New Redemption Grab Bag now includes an assortment of 500 cards from five (5) different expansion sets. Available at Cactus website.
Do you mean the thread where people type paragraphs of wild speculation, then then end with
Quote from: Chronic Apathy on October 13, 2011, 12:46:53 AMQuote from: katedid on October 13, 2011, 12:35:55 AMI didnt read the rule book. I watched people play in a tournament for 5 hours....That reminds me. Don't listen to anything that comes out of Randall's mouth. He's busy trying to convince us that Son of God should be considered human for Herod's Temple.He's also tried to convince me I can't martyr OT heroes (because they aren't Christians, Jesus wasn't born yet), CAN rescue the NT only LS with SOG (which actually just makes sense, how is Jesus NOT a new testament hero? The whole new testament is about him dangit!)Disclaimer:All of those things were said one time, in jest he was not actually trying to convince me of those things.
Quote from: katedid on October 13, 2011, 12:35:55 AMI didnt read the rule book. I watched people play in a tournament for 5 hours....That reminds me. Don't listen to anything that comes out of Randall's mouth. He's busy trying to convince us that Son of God should be considered human for Herod's Temple.
I didnt read the rule book. I watched people play in a tournament for 5 hours....
postcount.add(1);
Quote from: Bryon on October 12, 2011, 11:28:12 PMOr, we could simplify the whole thing by simplifying the "rescue attempt" rule to a "rescue" rule. (you can only rescue a lost soul from your opponent's Land of Bondage).Said rule would only destroy the meta-game.Quote from: Bryon on October 13, 2011, 08:59:26 AMQuote from: browarod on October 12, 2011, 11:40:57 PMQuote from: lp670sv on October 12, 2011, 11:40:06 PMhave you been keeping up with the ROOT testing thread? Evidently not.Do you mean the thread where people type paragraphs of wild speculation, then then end withIt's not wild speculation. It's fact. The rescue rule destroys the game.
Or, we could simplify the whole thing by simplifying the "rescue attempt" rule to a "rescue" rule. (you can only rescue a lost soul from your opponent's Land of Bondage).
Quote from: browarod on October 12, 2011, 11:40:57 PMQuote from: lp670sv on October 12, 2011, 11:40:06 PMhave you been keeping up with the ROOT testing thread? Evidently not.Do you mean the thread where people type paragraphs of wild speculation, then then end with
Quote from: lp670sv on October 12, 2011, 11:40:06 PMhave you been keeping up with the ROOT testing thread? Evidently not.
have you been keeping up with the ROOT testing thread?
yeah thats good to teach the basics but they should still read the rulebook its like going to lecture at college and never reading the textbook same thing.
#OccupyWhateverStreetCactusHQIsLocatedOn!
and thats a complete lie theres been how many debates not answered quickly that could have been solved by reading the actual rulebook not just the reg heck some of the things asked could be handled just by reading without needing to ask at all.
investment by me
Quote from: Red on October 13, 2011, 09:04:56 AMQuote from: Bryon on October 12, 2011, 11:28:12 PMOr, we could simplify the whole thing by simplifying the "rescue attempt" rule to a "rescue" rule. (you can only rescue a lost soul from your opponent's Land of Bondage).Said rule would only destroy the meta-game.Quote from: Bryon on October 13, 2011, 08:59:26 AMQuote from: browarod on October 12, 2011, 11:40:57 PMQuote from: lp670sv on October 12, 2011, 11:40:06 PMhave you been keeping up with the ROOT testing thread? Evidently not.Do you mean the thread where people type paragraphs of wild speculation, then then end withIt's not wild speculation. It's fact. The rescue rule destroys the game.How is this post supposed to help, other than to decrease my opinion of your opinion?
Quote from: browarod on October 12, 2011, 11:40:57 PMQuote from: lp670sv on October 12, 2011, 11:40:06 PMhave you been keeping up with the ROOT testing thread? Evidently not.Do you mean the thread where people type a paragraph of wild speculation, but then end with QuoteDisclaimer: I have not actually played any games with this rule, I am speaking strictly from hypothetical impact.I have played dozens and dozens of games with this rule, and I have seen it change how I play the game. Before, the game was always about the "Big Two," and the most consistent way to get them was speed. There were no drawbacks to drawing tons of cards. You could tell who was winning a game most often by looking at who had the smallest deck left.Now, I can build a balanced deck with zero draw abilities and still have a fair fight. I have also felt hope in games where I would have given up in the past. I have played dozens of games against Samuel and Genesis decks and had much closer games (and even won a few times) when, in the past, the game would have been over in 5 minutes. It bought me some time to set up my defense, my sites, etc. We got a chance to have some battles.In that other thread, I saw a couple people complain that the proposed rule increases "luck" instead of "skill." That's hogwash. For years, people have complained that SoG/NJ makes the game too much about luck. 2 cards give you 40% of the victory condition of the game, PLUS they can be used defensively. Discarding Son of God from opponent's deck gave you a "lucky win," since it effectively took away half your opponent's defense, not just 40% of their victory. If anything, the proposed rule increases "skill" by reducing the power of the 2 cards that are all about Luck. If anything, the proposed rule increases "skill" by reducing the all-powerful status of "speed," which gets you the "Lucky Big Two" before your opponent. If anything, the proposed rule increases the need to play defense, or else continue to rely on luck and lost soul generation.Do you all know that the top 2 Type 1 decks at nationals had a combined total of 1 EE? Did you know that the EE was not played in 10 rounds? If you can't rescue your own lost souls with SoG/NJ, then you may have to actually use an evil enhancement to stop your opponent's rescue attempt, rather than just rely on dominants and Uzzah to stall. Or, you could continue to build decks the old way, then complain about the "increased luck factor" when the luck you rely on doesn't work for you.
Disclaimer: I have not actually played any games with this rule, I am speaking strictly from hypothetical impact.
I can appreciate the comments of this new rule affecting type 1, are we seeing a difference in type 2? Especially since I can count on my fingers the number of times I get SOG/NJ together to play before my opponent plays mayhem or A New Beginning, etc...
Quote from: christiangamer25 on October 13, 2011, 10:04:30 AMyeah thats good to teach the basics but they should still read the rulebook its like going to lecture at college and never reading the textbook same thing.*Actually in a lecture right now, didn't read the textbook*I don't like steering players to the rulebook. It's fairly old now, and any questions they have can be quickly answered by either me or you guys on the ruling boards.