|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 8, 2009 21:13:28 GMT -5
On a side note, (since I just brought up Appel) Have you ever considered a One Edge per target rule? For instance in type one you could play either a lunge, or an appel on a basic attack, but you could never play more than one edge on any block or attack unless specifically stated on the card. Obviously some cards like Gladius: Twist would need some errata, but it might give the design team a little more leeway in the future. We'll discuss it. Thing is, most cards usually only get 1 Edge played on them. The cards that DO get multiple Edge cards are designed to get them (blocks and dodges for example). What cards do you see being broken because they CAN be played in combination with other Edge cards?
|
|
jafo17
Ancient Immortal
Posts: 451
|
Post by jafo17 on Jun 9, 2009 11:16:47 GMT -5
Okay so tourney by tourney basis would be too much. I was thinking big regional tourneys and the like. But every 3 or 4 months I could agree with on updating the rule book. Its just real cool having access to something that can be used as a reference when questions come up. As far as the non-gaurd standing D, I figured as much. It would still be interesting if that was not the case. Maybe an errata in the future? ;D
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jun 9, 2009 16:31:38 GMT -5
As far as the non-gaurd standing D, I figured as much. It would still be interesting if that was not the case. Maybe an errata in the future? ;D Yeah, we'll get right on that one.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Jun 9, 2009 17:43:46 GMT -5
Thanks for your viewpoints on how we are updating the rules. What you have both expressed is what we normally try to do, however, as you know, if we come across something we fell needs to be immediately put into the rulebook, we go ahead and put in with whatever other updates we have on hold in order to keep things as current as possible. Recently, we have had some very important updates that needed to be addressed from all over the world, and so did what needed to be done for all. Thanks again for your input, it helps us a lot.
HWR
|
|
jafo17
Ancient Immortal
Posts: 451
|
Post by jafo17 on Jun 11, 2009 11:25:34 GMT -5
As far as the non-gaurd standing D, I figured as much. It would still be interesting if that was not the case. Maybe an errata in the future? ;D Yeah, we'll get right on that one. You do that, then get right back to me, then I'll need those Tps forms from U by friday at 9, then I would like Liz Grayson over at my house dressed in nothing but chocolate icing, then I'll win the lottery and have my own persona card printed cause I'm rich and powerful. All possiblilitys prowler, some more far fetched than others (especially the milllion dollars ;D) but all still possibliitys.
|
|
webtroll
Ancient Immortal
There can be only one... braaaain...
Posts: 497
|
Post by webtroll on Jun 11, 2009 12:02:54 GMT -5
You wanted Grayson at your house in chocolate frosting? With or without the Kris?
|
|
jafo17
Ancient Immortal
Posts: 451
|
Post by jafo17 on Jun 11, 2009 14:12:53 GMT -5
You wanted Grayson at your house in chocolate frosting? With or without the Kris? Hmm....I'll go with the actress(Gracen a.k.a, Amanda). Not the immortal, thats just nasty. Yes I am aware I spelled it wrong, I will probably get no end of guff for that .
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Jun 11, 2009 16:55:03 GMT -5
It is okay, we understand that your fantasy of Grayson in a wig and covered in chocolate trying to portray Elizabeth Gracen is unique. However, it doesn't compare to Russe"L" and his shrine for Kalas.
;D
|
|
jafo17
Ancient Immortal
Posts: 451
|
Post by jafo17 on Jun 11, 2009 17:11:27 GMT -5
Ooohh....well....I see...uh.
|
|
zarth2k
Elder Immortal
"So lure him outside and take his head. Problem solved."
Posts: 265
|
Post by zarth2k on Jun 15, 2009 0:04:21 GMT -5
On a side note, (since I just brought up Appel) Have you ever considered a One Edge per target rule? For instance in type one you could play either a lunge, or an appel on a basic attack, but you could never play more than one edge on any block or attack unless specifically stated on the card. Obviously some cards like Gladius: Twist would need some errata, but it might give the design team a little more leeway in the future. We'll discuss it. Thing is, most cards usually only get 1 Edge played on them. The cards that DO get multiple Edge cards are designed to get them (blocks and dodges for example). What cards do you see being broken because they CAN be played in combination with other Edge cards? I never meant to imply that the rule is broke as is. Simply that changing it would open up more up more options for the designers, fix the appel/ lunge 1E issue, and add a make playing defenses more...interesting.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Jun 15, 2009 15:59:36 GMT -5
No offense taken. I'll be honest, at this time with the multitude ways of UB/UD multi-attack possibilities out there, it isn't going to be anytime soon for going that route, but it will be discussed. Thanks for the idea, we will let you know if there is a change.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Jul 2, 2009 5:15:32 GMT -5
These entries are added to the Rulebook as of 07-01-2009.
FAQ Section:
Considered Versus Actually: If you are Considered Prone or Considered Disarmed, you are not subject to effects by cards or abilities that are triggered by being Prone or Disarmed. Similarly, if you are no longer under the effect of being Considered Prone or Considered Disarmed, you are not subject to effects by cards or abilities that are triggered by no longer being Prone or Disarmed.
HS3-180 They Also Serve: Unless your opponent ignores/nullifies/removes They Also Serve from play, they may not have more than one Sit/Obj/Plot/Loc in play, and may not play one to switch out the one they do have in play. The text is the way it is due to the fact that people will ignore/nullify this card, and what happens when the effects become active again.
These are clarifications of existing rules or cards, and so are not subject to the three week induction period.
HWR and Prowler
|
|
|
Post by clique84 on Jul 2, 2009 22:11:31 GMT -5
These entries are added to the Rulebook as of 07-01-2009.FAQ Section:Considered Versus Actually: If you are Considered Prone or Considered Disarmed, you are not subject to effects by cards or abilities that are triggered by being Prone or Disarmed. Similarly, if you are no longer under the effect of being Considered Prone or Considered Disarmed, you are not subject to effects by cards or abilities that are triggered by no longer being Prone or Disarmed. HS3-180 They Also Serve:Unless your opponent ignores/nullifies/removes They Also Serve from play, they may not have more than one Sit/Obj/Plot/Loc in play, and may not play one to switch out the one they do have in play. The text is the way it is due to the fact that people will ignore/nullify this card, and what happens when the effects become active again. These are clarifications of existing rules or cards, and so are not subject to the three week induction period. HWR and Prowler Umm, huh? So my opponent focus/ignores/whatever my They Also Serve. Can he then play a second Plot/Sit/Obj, and what happens when They Also Serve comes back? Bill
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jul 2, 2009 23:09:24 GMT -5
Umm, huh? So my opponent focus/ignores/whatever my They Also Serve. Can he then play a second Plot/Sit/Obj, and what happens when They Also Serve comes back? When your opponent plays a second Plot/Sit/Obj after ignoring/nullifing TAS, they must choose which of the 2 gets discarded when They Also Serve is no longer ignored/nullified, the same way they have to when TAS first comes into play. It is all a matter of timing.
|
|