|
Post by headswillroll on Jun 14, 2008 17:49:00 GMT -5
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. Secrecy can be just as strong a tactic as any. Well, I for one don't have any plans for going to New York, too crowded. Perhaps someday we will meet on middle ground. You never know.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Small on Jun 14, 2008 23:03:44 GMT -5
Currently for type two it is play in any order, for type one it has not changed.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Jun 15, 2008 9:03:14 GMT -5
Thank you for the response. Now only one answer to go. Hint: It is in the Type One forum.
|
|
|
Post by scottr on Jun 16, 2008 0:05:06 GMT -5
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. Actually, I don't see text that supports this - there are entries that are specific to playing Edge cards specifically "if it directly affects, prevents, or nullifies a Must Do action", but I can't find an entry granting this ability to any other May Do effects. Either way, it does seem like we both had the same idea of the way it was being played. 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. According to Tim's later post, Lean and Mean and Battlefield would be viable, which sounds in line with what I expected. 'Affecting' a must do currently seems pretty wide (depending on the must do involved, of course).
|
|
|
Post by Tim Small on Jun 16, 2008 7:09:22 GMT -5
Another example:
I am playing Annie Devlin and I have a Master Strat in play.
I have one defense in my hand. I want to rid myself of this defense so my opponent's battlefield will do one damage to me.
Because I am altering the effects of Battlefield, I can play this. This affects the outcome.
Why would fishing be any different then this example to look for something to discard?
You are looking for a direct way to affect the out come of the card in play. Strating, drawing and discarding your cards can and will have this affect and some will not. But, it has the potential to alter the outcome.
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcmurray on Jun 16, 2008 15:11:07 GMT -5
There is a real problem with this, and I cant believe that nobody else has seen it yet. I am waiting for word from the Design Team if this is truly thier intention. I dont think they have quite looked at the ramifications. Like what?
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 16, 2008 15:35:51 GMT -5
There is a real problem with this, and I cant believe that nobody else has seen it yet. I am waiting for word from the Design Team if this is truly thier intention. I dont think they have quite looked at the ramifications. Like what? Tim doesnt seem to see a problem with it, so we will just have to exploit it.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Small on Jun 16, 2008 17:03:25 GMT -5
Please exploit away, I will be up there this week.
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcmurray on Jun 16, 2008 19:54:08 GMT -5
Between prowler and heads, this is the most non-communicative message board I've ever been too when it comes to people doing more than make vague warnings about things they think are overpowered.
|
|
|
Post by dbaker on Jun 16, 2008 20:02:37 GMT -5
Please exploit away, I will be up there this week. Tim, will you be coming to our Type 2 tournament this Friday 6/20 or the re-scheduled Type 1 tournament the next Sunday 6/29? I was just wondering. WOuld really like to see you there.
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 17, 2008 5:07:34 GMT -5
Between prowler and heads, this is the most non-communicative message board I've ever been too when it comes to people doing more than make vague warnings about things they think are overpowered. If this were a non-competitive game like HackMaster, it would be different. However, since this game has winners and loser, keeping certain information to oneself is a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Small on Jun 17, 2008 16:53:35 GMT -5
I am going to be at both, that is the goal.
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 17, 2008 17:58:31 GMT -5
I am going to be at both, that is the goal. It would be great to see you, and even better to play against you once again. Might we see Greg there as well?
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcmurray on Jun 18, 2008 20:16:05 GMT -5
Between prowler and heads, this is the most non-communicative message board I've ever been too when it comes to people doing more than make vague warnings about things they think are overpowered. If this were a non-competitive game like HackMaster, it would be different. However, since this game has winners and loser, keeping certain information to oneself is a good idea. If your strategy is so weak it can't win once people know about it, you wouldn't survive the second round around here. Stuff like this reminds me of growing up in the cold war, but with more geekiness and less fear. Fear not though, we all fear and respect your awe inspiring deck building might.
|
|
|
Post by forimthehighlander on Jun 18, 2008 20:44:29 GMT -5
Another example: I am playing Annie Devlin and I have a Master Strat in play. I have one defense in my hand. I want to rid myself of this defense so my opponent's battlefield will do one damage to me. Because I am altering the effects of Battlefield, I can play this. This affects the outcome. Why would fishing be any different then this example to look for something to discard? You are looking for a direct way to affect the out come of the card in play. Strating, drawing and discarding your cards can and will have this affect and some will not. But, it has the potential to alter the outcome. I want to throw it out there that this logic is pretty flawed from the start. This will lead to a lot of rulings made simply on opinion of how something "affects" something rather than the actual interaction of the cards. In the Lean and Mean vs. Battlefield example, Lean and Mean does absolutely nothing to affect/alter the Battlefield, all it affects/alters is your ability to ditch or not ditch. Just of the top of my head, this would allow me to play a Lean and Mean during my Must Do before I exert for a Disarm Check. You may not see it as affecting the Disarm Check, but I could argue that the top card is not the Attribute I want for the Disarm Check so getting rid of it "affects/alters" the Must Do. Anyone besides me see the problem with the ambiguity of the situation?
|
|