2E Deck Construction Rules

[Thorr]

Here is a redux of the essentials for constructing a deck for use in the 2nd Edition rules environment.

Your deck potential is determined by your Persona. On the back of your Persona card, you will find a series of numbers placed on top of Attribute Gems. The first gem is the Master gem and represents your Master card limit. You may only include up to this number of cards with the word Master somewhere in the title.

After the Master gem are 5 other gems: Agility , Strength , Toughness , Empathy , and Reason .The numbers on these 5 gems will add up to a total of 25. These gems are used to determine how many cards with these gems printed them may be included in your deck. To determine this limit Multiply each number by 3. Example - Slan Quince has a rating of 3. This means that he can include up to 9 Agility gems in his deck.

When adding cards to your deck, the number of gems you see in the lower right hand corner of the card will count towards your limit for that gem unless otherwise specified by the card. Most cards will have a single gem on them. Some cards, such as Master cards, will have more than one. You must count each of the gems on the card. So, a Master card with Will count as 1 for the Master gem and 2 towards the Toughness gem.

Regardless of your Attribute gem distribution, your Endurance must be at least 50 cards and may not be more than 75 total cards. You must also include 1 of each of the standard Basic Attacks and Basic Blocks. These Basics are included in every Starter Deck. The Attribute Gems on these Basics do count toward your gem limits. Additionally, your deck may only include generic cards (cards with no subtitle) and cards with a subtitle matching one of your Pregame cards (described below) unless given permission to do so by another card (such as Darius or Weapons Expert).
Example - A player using Connor MacLeod may not normally include cards for Xavier St Cloud in his deck. A player who is not using a Weapon of Choice may not include weapon-specific cards. A player using a Weapon of Choice may not include a card from a different Weapon of Choice.

You may associate up to 6 Pregame cards with your deck. Your persona will count as one of these 6 cards. Weapons of Choice, Persona Premiums, Arms & Tactics, Quickenings and other cards will all count toward this limit as well so choose wisely. Some cards, such as Crystals, will state that they do not count toward your pregame limit. If a Pregame card does not have this stipulation, it will count. Also, you may only use 1 copy of any unique pregame card. I other words, you cannot use 5 Persona Premium cards to add 5 ability. Each Pregame must bea unique card and not a duplicate of another Pregame card.
Example - You can construct a deck with the following Pregames: Amanda Persona, Amanda Premium, Single-Handed Broadsword, Arms and Tactics (Attribute Check), There Can Be Only One (Head Shot), Darius (+1 Master), Crystal (Clio), Crystal (Erato), Crystal (Melpomene). The first 6 cards each occupy a Pregame slot, but the 3 Crystals do not since their text says they do not count.

[Thorr]

I believe I covered the most important points, but please post anything vital that I missed.

[Daijin]

Okay so if I read this right, the Basic Attacks and Basic Blocks in the deck, do not count towards the attribute limit for the Persona. But I can see why they have gems on them: for Attribute checks that are made during gameplay! Am I right?

And I think I see the difference between this new 2e format and the old Master Format. If I remember reading it right, the Master Format only excluded from the attribute limit the 6 Basic Blocks and 9 Basic Attacks you had to use for basic deck construction, but the others past the required amount of Basic Attacks/Blocks did count towards the attribute limit.

[Thorr]

Um, no you didn't read it right.

You must also include 1 of each of the standard Basic Attacks and Basic Blocks. These Basics are included in every Starter Deck. The Attribute Gems on these Basics do count toward your gem limits.

[Daijin]

Ah okay...this is why I ask. Rules can sometimes be confusing, which is why I ask and double check and never assume. Though now with this new knowledge, I see the slight difference between the 2e deck construction and the old Master Format, the both sound exactly the same to me. The only difference, which is more cosmetic than rule difference, is 2E uses a "Master's gem" to represent the Master card limit instead of the old Persona spelling it out in text. But the maximum deck limit of 75 cards is new. Also, I see that "Intelligence" and "Spirit" attributes were changed to "Empathy" and "Reason" for 2e, as well as the attribute total of the 5 gems now being 25, as opposed to the former total of 22.

But this does help me greatly! Thanks a lot Thorr!

[thomaskolter]

I have a question how do you you build a deck if your not using a Persona card I read the rules its an option to play a Generic Immortal unless the rulebook is wrong. So how do you do it?

[prowler7]

thomaskolter said:

I have a question how do you you build a deck if your not using a Persona card I read the rules its an option to play a Generic Immortal unless the rulebook is wrong. So how do you do it?

Which rulebook are you reading? The 2ed rulebook has no allowance for generic immortals. You cannot build a deck w/o a persona. However, since persona cards are uncommon, they are very easy to get.

[headswillroll]

I have it, since this continues to go nowhere, regardless of who answers the question. Thomaskolter, if you would, send a personal message to Therecanonlybeme. He is the authority on house ruling the Generic Immortal into Type Two format. Now, just so we are all clear, this is not sanctioned by the company in any way, shape, form, or fashion. What you do outside of tournament play is your business though. Hope this helps, for everyone's sake.



Headswillroll

[therecanbeonlyme]

thorr said:

I believe I covered the most important points, but please post anything vital that I missed.

You forgot to include the Generic Immortal Gem restrictions and rules. Greg and Tim told me that it it's OK for you to post them now.....................really, it's true.

[therecanbeonlyme]

Sadly, HWR is correct. Generics are not in 2nd Ed.

As much as this disappoints me, I believe 2nd Ed to be really well done. I think there is a great deal of balance and many of the immortals available are really fun to play. As soon as Luther comes out I'll probably drop all the generic nonsense.......or if I can get a Felice/Katana deck together before that.

If they wrong Luther like they did in 1st Ed..............I'm generic spamming 'til I get banned.

[therecanbeonlyme]

If you are interested in the unofficial 2nd Ed Generic Immortal rules that my friends and I have adopted..................

Generic Immortals have the following Gem restrictions:
x3 x4 x4 x4 x4 x4
**This limits Generic Immortals to a maximum deck size of 60 cards**

Generic Immortals are limited to 5 Pregame slots.

My friends and I didn't feel it would be appropriate for Generic Immortals to have an advantage in terms of deck construction and that these guidelines would be acceptable to the game designers, if Generic Immortals had been/are ever allowed in 2nd Ed.

Beyond that, all normal 1st Ed Generic Immortal deck construction rules apply.

You may include up to 1 copy of each non-reserved card from any immortal. This will not allow you to exceed the "6 card rule." For example, you can include Duncan: Duck, Amanda: Duck, Connor: Duck......etc, but, you may not include more than 6 cards named Duck.

[thomaskolter]

prowler7 said:

thomaskolter said:

I have a question how do you you build a deck if your not using a Persona card I read the rules its an option to play a Generic Immortal unless the rulebook is wrong. So how do you do it?

Which rulebook are you reading? The 2ed rulebook has no allowance for generic immortals. You cannot build a deck w/o a persona. However, since persona cards are uncommon, they are very easy to get.

The rules found on this site state if you do not play with a Persona you are considered playing a Generic Immortal. I'm not stupid I noticed there were no construction rules for that so asked the question here where they are. And what do the designers have in mind if I DON'T LIKE ANY OF THEIR PERSONAS. You are making the assumption I like them I have yet to find any I would even consider playing. I if I had to choose might go for Amanda and Duncan but I generally played Generic Immortals in 1e even at tournaments. With the addition in those of immortals with some powers of their own even if not as good as a Persona proper it was rather fun.

Seems to me the designers are screwing up not including them even if they don't personally like the concept maybe I do, or a player here as a preference. What about our rights to play a character concept from 1e that worked in this new setting its like what I and others may like and prefer don't matter.

I like the game concepts and much of the mechanics I just think that they are biased against the nameless immortals that might want to be included but never will.

I'm entitled as a customer and player of Highlander to my opinion its just as valid as yours.

[Tim Small]

I had a huge post that I was gonna post here about the generic immortal, but after reading it all it said was this:

1. Why would the design team put a sub standard persona into the game so it be schooled.
2. Why would we dessign a persona without any support cards, making it a sub standard deck.
3. Why would we want to to put out into the tournament system a persona that cannot win?

You would say in response to these:
1. Because a player wants it.
2. It wont be sub standard, it would be a new way to build decks.
3. I can win with it!

and here is the final statement I will make on it:
1. In no way does the design team see a way a Generic Immortal can compete in type two, so we dont want to place a substandard immortal out there.
2. In type 2 every immortal generally has the same number of cards (minus two or three). A generic immortal will in no way be able to compete with the immortal plots, signature card and hilts. in type one there was not a focus on a lot of immortals, making them beatable by generics. in type 2 that is not the case.
3. We are not going to put out a sub standard immortal with no support cards.

[therecanbeonlyme]

xiomburg said:

I had a huge post that I was gonna post here about the generic immortal, but after reading it all it said was this:

1. Why would the design team put a sub standard persona into the game so it be schooled.
2. Why would we dessign a persona without any support cards, making it a sub standard deck.
3. Why would we want to to put out into the tournament system a persona that cannot win?

You would say in response to these:
1. Because a player wants it.
2. It wont be sub standard, it would be a new way to build decks.
3. I can win with it!

and here is the final statement I will make on it:
1. In no way does the design team see a way a Generic Immortal can compete in type two, so we dont want to place a substandard immortal out there.
2. In type 2 every immortal generally has the same cards (minus two or three). A generic immortal will in no way be able to compete with the immortal plots, signature card and hilts. in type one there was not a focus on a lot of immortals, making them beatable by generics. in type 2 that is not the case.
3. We are not going to put out a sub standard immortal with no support cards.

Um............I'd rather you just left it at playful banter. I've already resigned myself to the fact that generics aren't coming back. It doesn't make sense from a business standpoint. The game si making a comeback and it needs new money to get it going again. The generic following is a small niche looking to follow the game without making a big investment. You really can't fault those of us that are wary about dumping a whole bunch of money into a game that screwed the majority of us over. Just as I cannot fault you for making a decission that is best for your business.

That being said I think you have done a great job thus far. I wish Highlander got more support in my area. Had this happened at a different time in my life, I'd be trying to promote the game myself.

In response to your final statements:

1 and 2-> I think it's rather shortsighted to say that a generic immortal cannot compete in type two. As new sets get released some immortals will simply cease to be relavent. New sets might bring them back into the mix, but, then other immortals will take their place at the bottom of the pile. My friends and I have already built and played 3 different generic decks that are fairly competitive with "standard" named immortal builds. In just the two sets there is already a ton of potential with generics. While there are not as many generic cards, there are plenty of solid non-reserve cards available and having WoC's right out the gate gives generics a great card pool to choose from. The quality of generic cards this early compared to 1st Ed does make generics playable.

3-> You might be digging yourself a big hole with that statement. In fact it kind of opens the door for me and anyone else to give you crap if any sub-standard immortals make it though. SO what happens if highlander catches fire but see the same 5-10 immortals winning each tournament? Currently you don't have large enough tournament results to get a good idea of which immortals are even competitive. You have a lot of personal prefrence and the whim of those who have all the cards necessary to complete a deck for a specific immortal. Just by looking at the tournament results on the forums here, there are already several immortals that are rarely played, or rarely do well. While you may have "40 immortals" to choose from by the end of '08, it's unrealistic to think all of them will be competitive. And I'm not even going to get into the natural power creep that takes place in every CCG

[RusselMerchant]

If an imortal falls behind the curve the designe team will see it and help that imortal. For instance amanda is getting help with her WOC in the next set from what I understand.