|
Post by Tim Small on Jun 13, 2008 16:50:27 GMT -5
Well I talked with Brent and I presented your case to him and he said the following:
1. May Do's and Must Do's may be played in any order. 2. It is up to the player to play his May Do's in the correct order if wants benefits from them. 3. It is a rule change from old, but instead of the must do going first unless you have a may do, it is just play them in any order you need. 4. The reason is some may do's may have an efffect on a must do even if that may do may not appear to do so before hand.
|
|
|
Post by scottr on Jun 13, 2008 17:25:40 GMT -5
3 thoughts:
1. It eliminates specious arguments as to whether a may do 'affects'/'alters' a must do.
2. It simplifies an odd rule (and a horrible, if enjoyable, sentence in the rulebook), good for new players.
3. While I don't think this change makes much of a difference*, I'd still like to understand Prowler and HWR's concerns/scenarios/situations.
--
* I'm using to being told that if May Do 'affects' a Must Do, it may be played first. Example that I've seen many times: If I'm going to have to discard cards, I can first use my Master's Strat to swap 2 cards, and I might get something I don't have to discard (but I might get an awesome card that I would still be forced to discard).
That is more lenient than the 2E rulebook currently shows, and does directly affect my perspective on this issue.
Still, under the rule as I've seen it enforced, since something that 'affects' a must do could already be played, this rule change only affects things that don't 'affect' a must do at all - and if that is the case, well, I don't think that changes much at all. It isn't affecting the must dos, so why does the order matter?
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 13, 2008 19:46:29 GMT -5
My Question is this - Does this rule change for both Type One and Type Two?
I told Greg that I can see where in Type Two there would be very little impact as there are not really cards at this time that take advantage of this change. However, in Type One there are plenty of cards that can be used with this in ways they were never meant to be.
If this rule DOES stand for Type One, HWR and I are discussing whether or not we should post our concerns regarding this issue to the general public or just keep them to ourselves to exploit. Scott, one way or another, you will see what our concerns are.
Brent and Tim, if you arent familiar with the SECOND examples I gave to Greg, please PM me and I will relay them to you. I have since recanted my original argument as Greg and I were referring to different cards.
|
|
|
Post by forimthehighlander on Jun 13, 2008 22:19:44 GMT -5
I just want to throw it out there that you two (prowler and HWR) are really funny when it comes to your "secret tech" (my words).
|
|
|
Post by scottr on Jun 14, 2008 0:00:32 GMT -5
However, in Type One there are plenty of cards that can be used with this in ways they were never meant to be. If this rule DOES stand for Type One, HWR and I are discussing whether or not we should post our concerns regarding this issue to the general public or just keep them to ourselves to exploit. Scott, one way or another, you will see what our concerns are. Considering I haven't played Type 1 in a long time, probably just one way, not the other. I'm more interested in understanding whether my take on the current (old?) rule is in line with yours - are you used to 'may dos that can 'affect' a must do may be performed first', or only ones that fully negate a must do? As a side note, I would almost swear that the entry in the Type 2 rulebook was different not too long ago (that it said affect, not "allow you to not do a Must Do")
|
|
|
Post by Tim Small on Jun 14, 2008 8:25:10 GMT -5
Yes send me your concerns.
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 14, 2008 9:24:47 GMT -5
I just want to throw it out there that you two (prowler and HWR) are really funny when it comes to your "secret tech" (my words). When you play in the area with the best players, you keep any advantage you can get.
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 14, 2008 9:32:50 GMT -5
I'm more interested in understanding whether my take on the current (old?) rule is in line with yours - are you used to 'may dos that can 'affect' a must do may be performed first', or only ones that fully negate a must do? The rule has always been that ONLY May Do's that directly affect a Must Do can be played, and the Handbook and Errata support this. For instance: the card Discipline in relation to Fast Talk. In the errata it was finally correctly ruled that this card CAN be played as it directly affects a MUST DO (the Must Do of you not being able to play a card from your hand). As was pointed out earlier, "Recon" played before the Must Do phase in regards to "Battlefield" is ALSO a valid play as "Battlefield" is a Must Do effect. On the other hand, playing a "Lean and Mean" doesnt affect any Must Do effects, and therefor would NOT be playable before the Must Do phase.
|
|
|
Post by forimthehighlander on Jun 14, 2008 10:33:03 GMT -5
I just want to throw it out there that you two (prowler and HWR) are really funny when it comes to your "secret tech" (my words). When you play in the area with the best players, you keep any advantage you can get. Until you come out to NY and take on myself and my crew I wouldn't start bragging that you play with "the best players". I just don't see the point in such secrecy. The first time you show up to a tournament with your "secret tech" everything is revealed anyway. You may take one tournament with your grand ideas but after that people will modify and it'll be useless. Its not as big a deal as I think you believe it is.
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 14, 2008 11:12:05 GMT -5
I just don't see the point in such secrecy. The first time you show up to a tournament with your "secret tech" everything is revealed anyway. You may take one tournament with your grand ideas but after that people will modify and it'll be useless. Its not as big a deal as I think you believe it is. You assume we play the same deck or same idea more than once. Modify all you want, it wont help you against the NEXT deck you see which will be something completely different.
|
|
|
Post by forimthehighlander on Jun 14, 2008 11:39:32 GMT -5
I just don't see the point in such secrecy. The first time you show up to a tournament with your "secret tech" everything is revealed anyway. You may take one tournament with your grand ideas but after that people will modify and it'll be useless. Its not as big a deal as I think you believe it is. You assume we play the same deck or same idea more than once. Modify all you want, it wont help you against the NEXT deck you see which will be something completely different. And you seem to be assuming that all of these deck ideas will be good and will take other decks by storm. That's pretty arrogant if you ask me.
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 14, 2008 13:11:25 GMT -5
And you seem to be assuming that all of these deck ideas will be good and will take other decks by storm. That's pretty arrogant if you ask me. Considering our win/loss record when we do unleash these types of decks, we can afford the arrogance. Its not like we are saying we will quit the game if we lose to a generic deck or anything.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Small on Jun 14, 2008 17:18:05 GMT -5
Example:
Battlefield forces you to discard a defense during your May Do/Must Do phase.
you have none in your hand, but you have three lean and means.
Currently under the 1st ed and the current rules you can play the Lean and Means. This is due to this fact: You can alter the affects of battlefield through drawing cards. This has always been the ruling and is refered to 'Fishing'.
It is simular to playing an Alertness and then Exerting for a defense.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Jun 14, 2008 17:41:02 GMT -5
I have a question. Tim, you have stated your view and comment, and have also posted Brent's view and comment. What is the end result? What will the final rule be for Type One? What will the final rule be for Type Two? I ask this since I have a tourney coming up and would like to know what I can expect.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Jun 14, 2008 17:41:57 GMT -5
I just want to throw it out there that you two (prowler and HWR) are really funny when it comes to your "secret tech" (my words). Glad you get a laugh out of it.
|
|