Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Dom cap + not able to rescue your own lost souls balances the meta incredibly. It makes every single player reevaluate which is more important in regards towards Dom selection, defense, and lost soul generators. Before yesterday it did not take me much thought into building a top tier deck. I now actually find myself having to think about different scenarios and possibilities.

Until they find out how to deal without it, and then we are back where we started.

Check the ROOT thread for info on that.

Yes, I actually am on board with these rules now. When I was constructing my deck that I play now it took me longer than 5 minutes. Deck construction now requires longer time with more decisions not counting the benefits of the longer deck construction on the metagame.

While everyone else is at it, I'll add my two cents.

1: I think this is a pretty great idea, though that may be because I usually keep my dominants to a minimum. Anyway, this really keeps decks from being super small with the minimum Lost Souls and having, like, 10 dominants as well. I always liked the Site Cap, and now I like the Dominant Cap for the same reason.

2: This is actually the one that made my chin hit the edge of my desk. Who doesn't use Son of God on their own Lost Soul? My feelings are kind of mixed about this one, but that's only because I enjoy rescuing my own Souls so much. All in all, I would say this change has an air of sportsmanship to it that I do like. So I'm for this rule, too.

3: Yeah, I'm like everyone else and their mother about this one. Changing rules at the discretion of the host is not a good idea, plain and simple. It makes me feel uncomfortable, it makes you feel uncomfortable. This one should be retracted.

4: Oh, come on, this one is not that big a deal. So you wait one more turn. Your Mayhem can wait. I think it's fair enough myself, but I am relatively neutral about it.

So, in recap:
1: completely support
2: support
3: do not support
4: sort of support

All in all, a decent new set of rules!

1.  I really like this rule!  I believe it will create more differences between decks now.  Yes there are the same ol' lost soul generation & auto blocks and things, but it does make people play a little different based on their favorite way to play.

2.  I really like this rule too.  It forces people to have at least a little defense.  Yes, I did enjoy playing my SoG & NJ on my own shuffler or the lost souls that they could rescue only leaving ones they couldn't, but I think this will again be a good way to make decks a little different.  I think one of the biggest things this does is let people who don't play speed, to be able to maybe win some lost souls before they even draw a lost soul.  I think this will create a premium on quality blocks, compared to just running a hiding for a turn or two.

3.  I don't see why people are having such problems with this.  First, it is optional, so my playgroup will not be doing this style.  Second, I think it is a good idea for beginning playgroups.  I had a group come up from Dunlap, TN to one of my tournaments, and since they are new to the game and can't afford all the newer cards, it would be nice for them to host restricted tournaments, so that we don't come down there with a bunch of dominants that none of them have yet.  If you are afraid that you don't know if the tournament you are about to join is hosting a restricted category or not, then e-mail the host!  Cactus puts contact information for every host for every tournament.  If you are that concerned that you can't find another 4 cards to replace the 4 dominants you can't use, then take the longer and more painful option and contact the host.


4.  I like this much better than to not be able to play CM or Burial first turn.  I'm surprised that Mayhem hasn't received an errata before now.  Grapes has had one for over a year, so why not give Mayhem one too?

Do you guys think that rule#2 will make the wanderer LS more popular?  Just think, you have the NT LS, */4 LS, Wanderer, and another one.  If he has at least two out and one of them is either NT LS or the */4 LS, you could switch them and SOG it so that you have three LS that can't be rescued by Doms.  Do you think that tactic will be used more now?

I also expect the Thorns, the FbtN, the Shuffler, some Female heroes, some NT heroes, some over */4 heroes, etc. will be found in decks. Also, you just gave your opponent an exchanger, so he can exchange right back if you don't rescue it. He most likely will have an exchanger in his deck as well. So I doubt its popularity will be affected much. Most people use it already, and the new rules give it little to no extra power.

I DO think that the */4 LS might see some play, and the NT a little more.

i think #2 is very wrong since God can redeem our souls (no pun intended) wherever we are.

i think #2 is very wrong since God can redeem our souls (no pun intended) wherever we are.

Well, for gameplay purposes, Lost Souls in our Land of Bondage don't want to be rescued. 

Quote from: cardsofmanykinds on March 18, 2012, 09:31:12 AM

i think #2 is very wrong since God can redeem our souls (no pun intended) wherever we are.

Well, for gameplay purposes, Lost Souls in our Land of Bondage don't want to be rescued. 

Are you saying they have hardened-hearts? Or that our Land of Bondage is stoney ground? 

Quote

Is there any thought of making these available for States and Regionals this year if they are well-received?

I wouldn't have a problem with letting states and up be 2 and 2 or 3 and 3, but they need to be uniform.

Well, all the schools in Central Florida have uniforms, so this won't be a problem.

I agree, that's why I said it needs to be uniform. Whatever the T1 rules are at Nationals, so must they be at States and Regionals. I just wouldn't have a problem with them all being 2 and 2 or 3 and 3.

I think we're missing the biggest change with these rules: March Madness.  How will this change our eventual winner?  Will early dropouts complain that they could have won?  With this become a scandal, forever slandering the eventual winner's trophy?