Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Redemption® Resources and Thinktank => Topic started by: Neil Da BOMB J on September 10, 2011, 08:55:24 PM
-
POLL:
Does the game have
a) a good number of CBN, CBI, CBP.
b) to many CBN, CBI, CBP.
c) could use more CBN, CBI, CBP.
I personally don't think that ANY enhancements should be CBN of CBI.
-
A
-
A. I especially like that most of the CNB/CNP/CNI aren't interrupts so you have to have inish by the numbers to use them. It was the bain of my existence using Herod's but it actually was good because if every BW CBN enhancement was also an interrupt there would be no point to anything that can be N/I/P usually the ones that can are the interrupts and you need to pair an interrupt and a CBN to have it be a true automatic battle winner
-
B
-
A. Though I support conditional CBN or CBP on battlewinners. Only non-battlewinners should be CBN etc.
-
A.5 ::) I think that there is a fine line in anything on how much is too much. We are close to that line, the question is which side of it are we on?
-
I think there are too many CBN battle-winners. But I guess all-in all I'd go with A.
-
B. CBI/P/N should have been used sparingly, instead of slapping it on every card that could do with a bit more jingo.
-
In my personal opinion I believe that there are way too many CBN , CBP, and CBI. I vote there should only be more CBN's if the ability directly gets it's power from God ie: Authority of Christ . but that's just me.
-
A
-
B, it's more fun to have a battle have one negating card after another. CBN if good only if, as said before, it isn't a battle winner or is divine intervention (AOCP, Pillar of Fire, ...) and even then there shouldn't be that many of those types of cards.
-
I think the amount of CBP is good and necessary to control the power of FBTN. I like CBI for abilities that would be annoying to undo if interrupted (like look at/reveal/shuffle/etc.) but not for much else. CBN is nice but I agree that it's been used on way too much stuff. When you can run Covenant with Death in your deck and leave it active almost the entire time because most of your characters don't care about it, that's not really a good thing.
-
I think the amount of CBP is good and necessary to control the power of FBTN. I like CBI for abilities that would be annoying to undo if interrupted (like look at/reveal/shuffle/etc.)
All of these are inherently CBI.
-
B - too many...unless of course they decide to actually make CBP really mean CBP.
-
unless of course they decide to actually make CBP really mean CBP.
........it doesn't?
-
You missed the tiny text:
B - too many...unless of course they decide to actually make CBP really mean CBPandalsoANBworkshoweverSTAMPwantsitto.
-
unless of course they decide to actually make CBP really mean CBP.
........it doesn't?
Not when "cannot be prevented" can also mean "can be prevented".
Oh, and of course the obvious...
You missed the tiny text: B - too many...unless of course they decide to actually make CBP really mean CBPandalsoANBworkshoweverSTAMPwantsitto.
-
unless of course they decide to actually make CBP really mean CBP.
........it doesn't?
Not when "cannot be prevented" can also mean "can be prevented".
Can you provide an example? I really don't know what you're referring to.
-
If the CBP card gets negated (interrupt and prevent) after it's played.
-
I don't see why that's a bad thing. CBP is there to get around negation/preventing before it's played, not after. Otherwise, it'd be no different than CBI.
It's really no different than interrupting Lydia and capturing her.
-
If CBP worked like that, I could still interrupt/do something else (Reach->AoCP, etc)
-
Since when can you not Reach -> AoCP a CBP ability?
-
I don't see why that's a bad thing.
It's a very bad thing in my book. I don't like inconsistency when the only reason a rule is defined is because "that's the way we want it to work".
"Cannot be negated" should mean "cannot be negated" and stick to the table. It does.
"Cannot be interrupted" should mean "cannot be interrupted" and stick to the table. It does.
"Cannot be ignored" should mean "cannot be ignored" and stick to the table. It does.
"Cannot be prevented" should mean "cannot be prevented" and stick to the table. It does NOT.
You play a CBP ability against me. I should be able to interrupt that ability and then do anything after that EXCEPT prevent it. Why? Because it cannot be prevented!
So go ahead...interrupt and discard the card with the CBP ability. Or redirect it. Or discard the hero on which a CBP-enhancement was played. Or apply protection from the CBP ability. Or do Reach+AoCP...let the CBP ability kick back in...then do a Reach+something else.
Do whatever your heart desires BUT know that you cannot prevent it. That's all I ask. :)
-
I don't think the CBs are that hard to understand.
If something is CBP, then nothing you do before it is played can stop it from doing whatever it does to any card it can target.
If something is CBI, then nothing you do after it is played can stop it from doing whatever it does to any card it can target.
If something is CBN, then nothing you do before OR after it is played can stop it from doing whatever it does to any card it can target.
CBP isn't about the word "prevent" as much as it is just about timing.
-
I think that they should just change the wording to cannot be prevented before it is played. That way the card does as it says and causes a lot less confusion and dispute.
-
A.5 ::) I think that there is a fine line in anything on how much is too much. We are close to that line, the question is which side of it are we on?
This option gets my vote.
-
CBP isn't about the word "prevent" as much as it is just about timing.
So is comedy. Ironic, eh?
-
B for me, especially since I said so in an article/post even before this last set.