Cactus Game Design Message Boards

If all you want is negating EC abilities, then John better.  But John loses initiative in most battles.

Playing first is important in many situations.  If you wanna play first, James Son of Alphaeus is the go-to guy.

Quote from: Bryon on June 21, 2010, 02:18:52 PM

If all you want is negating EC abilities, then John better.  But John loses initiative in most battles.

Playing first is important in many situations.  If you wanna play first, James Son of Alphaeus is the go-to guy.

you'd need good purple enhancements if you were going to play first anyway. unless there are some in the next set, he's really not that good.

quoted for truth. in a brigade that has an interrupt, d3, play next, initiative really isnt a factor. combined with tgt compatibility, john will almost always be a better choice.

or just use both.

I have a clarification question on the preview card. Does it look at the toughness of the evil character when deciding whether to negate it and its weapons, or does it look at the toughness of each character and each weapon and negate or not negate individually?

If you have 3 disciples out, then you will almost always get to play the first enhancement once blocked, and so AoCP becomes a guaranteed soul probably 95% of the time on him.

AoCP is ALWAYS a guaranteed soul for me, you must be using it improperly .

A good/evil Judas Iscariot, thats starts as good would be a cool idea for a purple disciple/ crimson evil character. SA: When Judas is discards, return him to territory as an evil character. Judas may not use authority of Christ.

   first off, great article! i Thoroughly enjoyed reading about the new set and am excited to see that the disciples will take their place as a distinct group (in that they have their own color and work well together) and act as a viable strategy.     

   second, my good sir rob, I don't mean to sound like i'm critical, but i have a slight disagreement with Judas not being able to use AoC.

(Luke6)
 "13And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles;
 14Simon, (whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew,
 15Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon called Zelotes,
 16And Judas the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, which also was the traitor."

notice that Judas is singled out here as the traitor as in most other places of the Bible. however in Luke 9 all the disciples are mentioned right alone side of each other.

 "1Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases.
 2And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick."
like i said i don't mean to be splitting hairs, but when (or if) Judas is reprinted as a Hero, i think he should be able to use AoC and be every bit as useful as the other disciples, provided he has the means to be converted into an Evil Character who promptly hangs himself on a tree after Son of God is in the discard pile.

p.s. rob, thanks for the most epic and heart-racing game of Sealed Deck i have ever had the privilege playing!

   ...are u trying to keep Judas from being an EC? or are u making fun of the fact that i think he should be a decent hero? u kinda confused me... although i used to wonder why they never made Him a hero. he was after all very concerned and personal with the people, not really a high and lofty king (like a dominant). but then again, how could u make a hero that would measure up to the all-powerful Jesus? and if we did, it would just break the game...oh well...

   oh, come now. he healed, cast out demons, and converted people just like the the rest of the disciples, i think it was his greed and disappointment that Christ wasn't the conqueror he imagined that did him in. he was the the treasurer of Jesus' funds and stole from them, after all. i see him as no different than any of the other disciples, except that he let his weaknesses take him over, which of, coarse led to tragic consequences. perhaps 30 pieces of silver could convert him to an EC too...

Quote from: marc on June 22, 2010, 12:26:53 PM

   oh, come now. he healed, cast out demons, and converted people just like the the rest of the disciples, i think it was his greed and disappointment that Christ wasn't the conqueror he imagined that did him in. he was the the treasurer of Jesus' funds and stole from them, after all. i see him as no different than any of the other disciples, except that he let his weaknesses take him over, which of, coarse led to tragic consequences. perhaps 30 pieces of silver could convert him to an EC too...

Where does it say he did that?

Quote from: drb1200 on June 22, 2010, 08:52:44 AM

Yeah and there should also be a "Jesus" card that goes like this...

Jesus
100/100 Multi Hero
"You win this game of Redemption, every game you have ever played, and every game you will play. Cannot be negated, discarded, removed, or stopped in any way."

You mean

Son of God
"Rescue any lost soul in play"

any lost soul except the N.T. only lost soul... -C_S

   in an earlier post i quoted Luke 9. here it is again:

"1Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases.
 2And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick."

   this is where i derive my belief that Judas was part of the healing and such. he wasn't singled out as the disciple that couldn't cast out a demon. the verse simply refers to the disciples receiving authority from Christ to be able to do these things in His name. Judas is singled out as the traitor most everywhere else, but not so here. secondly, it doesn't make sense that Jesus would pick a "defective disciple" that couldn't receive His authority. and if He did, I'm sure that someone would have made mention of it somewhere. I don't see why we must assume that Judas acted in total contrast to the other disciples (in that he supposedly didn't heal), just because the Bible doesn't mention him specifically doing those things. Why don't we assume that James the Less didn't heal. the only indication we have of him healing is in the above verse. it makes far more sense that Judas was just like the others and later chose to betray Jesus because of his greed (like i said he stole from the treasury while he was in charge of it) and disappointment (like i also said he was probably thinking of Christ as the conquering king who would set his people free from the tyranny of Rome. many saw him as this up until the very end). to say that Judas' sin negates his whole ministry by Christs side preforming miracles doesn't make sense. its like treating Paul as an EC because he was one at one point in his life. his transformation was for the better, Judas' for the worse. did i make much sense or was i just rambling on? i don't want to sound like im starting an argument either.    
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       God Bless y'all!
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       marc = )

to be fair to Marc's point of view:  at the last supper, on some level, they all thought they potentially could be the one to betray Jesus and Judas didn't necessarily stand out as "the one."

In fact, even after Jesus pointed him out, and he walked out on everyone, the rest of the disciples still didn't figure out it that Judas who was the traitor.  They just thought he was going grocery shopping.