Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on June 23, 2013, 12:38:07 PM

That would slow the game down immensely and not in a good way.

what a whole 15 seconds a turn?

Including multi-player, going around every phase, and everyone taking the time to 'decide'?  We already have turn limits and non-turtles time-out because people think way too long, and this adds additional actions.  I agree with you that something different would probably be a good idea, but I don't think that the time issues can be dismissed out of hand, not in the least.

I've played games that have a format that is similar to the suggestion and turns go relatively quickly

Those games aren't this one. The fact remains that any rule changes that slow the mechanics of the game down are bad. A better answer to the "reasonable amount of time" issue is to simply make the rule that "respond to your own action" only applies when slapjack occurs at roughly the same time, which I'm pretty sure is already the case.

I still don't see why you can't allow for the person who's turn it is to have precedence at the beginning of a phase. Having clear defined phases is not a far stretch and doesn't add but a couple seconds to say, I will be playing a dominant during my draw phase... this is not hard nor time consuming and the benefits outweigh the 2 seconds it takes, no more slap jack and confusion as to why there is no real initiative for doms and clears up issues both in live and RTS play...

I still don't see why you can't allow for the person who's turn it is to have precedence at the beginning of a phase. Having clear defined phases is not a far stretch and doesn't add but a couple seconds to say, I will be playing a dominant during my draw phase... this is not hard nor time consuming and the benefits outweigh the 2 seconds it takes, no more slap jack and confusion as to why there is no real initiative for doms and clears up issues both in live and RTS play...

Couple of things:

1. Slapjack is not only an issue at the beginning of phases.  In fact, it can happen a lot more in the middle of phases.

2. Trying to say a specific number of seconds as the amount of time it would add doesn't work, 15 or 2, or any other number.  We have hard limits on the amount of time taken per turn and per action, and no one observes those.  Some people are just very slow players.  It is a fact.  Not everyone will add only a few seconds to each turn, that's the way it is.

3. You will never remove confusion.  The fact that we have a specific card type that is designed to ignore all 'initiative' and be played any time will always cause a problem, it doesn't matter what we do.  I agree that it could perhaps be better, but the solution proposed won't magically fix everything, unfortunately.

I'm against codifying any amount of time as what I get, because then I can use it legally stall.

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on June 23, 2013, 02:26:40 PM

I'm against codifying any amount of time as what I get, because then I can use it legally stall.

That's why announcing similar to passing of init would eliminate that issue

Not really. It can take some players quite a bit to decide what to do. That would make it worse.

Quote from: theselfevident on June 23, 2013, 02:06:03 PM

It would be clearer and make it more consistent tho... if the rule is dom init goes to the person who last had an action why is that so hard and you can be clear that you are playing a dom after your action.... much fewer slap jack instances.

The idea of a "dominant initiative" starts to eliminate the point of having dominants in the first place. The person who plays first gets to go first. Ties go to the person who made the last action. There really aren't many ways that this is going to be any simpler, and none that I can think of that won't result in big changes in the amount of time a game takes. The only reasonable change that can be made is that ties go to the person who didn't make the last action, and that comes down to personal preference. It's one of those rules that affects how a player approaches a lot of different situations, and if it isn't broken (which it isn't), I don't see a point in fixing it.

Is it a reasonable amount of time from the point you draw to the point the person plays Mayhem, which is instantaneously, if you have the right to respond to your own action then you should get that right. it is broken

It's not broken at all. The scenario where is would matter probably happens 1 in 50 games (and it didn't even decide the game in your situation, so I really don't get the fuss - it's a pretty easy ruling that's consistent across the board).

If you have the right to respond to your own action, then you should never have dom-slap jack and thus it is broken... is there any question when passing initiative? No you know who has the right to play their card. Also, when you play an evil character (as pointed out before) you have the right to play Grapes, no dom slap jack, you just get the right no question.

You only have the right to respond to your own action in a slap jack situation. Slapjack just happens to occur a lot on RTS. Again, this is not an issue IRL, and if it is, we have a consistent rule on it that makes complete sense.

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on June 23, 2013, 02:56:34 PM

Quote from: theselfevident on June 23, 2013, 02:50:47 PM

If you have the right to respond to your own action, then you should never have dom-slap jack and thus it is broken... is there any question when passing initiative? No you know who has the right to play their card. Also, when you play an evil character (as pointed out before) you have the right to play Grapes, no dom slap jack, you just get the right no question.

You only have the right to respond to your own action in a slap jack situation. Slapjack just happens to occur a lot on RTS. Again, this is not an issue IRL, and if it is, we have a consistent rule on it that makes complete sense.

I really don't see how this adds any significant amount of time and it reduces confusion and issues both IRL and on RTS...

There isn't any confusion other than you? There's very clear rules. I don't get it.

It is consistent, if you and your opponent both play a dominant at the same time then the person who last did something gets priority. You can't play it after they did and claim responding to action, but at the same time your opponent can't throw down his dominant mid action and say he played it first.

This is not a situation where you can compare redemption to other CGs because other CGs don't have dominants, the only thing I can think of that comes close is exodia and the rule there is you drew all 5 you win, no if ands or buts. The "special preference" rule was made for one very specific situation really, you rescue the two liner once and as soon as your opponent "taps" it you play SOG/NJ before they can get their hands back to their cards to bury it. THAT is unfair, because they knew exactly what they were going to do and the action of making the notation, for your sake, that you rescued half of the lost soul should not warrant you an advantage. The rule is about making it so that game actions like drawing, handing over souls, and the like don't give your opponent an advantage because he knows what he wants to do and is going to use the time it takes to complete those actions to get a leg up on you. That's not fair, you shouldn't be punished for following the rules.

No, you aren't. your opponent cannot play mayhem before you finish drawing your 3 cards, but you also can't draw 3, wait a moment, and then when he chooses to play mayhem decide you were going to use SOG/NJ and claim responding to your own action. Playing them must immediately follow your drawing of the cards.

But you don't get the chance because your opponent plays Mayhem as soon as you draw

If he plays Mayhem as you are drawing your cards, meaning you are have like taken the cards from the deck but they aren't completely in your hand yet, then to my knowledge the same rule applies as does with burial and you may play your dominants and dominants only because you were not given the opportunity to respond to your own action.

If you have put the cards in your hand and did not immediately move to take the dominants out then you've forfeited your chance to respond to your action. You can't put your hand down, or stop to think, because at that point your action is complete. This is harder to interpret in RTS and, in fairness, I could see how it might cause a problem but the rules aren't designed for RTS, they are designed for redemption and until we get a better online platform, one that would hopefully do something like ask you if you are going to play a dom after each action and if you say no you forfeit responding to own action, then you just have to deal. It's stinks, but so does RTS.