Author Topic: ANE (A New Errata) (Read 7257 times)

Master KChief · « **Reply #25 on:** March 22, 2013, 08:24:43 PM »

Has there ever been a card errata'd because of an exploitation in T1?

The Guardian · « **Reply #26 on:** March 22, 2013, 09:01:37 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on March 22, 2013, 08:24:43 PM

Has there ever been a card errata'd because of an exploitation in T1?

The first errata to ANB was due to it's ability to give a player a second consecutive term when it did not say "If making a rescue attempt."

Master KChief · « **Reply #27 on:** March 22, 2013, 09:08:36 PM »

I also conveniently forgot about Mayhem.

The Guardian · « **Reply #28 on:** March 22, 2013, 09:22:30 PM »

Holy Grail and Grapes also.

Gabe · « **Reply #29 on:** March 22, 2013, 09:39:23 PM »

Lost Souls (2-Liner and 3-Liner)

Master KChief · « **Reply #30 on:** March 22, 2013, 09:41:55 PM »

Are those cards errata'd because of a) an exploitation and b) solely because of Type 1?

Professoralstad · « **Reply #31 on:** March 23, 2013, 01:03:08 AM »

Quote from: Master KChief on March 22, 2013, 09:41:55 PM

Are those cards errata'd because of a) an exploitation and b) solely because of Type 1?

I guess it's hard to say that any card is ever given an errata solely because of T1. With the exception of Lost Soulseseses, I don't know of any cards that are useful in T1 that aren't also useful in T2, and you can have up to four of a lot of them. So any broken combo in T1 can be expanded in T2, which is why combo decks are more prevalent in T2.

Also something to point out, AutO is arguably even more deadly in T2, where you can have twice the ratio of AutO's to cards in deck, and Gideon/Samuel has 4 Edicts he can use. I usually only use 3 AutOs in my T2 decks, but I could see putting in a fourth. Thaddeus is ridiculous in T2, where you can more easily maintain a full fleet of Disciples (due to duplicates), however, Disciples are tempered quite a bit by CwD and ASA. TGT is generally weaker in T2, but that's just because defenses are naturally bigger and have more territory protection typically. But even if any of those cards were errata'd, it wouldn't necessarily be just because of T1.

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on March 22, 2013, 08:06:34 PM

Do they even play T1 in Minnesota?

We try to avoid it if at all possible. But every once in awhile we get a defending national champion to show up at our locals and game nights and insist on it, so he can beat us over the head with his newest rendition of FBTNB.

sepjazzwarrior · « **Reply #32 on:** March 23, 2013, 03:37:14 AM »

does ANB target face-down artifacts in the artifact pile? i dont see anything in the new errata that allows it to target those...

Redoubter · « **Reply #33 on:** March 24, 2013, 11:36:26 AM »

Quote from: sepjazzwarrior on March 23, 2013, 03:37:14 AM

does ANB target face-down artifacts in the artifact pile? i dont see anything in the new errata that allows it to target those...

This again, as brought up by me and a couple others in this thread, but I'm not seeing an Elder comment yet. Can we fix this issue now and not deal with it again down the road

If we don't fix the artifact pile thing, there will be more threads (just like the last 3 times this card was errata'd) where we are told "we don't want to deal with the errata again". If we're going to fix it, can we fix it?

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #34 on:** March 24, 2013, 01:23:19 PM »

We're discussing the best way to deal with the whole artifact pile thing. Hopefully we'll return with something definitive soon

Redoubter · « **Reply #35 on:** March 24, 2013, 05:10:09 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on March 24, 2013, 01:23:19 PM

We're discussing the best way to deal with the whole artifact pile thing. Hopefully we'll return with something definitive soon

Thank you!

I know we all didn't want to have this conversation again, that's the only reason I mention it again

Korunks · « **Reply #36 on:** April 04, 2013, 05:36:50 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on March 24, 2013, 01:23:19 PM

We're discussing the best way to deal with the whole artifact pile thing. Hopefully we'll return with something definitive soon

Bump any update?

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #37 on:** April 04, 2013, 09:21:15 PM »

Quote from: Korunks on April 04, 2013, 05:36:50 PM

Bump any update?

Still working on it...

Gabe · « **Reply #38 on:** April 04, 2013, 10:09:10 PM »

Rest assured that Artifacts in the Artifact pile do shuffle. But we will iron out a solution that will keep the rules lawyers happy.

Red · « **Reply #39 on:** April 04, 2013, 10:21:02 PM »

Make it fix split altar. PLEASE.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #40 on:** April 06, 2013, 09:13:08 AM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on March 24, 2013, 01:23:19 PM

We're discussing the best way to deal with the whole artifact pile thing. Hopefully we'll return with something definitive soon

So does that mean ANOTHER Errata?

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #41 on:** April 06, 2013, 11:59:19 AM »

I think we should leave the SA for ANB the way it is printed, and just change every rule in the REG that affects it instead.

Chris · « **Reply #42 on:** April 06, 2013, 01:57:57 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on April 06, 2013, 11:59:19 AM

I think we should leave the SA for ANB the way it is printed, and just change every rule in the REG that affects it instead.

I agree with this. It's simpler in the long run.

lp670sv · « **Reply #43 on:** April 06, 2013, 09:20:08 PM »

I think we should all just mail every copy of ANB in existence to me so that I can change the special abilities to the new errata.....with fire.....

STAMP · « **Reply #44 on:** April 07, 2013, 11:59:49 AM »

You'll have to pry my 47 ANBs out of my cold, dead hands.

KingLeo · « **Reply #45 on:** April 08, 2013, 11:02:38 PM »

....... bravo kirk!!

KingLeo

STAMP · « **Reply #46 on:** April 17, 2013, 08:12:53 PM »

I need 49 ANBs. It's just a good number to have.

wmd1999 · « **Reply #47 on:** April 17, 2013, 09:54:22 PM »

You should give me seven so that you have 42, for that is the answer.

Gabe · « **Reply #48 on:** April 18, 2013, 11:25:11 AM »

Face down cards that in the the field of play will no longer be considered "out of play". This is an archaic rule that's unintuitive. While it may have had a purpose at one time, it does not any longer. We will remove face down cards from the definition of "Out of Play" in the next REG update. Additionally, we will add the following definition for "Face Down Cards".

Face Down Cards

Face Down cards are cards in territories, battle, and set-aside areas that are face down either due to special ability, or are inactive artifacts in an artifact pile. Face down cards have no abilities, brigade, titles, or identifiers while they are face down. The only known attribute of a face down card is the card type. Face down cards are only targetable by abilities that specify they can target face down cards or inactive artifacts, or cards that can target any or all cards in a location. When a face down card enters battle, it is immediately flipped face up, unless otherwise specified by the special ability that flipped it face down.

This should resolve the concern about ANB shuffling inactive artifacts as well as clean up a number of other odd card interactions. It also gives a slight boost the underplayed site guard strategy.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #49 on:** April 18, 2013, 12:26:40 PM »

Just to answer some of the questions/comments that might result:

-Does this help improve any National Promos?
No. Since any National Promos that this may have affected don't target any/all cards in a location, but rather only target artifacts in a location, they cannot target face down artifacts.

-How does this help improve site guarding?
A face down EC is allowed to block from territory just as a face down Hero is able to attack from territory. That means you can block with a face down EC in a site that isn't being attacked as your initial block. It also means that you have an EC in your territory that has no numbers, brigade, or identifiers, and that is able to enter battle with no numbers, brigade, or identifiers. So if there are any cards that may or may not place some sort of restrictions on which ECs can or can't block, those restrictions won't apply to face down ECs until they are flipped face up, at which point they are in battle.

-Can I discard face down card with Abom?
No. Since Abom doesn't allow you to target any card in a territory (due to the LS restriction) then it doesn't apply.

I'm sure there will be more questions, but those are a few of the ones I figured would be first. Any other questions should probably be in other threads (in order to leave this thread to address ANB).

News:

Author Topic: ANE (A New Errata) (Read 7257 times)

Chris