Cactus Game Design Message Boards

I play both also (and by Poker I'm referring to Texas Hold'em overwhelmingly). Even though it doesn't seem intuitive, from personal experience it seems that Redemption is far more luck based and less dependent on skill then poker.

When I play against someone that I know just outclasses me in Redemption, I'll still win a surprising amount of games. When I play against someone that I know just outclasses me in poker, I'm going to lose all my chips. The only edge that I'll concede to Redemption in terms of strategy is deck building, which despite a seemingly infinite amount of combinations, follows a fairly loose guide. For the top decks, at least.


Although it has to be Magic beings "Majus Poker" doesn't result in anything. 

The way that it is played directly enables the strategy. Whether you consider that part of the game or not is up to you

Some of that directly translates to CCGs.

I've stated before how I rule at my tournaments.  If there is a dispute as to whether a player tried to prevent another player from using a dominant by slapjacking cards, then I will always side with the player who wanted to play their dominant.

So if you're at my tournament, it is in your own best interest to ask your opponent for initiative so that when you play your card, that they can't claim that they wanted to play a dominant first.

I can not agree more with this "unofficial ruling", Its very intuitive and logical to have to pass and acknowledge initiative this way.

Since when is Magic on ESPN? . I assumed poker.
Poker is NOT more strategic than Redemption.  I don't know if MTG is, since I've never played it, but I've played poker, and I know that it is NOT.

I was featured on the JSS National championships, Magic Pro tour, Magic Grand Prix, and Worlds(which I lost on world-wide tv).
This was back in the day when they televised magic all the time, now they just put in on youtube or the wizards site.
I do not play texas hold em that much anymore.

Web definitions

scheme: an elaborate and systematic plan of action

the branch of military science dealing with military command and the planning and conduct of a war
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Strategy refers to a plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal. The word is of military origin, deriving from the Greek word strategos, which roughly translates as general.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy

In game theory, a player's strategy in a game is a complete plan of action for whatever situation might arise; this fully determines the player's behaviour. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_(game_theory)

Strategy was a Canadian game show which debuted on the CBC on April 1, 1969. It was hosted by Alex Trebek and produced by Sidney M. Cohen. The show aired its final episode October 7, 1969.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_(game_show)

Perhaps psychology isn't strategy, which I believe it to be, but even then it directly dictates strategy and opens up an infinite amount of possibilities. Even with that in mind, Poker isn't "all about reading people". Obviously examining their bets and reactions when new cards are introduced or when you do something is important, but it isn't the only factor. Calculating how many hands can beat you given the table, in addition to the probability of each hand, is one example skill besides "reading people". Evaluating said probability and betting appropriately is another. Perhaps strategy isn't the best term to describe it beings it's so hard to define.

Redemption utilizes these to some extent, but not nearly as heavily as poker. Poker is essentially based around this. Perhaps strategy isn't the best term for this, I'd say skill is more appropriate.

I was featured on the JSS National championships, Magic Pro tour, Magic Grand Prix, and Worlds(which I lost on world-wide tv).

Nice, do you still play?

Quote from: spicynumber1 on July 07, 2011, 03:42:53 PM

I was featured on the JSS National championships, Magic Pro tour, Magic Grand Prix, and Worlds(which I lost on world-wide tv).

Nice, do you still play?

Occasionally, but not as a professional anymore.

In battle, I understand.  However, in your examples above, things get a little sticky.  If I suspect my opponent of a FTM, I'll drop everything as soon as possible.  In the Hur/Gifts example, I'd attack from hand.  It's not a good situation to play in, but there's such a drastic difference between the two.

Attacking with Hur from hand is perfectly fine

I never knew you can "attack from hand"...
What a powerful move, there is no longer any need to play cards to territory then rescue?

You'd be breaking the rules if you tried to drop everything real quick in anticipation of a Mayhem, and any good judge would make you pick your cards back up.

Attacking with Hur from hand is perfectly fine, but if you flipped up Gifts and slapped Hur into battle from hand or territory or anywhere else, any good judge would make you go back if your opponent wanted to play DoN.

Speaking from the position of an actual Tourny host/judge, I would allow it.  Reasoning?  There's nothing in the rules that says otherwise.  It being the "right thing to do" is up to debate, but it is not a judges job to regulate morals, just gameplay.

Quote from: Gabe on July 07, 2011, 02:13:46 PM

Some of that directly translates to CCGs.

, but although SOME of Redemption is about reading your opponent, it isn't practically the whole game

I've read my opponents enough over the years to know that playing ANB drives them crazy.  However, no matter how much they whine about either game, a spade is still a spade whereas ANB may soon become a spade.

You won't get an announcement saying as much. However I will state that the opponent must be given a reasonable amount of time to react to the playing of a card. You can't activate Gifts with one hand, while placing Hur into battle from the other. a good rule of thumb is about 10-20 seconds to process something like an artifact being activated - Back when I used to run Hur + Gifts I would generally activate Gifts, then sit and wait not saying anything to see if my opponent wanted to do anything, then rescue.

However I will state that the opponent must be given a reasonable amount of time to react to the playing of a card.

In the Mayhem example, I'm not reacting to the playing of a card.

While I still disagree, I'll rule as the Elders have said.