Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Territory class characters blink when they enter battle, but enhancements don't.

perhaps even divide the ability of a card into instant/ongoing abilities etc...

Intriguing...

Quote from: jbeers285 on July 25, 2017, 05:37:45 PM

Cascade negate creates loops and shouldn't exist anyways. IMO

Quote from: Kevinthedude on July 25, 2017, 05:39:33 PM

Quote from: jbeers285 on July 25, 2017, 05:37:45 PM

Cascade negate creates loops and shouldn't exist anyways. IMO

I absolutely agree.

 

  wholeheartedly.


PS- I copied this whole thing in the hopes that this agreement cascades.

i like cascade negate it makes sense i think implied abilities and things just not being all in one place(come to think of it cascade negate is kind of an implied ability) brings more questions to the boards along with unique situations. some things in the rule book could fit into the reg and the reg is already really great for navigating with its contents listed and linked. maybe the ten rules of redemption in it? that seems to be a great resource for entry level play

http://www.cactusforums.com/redemption-official-rules/the-ten-commandments-of-redemption/

i mean maybe this being in the reg would make a lot of things clear. #5 and #7 people seem to forget or not know to begin with

#5 - Negates Cascade; Any Cards That Take Effect as the Result of a Negated Card, are Also Negated

#7 - Rock (protect/immune/ignore) beats scissors (cannot be negated); scissors beats paper (interrupt/prevent/negate); paper beats rock.

There is a big difference between the cascade wording of the commandments and the proposed new REG entry for cascade. The commandment wording would indicate that abilities that triggered off a negated ability are also negated (Dull trigger off a negated search) which is not how I've understood it to work.

I think CountFount is still confused about why people always beat him with his own decks

Quote from: The Guardian on July 25, 2017, 10:41:08 PM

There has been no change to commandment #5.

Do effects of triggered abilities that triggered off negated abilities (Such as negating a search that triggered a Dull soul) get negated as well? Also if an opponent uses a search ability for the first time that turn, it completes, but then gets negated, is that player still considered to have "used a search ability" for the purpose of cards like Fire Foxes?

Yes
No, but if you protect with fire foxes I think you could negate their search but still have protected souls

I think the biggest things have been implied abilities, cascade negates, and clarifying the differences of things like "played", "activated", "used", etc. and making sure that entries properly utilize terminology as to try to mitigate confusion. I know our playgroup had some confusion with things like placed enhancements, weapons, and when/how certain artifacts could be used because of things like these. I think the more we can shift towards layman's terms the better in general.

Quote from: The Schaefer on July 26, 2017, 03:49:56 AM

I think the biggest things have been implied abilities, cascade negates, and clarifying the differences of things like "played", "activated", "used", etc. and making sure that entries properly utilize terminology as to try to mitigate confusion. I know our playgroup had some confusion with things like placed enhancements, weapons, and when/how certain artifacts could be used because of things like these. I think the more we can shift towards layman's terms the better in general.

Played and used are the same. Used is just what character is playing it. Play is putting it on the table which means the effect resolves. Activating effects are either when it's played or when an effect is triggered.

Played and used mean very different things.

I think my point on played vs used vs activated vs etc. is pretty well demonstrated via recent threads and playgroup experiences. Personally I would say I'm comfortable enough to make sense of most situations with them all but, overall there seems to be plenty of confusion on these. Mostly I'm just saying better codification and wording is needed within the rulebook to address this. Mainly for newer players or players who don't really check the boards.

And just to clarify I'm not saying I'm personally struggling with these topics. I'm saying that these topics seem to be what I've seen others get tripped on in actual game functionality.

Quote from: megamanlan on July 26, 2017, 03:26:27 PM

Quote from: The Schaefer on July 26, 2017, 03:49:56 AM

I think the biggest things have been implied abilities, cascade negates, and clarifying the differences of things like "played", "activated", "used", etc. and making sure that entries properly utilize terminology as to try to mitigate confusion. I know our playgroup had some confusion with things like placed enhancements, weapons, and when/how certain artifacts could be used because of things like these. I think the more we can shift towards layman's terms the better in general.

Played and used are the same. Used is just what character is playing it. Play is putting it on the table which means the effect resolves. Activating effects are either when it's played or when an effect is triggered.

Played and used mean very different things.

Played is putting the card on the table or when it's effect activates. Used is what character is using it. That's not a huge difference.

Quote from: megamanlan on July 26, 2017, 04:40:43 PM

Quote from: Kevinthedude on July 26, 2017, 04:01:02 PM

Quote from: megamanlan on July 26, 2017, 03:26:27 PM

Quote from: The Schaefer on July 26, 2017, 03:49:56 AM

I think the biggest things have been implied abilities, cascade negates, and clarifying the differences of things like "played", "activated", "used", etc. and making sure that entries properly utilize terminology as to try to mitigate confusion. I know our playgroup had some confusion with things like placed enhancements, weapons, and when/how certain artifacts could be used because of things like these. I think the more we can shift towards layman's terms the better in general.

Played and used are the same. Used is just what character is playing it. Play is putting it on the table which means the effect resolves. Activating effects are either when it's played or when an effect is triggered.

Played and used mean very different things.

Played is putting the card on the table or when it's effect activates. Used is what character is using it. That's not a huge difference.

It seems we're talking about the two different kinds of use. "Used by" is what you're talking about and yeah that is basically interchangeable with "played by" and actually that should probably be changed in the REG. The definitional use of "use" (which is what I was talking about) refers to completing an ability, not activating it.

...I don't know where your gettin that as I've never seen it in REG and it mentions that "Play" and "Use" are interchangeable. "Activate" is an effect attempting to complete.

The biggest problems about the rules is the fact, that there are 3 different documents that are relevant for the rules
- 10th Edition Rulebook (Site rules etc.)
- 4th Rulebook
- REG

These documents even contradict each other. I would find it easier for new players if there would be a recent Rulebook-REG document with the actual version of both the Rulebook and the REG.

The second problem is that some of the rules are hard to find or even not defined in any of this documents.

For example in neither of these three documents you may find a definition of a good brigade (or evil or neutral).
The documents even state under Brigade only that Heros and Evil Characters have brigades but don't state that Sites or enhancements or Covenants or Curses would have brigades. You have to search for that info elsewhere. So the definitions are not complete. The documents even mislead you with the definition that the brigades of sites are Hero brigades which associates a player with good brigades.
But, you new player, the Hero brigades on Sites are neutral brigades, as Sites are neutral cards.

So, I would find a complete Rulebook-REG document with complete definitions and complete glossary a good starting point.

One more unnatural rule is the rule that cascade negate may negate the things that were a cascade result of a CBN ability. It seems more natural to understand that everything behind CBN would stay untouched from the cascade negate. So that's one of the rules that I've found hard to understand.

Sometimes, the wordings on cards are misleading, and even the newer prints of that cards have the same wording (e.g. you buy a CoW display packs, and the old editions cards are not printed with the Errata applied). Maybe it would make sense to reprint cards with updated Errata and updated design (they still have the old design with abilities printed over the card picture). The worst example of the problem mentioned above are the Site icons on Fortress Cards (As Erratas made the Sites be Fortresses).
Also there is a Noah-like wording problem about an adjective referring to multiple nouns which various players understand on various ways.

To my understanding we have several topics which will keep rules hard to know by heart and prevent from instinctive and intuitive play:
What I mean are all the different categories of:

• Characters who fought in earthly battles
• Heavenly Temple Artifacts
• ...

I am not such bible proof but IMHO even the maybe the fittest bible knowing person will not know at once whether something or a character fits into a certain category.