Author Topic: Son of Man (Read 4247 times)

Bobbert · « **on:** May 04, 2018, 11:30:34 AM »

I know, I know, we've had this discussion before.

As we all know, Son of God is the most powerful card in the game - as it should be. However, there were a LOT of names for Jesus, many of which could be their own cards. The problem arises in the form of balance issues : if a card representing Jesus can't be in the same deck as SoG, it's either never going to see play or will be immediately replaced by everyone who can get their hands on it (see: NJ/TSC).
That said, at the moment TSC is a significant portion of SoG's power. Perhaps we could make an alternative with a more powerful but single-use ability.

Son of Man
Good Dominant
Identifier: Same unique card as Son of God
You may banish this card to rescue a human evil character.
"For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost."
Luke 19:10

+Effectively acts as a second AotL
+Still 1/5 or 1/8th if wincon, and possibly lets you win a battle as well
+Can use on own Evil Character if needed

-Only usable once, since it banishes self
-Can only rescue EC in battle
-Cannot use against demons/animals
-Cannot get rid of a problematic soul

Thoughts?

Ironisaac · « **Reply #1 on:** May 04, 2018, 11:35:19 AM »

Well despite the obvious issue of it being a Jesus card, (which I don't really have an issue with, but I know others will) I think it should only target an EC in a Territory, so it's not a battle winner. Otherwise, I really like it!
I think I may still use SoG over this, but it is a nice alternative.

Josh · « **Reply #2 on:** May 04, 2018, 11:42:53 AM »

As is, this is just going to replace SoG and TSC's job will be to double up AotL. And since it can target any EC, you can effectively rescue 2 with just this card if you are blocked by a lone human EC.

Math:

This + TSC + AotL = 4 rescues and 3 ECs removed > SoG + TSC + AotL = 3 rescues and 1-2 ECs removed

QED, this replaces SoG in my decks

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 04, 2018, 11:45:20 AM »

I like this.

Earlier I suggested another Son of Man with the same idea of a more strategic, single-shot ability. I think we may even be using the same verse.

Rewriting to the newer wording...

Son of Man
Good Dominant
Identifier: Same unique card as Son of God
You may banish this card to negate and rescue any Lost Soul (including your own).
"For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost."
Luke 19:10

I personally would never play this in T1 over either the traditional SoG or Bobbert's version--as giving up a free Lost Soul with TSC or NJ is too high a cost. I would, however play this in T2 where it would always will provide a guaranteed block in addition to a LS.

Quote from: Ironisaac on May 04, 2018, 11:35:19 AM

Well despite the obvious issue of it being a Jesus card, (which I don't really have an issue with, but I know others will) I think it should only target an EC in a Territory, so it's not a battle winner.

The potential battle winner for a second LS makes up for not getting a "free" second with TSC or NJ.

For Bobbert's version you could also add "Identifier: Same Unique card as Son of God and The Second Coming"

TheJaylor · « **Reply #4 on:** May 04, 2018, 12:02:38 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on May 04, 2018, 11:45:20 AM

I like this.

Earlier I suggested another Son of Man with the same idea of a more strategic, single-shot ability. I think we may even be using the same verse.

Rewriting to the newer wording...

Son of Man
Good Dominant
Identifier: Same unique card as Son of God
You may banish this card to negate and rescue any Lost Soul (including your own).
"For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost."
Luke 19:10

I personally would never play this in T1 over either the traditional SoG or Bobbert's version--as giving up a free Lost Soul with TSC or NJ is too high a cost. I would, however play this in T2 where it would always will provide a guaranteed block in addition to a LS.

Quote from: Ironisaac on May 04, 2018, 11:35:19 AM
Well despite the obvious issue of it being a Jesus card, (which I don't really have an issue with, but I know others will) I think it should only target an EC in a Territory, so it's not a battle winner.
The potential battle winner for a second LS makes up for not getting a "free" second with TSC or NJ.

For Bobbert's version you could also add "Identifier: Same Unique card as Son of God and The Second Coming"

I'm not exactly sure what the wording is on the new-ish "Lost Souls that have been selected by Rescuer's Choice cannot be rescued by anyone else's dominants" rule is, but if it is just that then this wouldn't work unless that was reworded I guess. I think the ability is definitely viable if it worked the way intended but I'm also hesitant to add any more dom blocks to T2-Multi for the same reason that the rule was put in place.

Bobbert · « **Reply #5 on:** May 04, 2018, 12:07:56 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on May 04, 2018, 11:45:20 AM

Earlier I suggested another Son of Man with the same idea of a more strategic, single-shot ability. I think we may even be using the same verse.

The old 2014 thread I linked in the first line includes that as the first pic (and unsuccessfully tries to link to your thread, it looks like) - credit where it's due, although I only remembered that thread halfway through designing this card

Quote from: Ironisaac on May 04, 2018, 11:35:19 AM

Well despite the obvious issue of it being a Jesus card, (which I don't really have an issue with, but I know others will) I think it should only target an EC in a Territory, so it's not a battle winner. Otherwise, I really like it!
I think I may still use SoG over this, but it is a nice alternative.

I mean... we already have a Jesus card. It's called Son of God and it goes in every deck (unless your name is Gabe, apparently

).
My original idea actually had it only work in battle. I ended up dropping that, since I felt not being able to rescue unless a human EC is blocking was a pretty solid downside.

Quote from: Josh on May 04, 2018, 11:42:53 AM

As is, this is just going to replace SoG and TSC's job will be to double up AotL. And since it can target any EC, you can effectively rescue 2 with just this card if you are blocked by a lone human EC.

Math:

This + TSC + AotL = 4 rescues and 3 ECs removed > SoG + TSC + AotL = 3 rescues and 1-2 ECs removed

QED, this replaces SoG in my decks

I've already seen people double up AotL instead of SoG with TSC, and this can't stop Dull. There are some cases where you're certainly right, but if your opponent only blocks with demons or animals (both fairly strong defenses), or multiple characters (which a lot of times is a good idea anyway) the value drops of considerably.

TheJaylor · « **Reply #6 on:** May 04, 2018, 12:11:08 PM »

Quote from: Bobbert on May 04, 2018, 12:07:56 PM

I mean... we already have a Jesus card. It's called Son of God and it goes in every deck (unless your name is ~~Gabe~~ John (Earley), apparently ).

FTFY

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #7 on:** May 04, 2018, 07:13:19 PM »

Quote from: Bobbert on May 04, 2018, 12:07:56 PM

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on May 04, 2018, 11:45:20 AM
Earlier I suggested another Son of Man with the same idea of a more strategic, single-shot ability. I think we may even be using the same verse.

The old 2014 thread I linked in the first line includes that as the first pic (and unsuccessfully tries to link to your thread, it looks like) - credit where it's due, although I only remembered that thread halfway through designing this card

I wasn't worried about credit. I just think the idea of having a SoM the exchanges a second automatic LS for more strategic counter-play is an excellent one. It adds on both the deck building and the play side. I was reinforcing your idea.

Quote from: KoalaKing on May 04, 2018, 12:02:38 PM

I'm not exactly sure what the wording is on the new-ish "Lost Souls that have been selected by Rescuer's Choice cannot be rescued by anyone else's dominants" rule is, but if it is just that then this wouldn't work unless that was reworded I guess. I think the ability is definitely viable if it worked the way intended but I'm also hesitant to add any more dom blocks to T2-Multi for the same reason that the rule was put in place.

If players would seriously be willing to forego the opportunity of a second free rescue for a block then T2-Multi has truly changed beyond anything I would recognize.

SEB · « **Reply #8 on:** May 07, 2018, 08:21:07 AM »

Quote from: Bobbert on May 04, 2018, 11:30:34 AM

Son of Man
Good Dominant

Identifier: Same unique card as Son of God
You may banish this card to rescue a human evil character.
"For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost."
Luke 19:10

You could also change the SA to:
"Banish Son of Man to Negate and Rescue target Human Evil Character in a Territory."

SEB · « **Reply #9 on:** May 07, 2018, 08:26:11 AM »

(Side note) Technically, AotL is the same "unique character" as SoG. One could make the argument that a deck should not contain both. (apologies if this dredges old debates I know nothing about).

The Guardian · « **Reply #10 on:** May 07, 2018, 11:04:38 AM »

Not sure what the theological basis would be for that...Jesus (the Son of God) is not an angel...

In any case, dominants are not characters.

Bobbert · « **Reply #11 on:** May 07, 2018, 11:29:09 AM »

I have heard arguments that Captain of the Host was pre-incarnation Jesus (since he didn't rebuke Josh for worshipping him, like every other angel). That said, AotL references Acts 12, Luke 2, or Exodus 3 (depending on the version), so we can fairly confidently say that it's not Jesus.

That said, claiming that Jesus was an angel (a created being) and not God is known as Gnosticism, and is denounced by Paul a lot.

Back to the matter at hand, I think that if it were to only target a territory then negate and rescue an EC would be the way to go. That said, at that point I would consider whether it even needs to banish itself - sure, it's territory destruction, but there's a reason you save AotL for battle 80+% of the time.

thejambi · « **Reply #12 on:** May 07, 2018, 11:49:22 AM »

FYI, viewing the Angel of the Lord references in the OT as theophanies is pretty common, and different than claiming Jesus is/was an angel.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #13 on:** May 07, 2018, 12:25:43 PM »

Quote from: Bobbert on May 07, 2018, 11:29:09 AM

I have heard arguments that Captain of the Host was pre-incarnation Jesus (since he didn't rebuke Josh for worshipping him, like every other angel). That said, AotL references Acts 12, Luke 2, or Exodus 3 (depending on the version), so we can fairly confidently say that it's not Jesus.

FWIW--Many of the Early Church Fathers held that the member of the trinity speaking in Exodus 3 was Christ. Justin Martyr is probably the most well known for equating The Angel of the Lord == the Christ, but here are a couple of other examples.

Quote from: Irenaeus

And again, when the Son speaks to Moses, He says, I have come down to deliver this people.

Quote from: Theodoret of Cyrus

The whole passage [Exodus 3--mjb] shows that it was God who appeared to Moses. But Moses called Him an “angel” in order to let us know that it was not God the Father whom he saw — for whose angel could the Father be? — but the Only-begotten Son, the Angel of Great Counsel.

Bobbert · « **Reply #14 on:** May 07, 2018, 12:41:53 PM »

Quote from: thejambi on May 07, 2018, 11:49:22 AM

FYI, viewing the Angel of the Lord references in the OT as theophanies is pretty common, and different than claiming Jesus is/was an angel.

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on May 07, 2018, 12:25:43 PM

Quote from: Bobbert on May 07, 2018, 11:29:09 AM
I have heard arguments that Captain of the Host was pre-incarnation Jesus (since he didn't rebuke Josh for worshipping him, like every other angel). That said, AotL references Acts 12, Luke 2, or Exodus 3 (depending on the version), so we can fairly confidently say that it's not Jesus.
FWIW--Many of the Early Church Fathers held that the member of the trinity speaking in Exodus 3 was Christ. Justin Martyr is probably the most well known for equating The Angel of the Lord == the Christ, but here are a couple of other examples.

Quote from: Irenaeus
And again, when the Son speaks to Moses, He says, I have come down to deliver this people.

Quote from: Theodoret of Cyrus
The whole passage [Exodus 3--mjb] shows that it was God who appeared to Moses. But Moses called Him an “angel” in order to let us know that it was not God the Father whom he saw — for whose angel could the Father be? — but the Only-begotten Son, the Angel of Great Counsel.

Both valid points. I admit that I spoke hastily and ungraciously. My apologies.

SEB · « **Reply #15 on:** May 07, 2018, 12:47:56 PM »

Quote from: thejambi on May 07, 2018, 11:49:22 AM

FYI, viewing the Angel of the Lord references in the OT as theophanies is pretty common, and different than claiming Jesus is/was an angel.

Well said!
Basically, both "Angel of the Lord" and "Captain of the Hosts" may refer to the second person of the trinity (i.e. the Son). The principle point is when the being of reference does NOT refuse worship. The celestial, spiritual messengers of God (confusingly named "angels") will never receive worship that is due to God.

Example of Angel of the Lord as a theophany: Gen 16:7-14
"13 Then she called the name of the LORD who spoke to her, "You are a God who sees"; for she said, "Have I even remained alive here after seeing Him?" NASB
(For those who dont know when using "LORD" in all capitals it refers to the Hebrew's text of reference the proper name of GOD "YHWH" which is always spoken in Hebrew as "Adonai" which in English is "Lord.")

Number 22:31 Balaam bows before the AotL in repentance, but the angel doesnt stop and correct him.

"Captain of the Host" is a little more tricky, as the phrase is more uncommon in Hebrew writing. Many see the instance where Joshua (Joshua 5:13-15) is talking to the Captain of the Host as a theophany due to the Captain's command to Joshua to remove his sandals (like Moses did before at the burning bush - a rite of passage so to speak), and after Joshua bows before the Captain, there is no command NOT to worship.

Revelation 22:9 is an example of angels deflecting personal worship. Most theologians think its for two reasons: 1) angels know where true worship should be directed, and 2) no angel wants to fall prey to the same prideful fall of Lucifer.

SEB · « **Reply #16 on:** May 07, 2018, 12:50:24 PM »

(side note)
I dont get these kind of talks with other card games i play!

The Guardian · « **Reply #17 on:** May 07, 2018, 01:01:13 PM »

Indeed, it is an interesting topic and I appreciate you providing solid points for discussion. I hope my initial response did not come across as dismissive--I guess I was looking at it more from a gameplay standpoint than a theological standpoint. I just preferred that can of worms ("SoG & AotL = same card") not be opened.

SEB · « **Reply #18 on:** May 07, 2018, 01:09:13 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on May 07, 2018, 01:01:13 PM

Indeed, it is an interesting topic and I appreciate you providing solid points for discussion. I hope my initial response did not come across as dismissive--I guess I was looking at it more from a gameplay standpoint than a theological standpoint. I just preferred that can of worms ("SoG & AotL = same card") not be opened.

Haha ya, but if someone does want to open that up, you can simply say that the card AotL is not referring to a theophany, but rather a celestial messenger of God.
I got you, fam!

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #19 on:** May 07, 2018, 01:19:53 PM »

Quote from: SEB on May 07, 2018, 12:50:24 PM

(side note)
I dont get these kind of talks with other card games i play!

This is one of the main reasons why I continue to frequent the boards even though I no longer play.

News:

Author Topic: Son of Man (Read 4247 times)