument is completely without merit. The only other way to fix the T1 meta would be to do 6/60 like we've been begging for with very little opposition for years.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #24 on:** March 12, 2010, 11:14:28 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on March 12, 2010, 11:04:31 AM

The only other way to fix the T1 meta would be to do 6/60 like we've been begging for with very little opposition for years.

First of all, I oppose. I oppose greatly, if it makes a difference. I do not want to nullify previous starter decks. This is the main issue, but I also really just don't like changing a mechanic which has remained unchanged throughout the 15 year lifespan of this game. (Also, I would rather keep T1 and T2 as dissimilar as possible.)

Secondly, this is not the only other way to fix this. As I have said before, we can easily solve this problem with cards! Many people on the boards have posted ideas for single cards that could solve the dominant problem. We have asked the cardmakers to power down dominants. Everyone is aware that a lot of people want NJ banned. Something is going to happen. I would at least wait until after the next set releases before driving for the banning of any cards.

News:

Author Topic: Son of God Reprint (Read 7376 times)

12tipton3

12tipton3

Lamborghini_diablo

drb1200

Ironica