The 2018 Community Created Card: Stats voting and Special ability suggestions

[ChristianSoldier]

"When you write a special ability it will need to be no longer than this block of text. If you use things like Enhancement or opponents, they can cause text to cut off a row early which shortens the SA."

In an attempt to shorten my suggested ability without changing what it does (too much anyway, I removed all references to Philistines) I have come up with this (all my notes from my previous post still apply):
Rapha Father of Giants 9/12, WC, TC
X = Number of Philistine Giants in play
You may search your deck or reserve for a Giant. Increase all Giants by X/X. Negate play abilities. If a Giant is in battle Toss the First good Enhancement. Cannot be Negated if Gath is in play.

[Ironisaac]

12/12, black, WC TC

When put in play, gain a nationality of your choice.

If you are attacked, you may search your deck or Reserve for a Giant and/or a black weapon, and you may equip a black weapon to any black warrior with or without a weapon already equipped.

Could this be shortened some how? I want him to give you the ability to give someone a second weapon, which i think would be pretty sweet, but maybe OP. How else could this be reworded? Specifically, I'm wondering if the "with or with out a weapon already equipped" is technically necessary. Because if not, i could add cbn to him, which he needs imo. 

[EmJayBee83]

To help people monitor the length of the SA I've written the following which uses the maximum space we have available in the text box.

Remember folks, we have additional SA space in the identifier box if you add a taunt. Here's an example...

Rapha, Father of Giants   10/12
Black Brigade
Warrior Class/Territory Class

Spears gain ability "Toss all non-weapon class enhancements played in this battle" when placed on a giant. Cannot be negated by a good card.

Taunt (shuffle a lost soul into owner's deck)

[VJ]

Card name:  Rephaim
Stats:  12/12
Identifier:  Generic, Canaanite giant

SA:  Not sure - however, the special ability should enable the unique giants to gain an advantage since they were descended from the original giant Canaanites mentioned in Genesis 14:5.

[Josh]

Being the "Father of Giants", I think Rapha's ability should emphasize getting giants into hand, play, and battle.  I've opted for a stronger one-time-use and coupled it with a way to give Philistines a battle extender.  (Banish just seems appropriate here since Rapha wasn't around when the other famous giants in the Bible were.)  The "If equipped" ability also creates tension (to borrow RDT's word) with losing the weapon if you use the Banish ability.

Rapha, Father of Giants
12/12 Black Evil Character
WC, TC, Giant
"While equipped, negate Artifacts.  If your giant is harmed, you may banish this character instead to search deck and/or Reserve for two giants and add your giant to battle.  Cannot be negated.”

EDIT:  Revised ability on page 3 of thread to accommodate the arguments below

[Watchman]

If people knew Rapha wasn't going to have the Philistine identifier they might want to vote for another candidate.

I understand where the idea comes from that he might be Philistine, or even Canaanite, but Travis shared his findings long before the vote took place. I'm sorry if someone still presumed that he would be Philistine and that greatly influenced their vote. I hadn't seen a large push to add that identifier prior to now or I would have pointed it out sooner.

Yeah, just make him philistine. I don't think anyone really cares.

We attempt to make this game as accurate as possible given what we know. To add an identifier because "we want it" is simply not that way we do things. We cannot set that kind of precedent.

Part of the process of allowing the community to make a card is to take you all through the same (sometimes painful) processes that we have to go through to get a card in it's final form. This is a great opportunity for everyone to see what that looks like.

Travis’ research is pretty interesting, for sure. But his own findings were inconclusive. He presented research and facts but there was still no definitive answer to the question if “the giant” (haRapha, in Hebrew) was an actual person or if the word/term was referring to a people group or attributes related to a person or people group. And the scriptures that are being referenced for Rapha father of giants is within the context of him being the father of four Philistine giants (or that these Philly giants were of “the giant” people group). There’s other biblical evidence suggesting that the Canaanite giants are not necessarily of the same line as the Philistine giants (archaeological evidence suggests that the Philistines came later than the Canaanites) and to suggest that a guy named Rapha is the father of ALL of the different giant people groups is a stretch.

This Rapha character is ambiguous, at best. I like the creative idea of Rapha, father of giants (even though it’s strange to say “Giant, father of giants,” which is the translation) as it makes for an interesting character, but there simply is no definitive proof that he’s an actual person who fathered all of the giants.

My suggestion was that if we’re treating him as a character it would be cleaner to make him a Philistine giant since the Bible reference(s) we are most likely going to use are the ones from II Samuel 21 and I Chronicles 20, which speaks of the four Philistine giants being descendants of “the giant.”

This article may shed more light on this whole subject:

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/giants-in-the-old-testament/

[The Guardian]

(even though it’s strange to say “Giant, father of giants,” which is the translation)

You've never met anyone named Eric Ericson or John Johnson? 

[bmc25]

12/12 Rapha, Father of Giants

Territory Class:
Philistine Characters cannot be negated. All Giants may band to any amount of Giants. While Rapha is in Battle Negate all special abilities on characters and non-weapon class enhancements.

1) This would allow the black brigade Lahmi, Saph, and Ishbibinob to band to each other.

2) He would be an Evil Character version of Captain of the host.

3) Evil Banding is strong against the current meta Martyrs/throne of David/Children of Light archetypes.

[jesse]

In the Bible (NASB and many other literal-leaning translations), "The Giant" ("Rapha") is clearly stated to be the father of 5 Philistine Giant brothers:

1) Ishbibenob - 2 Samuel 21:16, 22
2) Saph - 2 Samuel 21:18, 22
3) Goliath - 2 Samuel 21:19, 22
4) "The Twelve-Fingered Giant" - 2 Samuel 21:20, 22

2 Samuel 21:22 states, "These four were born to the giant in Gath, and they fell by the hand of David and by the hand of his servants."

5) Lahmi - 1 Chronicles 20:5, 8

So while it is true that we don't know if Rapha himself was descended from Philistines, would him being the father of 5 Philistines be enough for him to be considered a Philistine? I don't know how the rules for identifiers work...is being the parent of an individual of a civilization enough to make you part of that civilization?

Additionally, using the Bible as our primary source, there is no mention in the text (the only places he is mentioned are 2 Samuel 21 and 1 Chronicles 20) that this particular father was the father of anyone else. Commentaries can greatly vary in terms of interpretation, but it seems clear to me that from what is clearly stated in the Bible, this particular individual is best considered a Philistine because all we really know about him is that he was the father of 5 Philistine brothers who were giants, and was a giant himself. Additional evidence that he is a Philistine is that he was from Gath (2 Samuel 21:22, 1 Chronicles 20:8 ) which was clearly one of the 5 Philistine cities.

And he must have been infamous in the region, as he was simply referred to by the nickname "The Giant" instead of a regular name. Similar to his son, "The Twelve-Fingered Giant". Which hopefully will make for a really awesome and fun card!

I just feel like this can be a really fun character and it would be a shame if he wasn't a Philistine to work cohesively with his sons. And moreover it seems clear to me from the Bible itself that this is what he was.

Just my 

[Watchman]

(even though it’s strange to say “Giant, father of giants,” which is the translation)

You've never met anyone named Eric Ericson or John Johnson? 

Personally, no, I haven’t met anyone with those names. But there are people out there with those names.

[Crashfach2002]

In the Bible (NASB and many other literal-leaning translations), "The Giant" ("Rapha") is clearly stated to be the father of 5 Philistine Giant brothers:

1) Ishbibenob - 2 Samuel 21:16, 22
2) Saph - 2 Samuel 21:18, 22
3) Goliath - 2 Samuel 21:19, 22
4) "The Twelve-Fingered Giant" - 2 Samuel 21:20, 22

2 Samuel 21:22 states, "These four were born to the giant in Gath, and they fell by the hand of David and by the hand of his servants."

5) Lahmi - 1 Chronicles 20:5, 8

So while it is true that we don't know if Rapha himself was descended from Philistines, would him being the father of 5 Philistines be enough for him to be considered a Philistine? I don't know how the rules for identifiers work...is being the parent of an individual of a civilization enough to make you part of that civilization?

Additionally, using the Bible as our primary source, there is no mention in the text (the only places he is mentioned are 2 Samuel 21 and 1 Chronicles 20) that this particular father was the father of anyone else. Commentaries can greatly vary in terms of interpretation, but it seems clear to me that from what is clearly stated in the Bible, this particular individual is best considered a Philistine because all we really know about him is that he was the father of 5 Philistine brothers who were giants, and was a giant himself. Additional evidence that he is a Philistine is that he was from Gath (2 Samuel 21:22, 1 Chronicles 20:8 ) which was clearly one of the 5 Philistine cities.

And he must have been infamous in the region, as he was simply referred to by the nickname "The Giant" instead of a regular name. Similar to his son, "The Twelve-Fingered Giant". Which hopefully will make for a really awesome and fun card!

I just feel like this can be a really fun character and it would be a shame if he wasn't a Philistine to work cohesively with his sons. And moreover it seems clear to me from the Bible itself that this is what he was.

Just my 

Jesse makes a very good point.  Did we not basically say that the fore-father of these nations would be given that identifier.  Esau is the father of the Edomites despite being born of a Hebrew father and mother.  Thus he was given the Edomite identifier.

[Gabe]

In the Bible (NASB and many other literal-leaning translations), "The Giant" ("Rapha") is clearly stated to be the father of 5 Philistine Giant brothers:

1) Ishbibenob - 2 Samuel 21:16, 22
2) Saph - 2 Samuel 21:18, 22
3) Goliath - 2 Samuel 21:19, 22
4) "The Twelve-Fingered Giant" - 2 Samuel 21:20, 22

2 Samuel 21:22 states, "These four were born to the giant in Gath, and they fell by the hand of David and by the hand of his servants."

5) Lahmi - 1 Chronicles 20:5, 8

So while it is true that we don't know if Rapha himself was descended from Philistines, would him being the father of 5 Philistines be enough for him to be considered a Philistine? I don't know how the rules for identifiers work...is being the parent of an individual of a civilization enough to make you part of that civilization?

Additionally, using the Bible as our primary source, there is no mention in the text (the only places he is mentioned are 2 Samuel 21 and 1 Chronicles 20) that this particular father was the father of anyone else. Commentaries can greatly vary in terms of interpretation, but it seems clear to me that from what is clearly stated in the Bible, this particular individual is best considered a Philistine because all we really know about him is that he was the father of 5 Philistine brothers who were giants, and was a giant himself. Additional evidence that he is a Philistine is that he was from Gath (2 Samuel 21:22, 1 Chronicles 20:8 ) which was clearly one of the 5 Philistine cities.

And he must have been infamous in the region, as he was simply referred to by the nickname "The Giant" instead of a regular name. Similar to his son, "The Twelve-Fingered Giant". Which hopefully will make for a really awesome and fun card!

I just feel like this can be a really fun character and it would be a shame if he wasn't a Philistine to work cohesively with his sons. And moreover it seems clear to me from the Bible itself that this is what he was.

Just my 

Jesse makes a very good point.  Did we not basically say that the fore-father of these nations would be given that identifier.  Esau is the father of the Edomites despite being born of a Hebrew father and mother.  Thus he was given the Edomite identifier.

Jesse's entire argument dismisses the fact that in the original text it could not have been referencing an individual's name the way it was written. "The Giant" was not the name of a man who sired 5 Philistines. And we're not talking about the father of the Philistines. We're talking about the guy from which all the giants descended. He's referred to much earlier in scripture in relation to other giants as well. They were all called the Rephaim after this individual from whom they descended.

We've said King Herod is an Edomite, yet his sons are not although that isn't really relevant here.

[Jeremystair]

Jesse's entire argument dismisses the fact that in the original text it could not have been referencing an individual's name the way it was written. "The Giant" was not the name of a man who sired 5 Philistines. And we're not talking about the father of the Philistines. We're talking about the guy from which all the giants descended. He's referred to much earlier in scripture in relation to other giants as well. They were all called the Rephaim after this individual from whom they descended.

We've said King Herod is an Edomite, yet his sons are not although that isn't really relevant here.

We all voted on the card based off Jesse's post here http://www.cactusforums.com/redemption-card-play/rapha'the-giant'/msg577508/#msg577508 we thought we were voting for the father of the Philistine Giants and the scripture that was given during the nomination.

[Ironisaac]

Spoiler (hover to show)

In the Bible (NASB and many other literal-leaning translations), "The Giant" ("Rapha") is clearly stated to be the father of 5 Philistine Giant brothers:

1) Ishbibenob - 2 Samuel 21:16, 22
2) Saph - 2 Samuel 21:18, 22
3) Goliath - 2 Samuel 21:19, 22
4) "The Twelve-Fingered Giant" - 2 Samuel 21:20, 22

2 Samuel 21:22 states, "These four were born to the giant in Gath, and they fell by the hand of David and by the hand of his servants."

5) Lahmi - 1 Chronicles 20:5, 8

So while it is true that we don't know if Rapha himself was descended from Philistines, would him being the father of 5 Philistines be enough for him to be considered a Philistine? I don't know how the rules for identifiers work...is being the parent of an individual of a civilization enough to make you part of that civilization?

Additionally, using the Bible as our primary source, there is no mention in the text (the only places he is mentioned are 2 Samuel 21 and 1 Chronicles 20) that this particular father was the father of anyone else. Commentaries can greatly vary in terms of interpretation, but it seems clear to me that from what is clearly stated in the Bible, this particular individual is best considered a Philistine because all we really know about him is that he was the father of 5 Philistine brothers who were giants, and was a giant himself. Additional evidence that he is a Philistine is that he was from Gath (2 Samuel 21:22, 1 Chronicles 20:8 ) which was clearly one of the 5 Philistine cities.

And he must have been infamous in the region, as he was simply referred to by the nickname "The Giant" instead of a regular name. Similar to his son, "The Twelve-Fingered Giant". Which hopefully will make for a really awesome and fun card!

I just feel like this can be a really fun character and it would be a shame if he wasn't a Philistine to work cohesively with his sons. And moreover it seems clear to me from the Bible itself that this is what he was.

Just my 

Jesse makes a very good point.  Did we not basically say that the fore-father of these nations would be given that identifier.  Esau is the father of the Edomites despite being born of a Hebrew father and mother.  Thus he was given the Edomite identifier.

Jesse's entire argument dismisses the fact that in the original text it could not have been referencing an individual's name the way it was written. "The Giant" was not the name of a man who sired 5 Philistines. And we're not talking about the father of the Philistines. We're talking about the guy from which all the giants descended. He's referred to much earlier in scripture in relation to other giants as well. They were all called the Rephaim after this individual from whom they descended.

We've said King Herod is an Edomite, yet his sons are not although that isn't really relevant here.

Well, could you not just make him Canaanite, Philistine, and whatever other nationalities his ancestors may have been? It would be consistent with the same logic behind Nimrod or Esau, and everyone gets what they want.

[NathanW]

I'm guessing this is why there is a general rule against making any characters not explicitly mentioned in scripture with sufficient evidence to suggest even basic identifiers.

[jesse]

Yes that's what I was going to say - the EC I was submitting was the one mentioned in 2 Samuel 21:15-22/1 Chronicles 20:4-8 (sorry if that wasn't clear). And in that passage, most of the literal translations (including the NASB, which Redemption officially uses) call this man "the giant" and refer to him as a specific individual (the father of the 5 Philistine brothers).

While I would hope that since the translations are based on scholarship we could just use them to trust that there was an individual named "the giant" who was the father of the 5 giant brothers as the 2 passages describe, using Biblehub.com to see the Hebrew word translated "to the giant" after "born" shows just 2 instances in the Bible - 2 Samuel 21:20 and 2 Samuel 21:22, which are both talking about this particular individual.

Also, the fact that this particular individual "the giant" was from Gath seems to point to him being an individual and not representative of generic giants because there were giants outside of Gath, as we know from the rest of the Bible.

Finally, as the 5 Philistine Giants were clearly brothers, could we just make the card based on their father (knowing they had one)? Although again it seems explicitly clear from 2 Samuel 21 and 1 Chronicles 20 that the man nicknamed "the giant" was their father.

[Noah]

Maybe I missed something, but I don't understand how the reasoning for Rapha being a Philistine/Caananite is any different then Nimrod being a Babylonian and an Assyrian. Please enlighten me.

[VJ]

The KJV and NASB does refer to the 4 giants as the sons of the Giant of Gath.  The NIV says they are descendants of Rapha or the Raphaites - an ancient people of large stature. 

If the name Rapha was changed to the Giant of Gath, then he would be a Philistine.

[jesse]

The KJV and NASB does refer to the 4 giants as the sons of the Giant of Gath.  The NIV says they are descendants of Rapha or the Raphaites - an ancient people of large stature. 

If the name Rapha was changed to the Giant of Gath, then he would be a Philistine.

Yes I like that - "The Giant of Gath"! Would that work?

[Watchman]

Maybe I missed something, but I don't understand how the reasoning for Rapha being a Philistine/Caananite is any different then Nimrod being a Babylonian and an Assyrian. Please enlighten me.

Because the people of the southern Tigris/Euphrates valley were the ancestors of the Assyrians and Babylonians. They originated in the south but some of these people migrated north and eventually became the Assyrian nation. The people who remained in the south eventually became the Babylonian nation. Nimrod was the ancestral father of these two people groups who were originally one people but eventually became two separate, distinct nations.

In contrast, the Canaanites were in Canaan long before the Philistines arrived. They were there even before Abram arrived. The Philistines, who were a distinct and separate people group from the Canaanite peoples, had no ancestral ties to the Canaanites but came from the north (according to historians). If you look at the biblical references there are several Canaanite nations listed; however, you will see that the Philistines are not included among them. If you look in the book of Joshua and Judges, and after these, there are clear distinctions between the Canaanites and Philistines, including giant peoples.

The issue here is Gabe and maybe some others are saying that Rapha is the father of ALL giants, not just the Philistines but also the Canaanite giants, while some of us are saying that the references about Rapha that Jesse presented originally with this character are specific to the Philistine giants. There is no known link evidencing that Rapha is the father all of giant people, but it seems clear it’s specific to Philistine giants.

[The Guardian]

I plan to do additional research on this when time permits, but that will not be until much later tonight (or tomorrow).

I encourage everyone to keep the discussion going in a productive manner (i.e. presenting further research or raising alternate ideas), thank you for all your participation thus far! 

[Watchman]

The KJV and NASB does refer to the 4 giants as the sons of the Giant of Gath.  The NIV says they are descendants of Rapha or the Raphaites - an ancient people of large stature. 

If the name Rapha was changed to the Giant of Gath, then he would be a Philistine.

Yes I like that - "The Giant of Gath"! Would that work?

I agree. That name makes this so much more clearer than Giant, father of giants. And it would be specific to the Philistine nation.

[Watchman]

The KJV and NASB does refer to the 4 giants as the sons of the Giant of Gath.  The NIV says they are descendants of Rapha or the Raphaites - an ancient people of large stature. 

If the name Rapha was changed to the Giant of Gath, then he would be a Philistine.

The issue, however, is that rephaim (the Hebrew plural of “giants”) is mentioned in other, earlier books of the Bible, but the scriptures that are specific to this character are from II Sam and I Chronicles, which reads “harapha,” which means “the giant.” Not once in the Samuel and Chronicles references is the Hebrew word rephaim mentioned; it’s always singular and definitive.

The NIV is a very sloppy bible translation and has many translation issues, so I would not rely upon it overall. As Travis pointed out in his analysis, the NIV leaves out the word “the” from the front of rapha. Which, when translated, would read ”descendants of giant” instead of “descendants of the giant,” which is a significant difference. A while back I read the scripture references from Samuel and Chronicles in just the Hebrew words and it clearly, as consistent with other, more accurate bible translations than the NIV, is worded harapha, or the giant; there were no plurals in the the word rapha. The English translation next to the Hebrew also showed it to be “the giant.”

[soul seeker]

FTR, I've not voted on numbers yet because I'm still undecided.  I do want the numbers to have some kind of significance.
My submission for consideration...

Father of Giants
Identifiers:  Giant, Taunt, and Nationality of some type 
Territory Class
Warrior Class
Ability: "Search Draw and Reserve Piles for a giant OR Place a Weapon on a Warrior Class character to band all Giants for that turn. Cannot be Negated."

Here is the idea behind my submission: the search reflects his patronage of the giants, and the placement of weapons represents him teaching his sons to be warriors.  After all, in that time period sons followed in their fathers' footsteps, learned from them, and joined the "family business."  The "OR" represents that he didn't do both at the same time.  The "Cannot Be Negated" shows that he was an imposing character.

[jbeers285]

Based on 55 votes toughness is already locked at 12.
Strength is one vote away from locking a tie  at 12.

12/12 looks to be the stats at this point.