Author Topic: Simplicity or Balance? (Read 32672 times)

lightningninja · « **on:** October 11, 2011, 11:38:06 PM »

I guess after thinking of the new proposed rule changes, I'm getting a little confused.

The argument is that we need to make Redemption extremely simple, so that it's easier for new players to learn, which I understand. That's why ignore is under consideration. But then why the sog/nj rule change for rescuing souls? This is MORE confusing, not only does it cause confusion for anyone who doesn't read the whole new rulebook, it requires another game rule to remember.

So what's more important, simplicity or balance?

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #1 on:** October 11, 2011, 11:40:53 PM »

It actually is more simple. It's changing "you can only rescue Lost Souls in opponents' lands of bondages except with these two particular cards" to "you can only rescue Lost Souls in opponents' lands of bondges."

katedid · « **Reply #2 on:** October 12, 2011, 12:29:19 AM »

balance- simplicity only equal fun until you are more advanced. For example chess is harder to learn buy more fun to play than checkers. It might take longer to learn the ins and outs of chess but when you do it will be much more entertaining

Isildur · « **Reply #3 on:** October 12, 2011, 01:05:54 AM »

Quote from: katedid on October 12, 2011, 12:29:19 AM

balance- simplicity only equal fun until you are more advanced. For example chess is harder to learn buy more fun to play than checkers. It might take longer to learn the ins and outs of chess but when you do it will be much more entertaining

Chess is an understatement when compared to Redemption's rules

katedid · « **Reply #4 on:** October 12, 2011, 01:39:17 AM »

Quote from: Isildur on October 12, 2011, 01:05:54 AM

Quote from: katedid on October 12, 2011, 12:29:19 AM
balance- simplicity only equal fun until you are more advanced. For example chess is harder to learn buy more fun to play than checkers. It might take longer to learn the ins and outs of chess but when you do it will be much more entertaining
Chess is an understatement when compared to Redemption's rules

That is so true. but it was a basic comaprison

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #5 on:** October 12, 2011, 02:21:38 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on October 11, 2011, 11:40:53 PM

It actually is more simple. It's changing "you can only rescue Lost Souls in opponents' lands of bondages except with these two particular cards" to "you can only rescue Lost Souls in opponents' lands of bondges."

I agree with Pol. Many people are surprised when they first learn the game that they can use SoG to rescue their own LSs. I have to actually TEACH that as a "strategy tip" to all my new players because at first they assume that they can't.

Quote from: katedid on October 12, 2011, 12:29:19 AM

balance- simplicity only equal fun until you are more advanced. For example chess is harder to learn buy more fun to play than checkers.

1 - Checkers is still fun.
2 - Redemption will always be more complicated than checkers regardless of minor simplifications that we are able to implement.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #6 on:** October 12, 2011, 09:29:18 AM »

I didn't like the "only opp LS" when I first heard about it, and now like it even less. I think that rules that make sense, even if they are complicated, are preferable. For instance, the change to Lampy was a good idea.

browarod · « **Reply #7 on:** October 12, 2011, 11:58:54 AM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on October 12, 2011, 02:21:38 AM

Quote from: Minister Polarius on October 11, 2011, 11:40:53 PM
It actually is more simple. It's changing "you can only rescue Lost Souls in opponents' lands of bondages except with these two particular cards" to "you can only rescue Lost Souls in opponents' lands of bondges."
I agree with Pol. Many people are surprised when they first learn the game that they can use SoG to rescue their own LSs. I have to actually TEACH that as a "strategy tip" to all my new players because at first they assume that they can't.

To be perfectly honest, I've never seen that as the case. Everyone I know of has always known that you can rescue any (because any means any and all means all) souls with Soggy Waffles. Or does any not mean any anymore? I also disagree with Pol that the change is simpler for the reason I stated in my previous sentence. It's changing "you can only rescue Lost Souls from opponents' Lands of Bondage with characters and enhancements; any means any and all means all" to "you can only ever rescue Lost Souls from opponents' Lands of Bondage; all means all, but any only means any if it's not on Dominants that the PTB (and some REPs) think are too powerful."

Quote from: SomeKittens on October 12, 2011, 09:29:18 AM

I didn't like the "only opp LS" when I first heard about it, and now like it even less. I think that rules that make sense, even if they are complicated, are preferable.

^This.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #8 on:** October 12, 2011, 03:24:50 PM »

I find that people starting out are often surprised to learn that SoG/NJ can be used on your own souls, and also are surprised to learn that I can band to their characters. It's the same concept really (defining "any" as "any card in play, not just yours or just your opponent's"), but it's just something that people need to learn. I agree that it would be more complex to make the change, because, as Browarod said "any" means "any" is one of the bases of Redemption's abilities, and making SoG/NJ the one exception is, as with all exceptions, adding a further bit of complexity.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #9 on:** October 12, 2011, 03:30:21 PM »

KING'S DAUGHTER SAYS I HAVE ACCESS TO ANY SITE SO I CAN RESCUE MY OWN LOST SOULS IF THEY'RE IN A SITE

browarod · « **Reply #10 on:** October 12, 2011, 03:35:38 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on October 12, 2011, 03:30:21 PM

KING'S DAUGHTER SAYS I HAVE ACCESS TO ANY SITE SO I CAN RESCUE MY OWN LOST SOULS IF THEY'RE IN A SITE

King's Daughter gives you access to those sites, sure, but she doesn't give you access to the souls in them. Nice try, though.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #11 on:** October 12, 2011, 03:37:28 PM »

Why not? Any means any, right? My point is there there's already a fundamental rule regarding rescuing souls, and the change would make that rule less complicated, not more.

I would like to add that I do not support the ruling, but not because it makes anything more complicated, which it doesn't.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #12 on:** October 12, 2011, 03:42:41 PM »

Because you still have to attack the player you're rescuing the soul from, and you can't attack yourself. I can't rescue a soul from someone I'm not attacking in multi even if I have access to the site their soul is held in, also.

browarod · « **Reply #13 on:** October 12, 2011, 03:49:55 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on October 12, 2011, 03:37:28 PM

Why not? Any means any, right?

Yes, any means any. But KD doesn't say "Hero has access to any Lost Soul", just "any site." SoG does specify "any Lost Soul" which is different, but also does not break the "any means any" rule.

Imho, it's less complicated for any means any to always hold and be able to overrule game rules (since that's what special abilities do, they overrule game rules) than to make an exception for two specific cards that don't get to break game rule.

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on October 12, 2011, 03:42:41 PM

Because you still have to attack the player you're rescuing the soul from, and you can't attack yourself. I can't rescue a soul from someone I'm not attacking in multi even if I have access to the site their soul is held in, also.

^This, too.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #14 on:** October 12, 2011, 04:32:40 PM »

Quote

than to make an exception for two specific cards that don't get to break game rule.

Actually you've got it backwards. Right now, SoG and NJ are exceptions. The proposed rule would standardize how rescuing works. Furthermore, "any" would still mean any, because there are already rules restricting "any" to mean "any legal target." You can't use Sanctifying Faith to Convert a Demon, even though it says "any evil character," because demons are not legal targets for conversion. It's no more complicated to say that you can't use SoG on your own Lost Soul, even though it says "Any lost soul," because your own lost souls would not be legal targets for rescue.

lightningninja · « **Reply #15 on:** October 12, 2011, 04:34:33 PM »

Pol, there is no game rule that you can only rescue opponent's souls. Only that you can only make a RESCUE ATTEMPT against your opponent, and not yourself. Sog/nj do not violate any game rule, and making the new change ALSO doesn't violate any game rules, it just creates one. Which is why I think it is more complicated. It limits Sog/nj to disallow them from doing what their ability says they should do.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #16 on:** October 12, 2011, 04:54:23 PM »

Quote

Pol, there is no game rule that you can only rescue opponent's souls. Only that you can only make a RESCUE ATTEMPT against your opponent, and not yourself.

There is no practical difference when the discussion is in relation to simplicity. "You may only rescue your opponents' souls"="you may only attack your opponents" with SoG/NJ being the only exception.

Quote

making the new change ALSO doesn't violate any game rules, it just creates one

Only if you assume your initial premise is accurate, which I've already debunked.

Quote

Which is why I think it is more complicated. It limits Sog/nj to disallow them from doing what their ability says they should do.

The conversion rule limits Sanctifying Faith by disallowing it from doing what its ability says it should do.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #17 on:** October 12, 2011, 05:16:03 PM »

I don't think changing Son of God and New Jerusalem to only work on opponents lost souls will make much of a difference in game complexity, its like saying that a drop of salt water will make much of a difference in my bathtub, yes technically it will change it, but not my anything noticeable.

Redemption is a complex game because we have lots of cards, lots of card types (that work differently) and the initiative system is fairly complex (especially when dealing with removal by special abilities), old card wordings that we refuse to update (we explain how they work sort of), lots of seemingly arbitrary rulings (there are reasons for them, but most of them would be unknown to players who don't know the history of the game)

If you want to simplify the game the place to start is Special Initiative, not Son of God/New Jerusalem, because that is a simple "It says any so you can rescue your own" or "you can only rescue lost souls from your opponent so it even though it says any it only works on your opponent" whereas for Special Initiative we need often find new and exciting ways to be confused, so defining that would be a much better place to start.

(If you couldn't tell I really don't care what happens with Son of God and New Jerusalem, I would prefer to see confusing game rules and special abilities have well defined rules to follow)

lightningninja · « **Reply #18 on:** October 12, 2011, 05:41:37 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on October 12, 2011, 04:54:23 PM

There is no practical difference when the discussion is in relation to simplicity. "You may only rescue your opponents' souls"="you may only attack your opponents" with SoG/NJ being the only exception.

Yes absolutely there is. The difference is, that with the new rule, there is a whole new rule to remember, and if you don't remember you are going to be very confused as to why Sog can't rescue ANY lost soul, like it states. With how things are now, you only have to remember that you can't attack yourself (which is pretty simple and players don't get confused about this very long), and then everything else works like it says.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #19 on:** October 12, 2011, 08:04:11 PM »

How is explaining "you can only rescue your opponent's Lost Souls" to a new person more complicated than explaining "you can only attack your opponent?"

lightningninja · « **Reply #20 on:** October 12, 2011, 08:41:56 PM »

Because Sog says, "any" lost soul. So they will, and should, think they can rescue any.

Bryon · « **Reply #21 on:** October 12, 2011, 08:58:58 PM »

Brandon, if I activate Jacob's Ladder, can I rescue one of my own lost souls?

Why not?

It doesn't say it has to be in an opponent's land of bondage. It just says I have to have "access." If I have access to the Lost Soul in my territory to rescue with Son of God, then don't I have access to rescue with Jacob's Ladder?

Red Wing · « **Reply #22 on:** October 12, 2011, 09:02:38 PM »

Quote from: Bryon on October 12, 2011, 08:58:58 PM

Brandon, if I activate Jacob's Ladder, can I rescue one of my own lost souls?

Why not?

It doesn't say it has to be in an opponent's land of bondage. It just says I have to have "access." If I have access to the Lost Soul in my territory to rescue with Son of God, then don't I have access to rescue with Jacob's Ladder?

So are you saying we CAN rescue Lost souls in our own Land of Bondage (other than Soggy/NJ)?

lp670sv · « **Reply #23 on:** October 12, 2011, 09:10:08 PM »

Quote from: Bryon on October 12, 2011, 08:58:58 PM

Brandon, if I activate Jacob's Ladder, can I rescue one of my own lost souls?

Why not?

It doesn't say it has to be in an opponent's land of bondage. It just says I have to have "access." If I have access to the Lost Soul in my territory to rescue with Son of God, then don't I have access to rescue with Jacob's Ladder?

loopholes!

SomeKittens · « **Reply #24 on:** October 12, 2011, 09:16:41 PM »

Quote from: Bryon on October 12, 2011, 08:58:58 PM

Brandon, if I activate Jacob's Ladder, can I rescue one of my own lost souls?

Why not?

It doesn't say it has to be in an opponent's land of bondage. It just says I have to have "access." If I have access to the Lost Soul in my territory to rescue with Son of God, then don't I have access to rescue with Jacob's Ladder?

I could have sworn there was an errata....

News:

Author Topic: Simplicity or Balance? (Read 32672 times)

browarod

browarod

Rawrlolsauce!

browarod

lp670sv