What new card made your jaw drop?

[BertGreenMan]

Counter Attack - OMG I was not expecting that one!!!!

So you can take his damage, counter attack, start your turn and attack again, wow.

with covert charaters this is a game winner.

[CGHShawn]

Counter attack seems wicked powerful, but so does that stinking hammer. I'm still shaking my head at that thing.

[Kallen000]

3 cards already got me making 3 decks but there are too many to say the one that really made me go OMG GG is a banker card and I dont want to say it in hopes that no one else sees it.(crosses fingers)><

[Osion]

Kallen000: shame on you for trying to keep that Insider Information secret! :D

how was my guess?

[kcfin]

There was only one real jaw dropper for me and that was: Eccentric Inquisition. Other than that there were about 2 dozen other cards that caught my attention as highly viable things to work with/around. Although I already have 2 solid deck ideas in mind, but will wait on doing anything until I see how the set plays before I do anything for sure.

[Brad Meine]

Ruthless Platoon
Rare
3 WWW
Character - soldier
2/3/3

CANNIBALIZE
COST: Destroy a character you control.
EFFECT: This turn, this card gains 2 strength.
Sac engines are good.

[turning_of_the_tide]

Sac engines are good.

very good with recapilating apparation I here :)

-Ryan:spade:

[DoughboyDominatrix]

Wyrmfang. It has to be Wyrmfang. That card is crazy.

[LucienofShadow]

I don't quite get Wyrmfang I'm afraid. Then again, I'm short on sleep.

I liked the Gearsmith stuff alot. The Horsemen in particular sparked my interest. I'm going to try and figure out some kind of rush deck with them, and maybe nodes as well. That character search card really set wheels turning.

[Brad Meine]

Wyrmfang Deathskull
Rare
7 WWWW
Character - dragon
6/6/3

UNIQUE Wyrmfang

If you attack, your opponent must pick any number of characters they control. Those characters must block during this battle if they can, and only those characters can block.
They have to declare blockers BEFORE you declare attackers?

[Osion]

Edit2: Got this one wrong.

[joshlytle]

Edit: @Brad. No, all your attackers must be declared before they pick the creatures they are going to block with.

Actually, "if you attack" triggers when you start an attack, before anything else happens. So your opponent must pick who can be a blocker before you attack. Brad was correct.

Josh Lytle

[Brad Meine]

Oh darn Josh beat me. :( *sulk* Osion got the pwnt by the Brad-meister.

Hey Josh, question. Why the push to get players to run higher thresholds?

[Osion]

Gotcha. "Pwnt" it is I guess.

Declare attack, they pick blockers, then you must have at least one or more characters actually attack.


1. Choose an attack target, opposing faction/location
2. Pick 1 or more non-depleted characters you control to form an attacking party.


If you have no characters that can attack, as in all your guys are depleted or such, can you still declare attack but then fail by neccessity to choose attackers in the second step?

[joshlytle]

Gotcha. "Pwnt" it is I guess.

Declare attack, they pick blockers, then you must have at least one or more characters actually attack.



If you have no characters that can attack, as in all your guys are depleted or such, can you still declare attack but then fail by neccessity to choose attackers in the second step?

I suppose you can, but what would be the point of that? If there's some sort of weird rules loophole you can think of, perhaps I can close it...What do you think?

Josh Lytle

[Osion]

I was thinking of wacky combos to explain a loophole, but then came across a real problem, I believe.

If the trigger "if I attack" triggers before any physical attackers are declared, then it should be assumed that I as the active player is officially "attacking", no?

If so, this rule contradicts Catastrophic Betrayal's card text "(You cannot attack with 0 characters)".

If I am considered attacking, then betrayal can be played with me having no characters in play, right?

I think anything that can be done indefinitely without cost can be exploited in some way.


If a card was printed "if you attack, put the top card of your opponent's deck into his or her discard pile". Then you could get rid of your opponent's deck for free. Just declare attack and fail to produce attacking characters, then repeat 75 times.

If you control Wrymfang and a completely depleted board, and your opponent has a Ferrous Ferret, you could "attack" infinite times, have Ferret grow to Ginormous size. If there was a card "pick a character, its faction loses influence equal to its strength" this rule could be a problem.

[Timmer]

Trying to work this through...

In my mind, I would say that you aren't attacking until the attack party is formed, which you can't do until you have at least one in your party. Like, you can put a card down on the table but then you can't pay the cost so you'll fail the card. The card never goes into being played state because the costs can't be paid. Same with the attack never happens because you can't form a party to attack. You can declare it all you want but doesn't mean you are attacking (or playing a card).

Correct me if I'm wrong or seeing something incorrectly, of course :)

[joshlytle]

If the trigger "if I attack" triggers before any physical attackers are declared, then it should be assumed that I as the active player is officially "attacking", no?

If so, this rule contradicts Catastrophic Betrayal's card text "(You cannot attack with 0 characters)".

If I am considered attacking, then betrayal can be played with me having no characters in play, right?

I think anything that can be done indefinitely without cost can be exploited in some way.

If you don't pick any characters to attack, the battle is over immediately. I can add this clarification to the next rules update. I guess no one has ever asked this question before, so now we get to answer it.

Josh Lytle

[Osion]

The active player still attacks though. so in the repeat example below:



If a card was printed "if you attack, put the top card of your opponent's deck into his or her discard pile". Then you could get rid of your opponent's deck for free. Just declare attack and fail to produce attacking characters, then repeat 75 times.

the cards will have to read, "if you attack with one or more characters, do X", otherwise the loophole still works?

[Ultamis]

The most broken,sick,disgusting card was pinch......:p

Reversing the order of attacking/blocking is pretty broken,forcing a big party to block a small attacker?A single blocker against your party of 3 plodding brutes and 2 scouts?

The horsemajigs also caught my eye,Easy turn 1 2/3/3s,late game full pumps,hell these things could be up there with the nodes in power.

Pinch seems useful by the way.

[joshlytle]

If a card was printed "if you attack, put the top card of your opponent's deck into his or her discard pile". Then you could get rid of your opponent's deck for free. Just declare attack and fail to produce attacking characters, then repeat 75 times.

I'd say...at least let us print a card before you go trying to break it! :rolleyes:
Thanks for the good question though. I'll tighten this up, but there's nothing to worry about in the mean time before I can update the rules.

Josh Lytle

[Timmer]

I'd say...at least let us print a card before you go trying to break it! :rolleyes:
Thanks for the good question though. I'll tighten this up, but there's nothing to worry about in the mean time before I can update the rules.

Josh Lytle

Josh -- my reply seems to have been bypassed. Can you give me a yay or nay on if I have the basics down on that? Trying to figure this out myself, too :)

[joshlytle]

Josh -- my reply seems to have been bypassed. Can you give me a yay or nay on if I have the basics down on that? Trying to figure this out myself, too :)

The reason I didn't address what you said is because this entire situation exposes an ambiguity in the rules, so technically it doesn't work anyway at this point. I'm going to look at the issue in the broader context and create an update to the rules that fixes the issue.

The good news is that the question doesn't really matter yet cause there aren't really any cards that can abuse the situation.

You'll see a definetive way to answer this question soon. Thanks again!

Josh Lytle

[Timmer]

The reason I didn't address what you said is because this entire situation exposes an ambiguity in the rules, so technically it doesn't work anyway at this point. I'm going to look at the issue in the broader context and create an update to the rules that fixes the issue.

The good news is that the question doesn't really matter yet cause there aren't really any cards that can abuse the situation.

You'll see a definetive way to answer this question soon. Thanks again!

Josh Lytle

Okay thanks. I was thinking the way I worked it out, there wasn't any hole in the rules. I guess I am looking at it a different way than you are. Look forward to hearing more on this. :)

[hwango]

Hey Josh, question. Why the push to get players to run higher thresholds?

My guess would be to keep deck design more varied and interesting. As they print more 1- and 2-threshold cards, it becomes easier to just play with your starting 2 resources, and fill the rest of the deck with "stuff." While such a deck wouldn't have access to some of the more powerful high-threshold cards, it also doesn't have to worry about failing to meet a threshold. Cards like Land Shark aren't going to discourage people from doing this, but tempting high-threshold cards probably stand a better chance.

I would also guess that high-threshold cards encourage people to play longer, more complicated games. The Spoils seems to have been designed by people who want the game to be more dynamic and complex than "play a new character, attack with all my guys, repeat."

[hwango]

To address the original question posed by this thread - the first card in the spoiler that made my eyes bug out a bit was Escrow Office. The cost reduction isn't the important part - it's the ability to create tokens for only 1 each. It's Voidal Poisoning's new best friend. In fact, Banker and Voidal Poisoning seem like they're going to be chummy in general with the huge influx of Banker cards that comes with undesirable tokens.

[aldrinanymous]

the horsemajigs and the sproingamajig sounds pretty interesting...:)

[joshlytle]

Hey Josh, question. Why the push to get players to run higher thresholds?

I may write an article to address this very issue. What I can say right now is that in general people don't really understand how to build The Spoils decks yet. Never forget that any deck with Greed in it (as long as there are more than 1 or 2) can run 2 First Unified Market of Abstract Secure Theorecticals. Does it matter that the card has 6 threshold? Not really, because you'd only play the card in the mid to late game.

I encourge you to track the levels of threshold you have during each game and realize how many of those cards you are scared of could be in your hand. Then, realize that you could just face-down them easily in the event the threshold isn't working out.

I may have to start writing a series of articles on subjects just like this one so I can get more in depth and really do it justice.

Josh Lytle

[FromTheShadows]

For me, the most shocking card i have seen so far is the poisoned blade. The thing is amazing. No longer do we have the little rogue guys getting bullied around by a union leader with an 8 life ass. Sure htey may not have high strengths or even life in alot of cases, but with this little beauty, my 1/2/6 can take out your 10/14/2 any day of the weak, and do it repetedly (hidden sandwhich, limited liabilitt pending.) Thanks :chomp: for printing this. Also works damn well with a sniper i hear......;)

[JayDubbs]

The card that caught my eye is Unnatural Alteration. Its one threshold lets it be splashed into any deck and so lets you toolbox the perfect creature solution. Since you are playing the creature for free you still get to pay the costs, so you can sack a creature to go get the flaming barduse to finish off the opponents last creature. Just an example feel free to insert advantagous situation of your liking.

Thinking that this card is just as broken as Ecto-Distillation and will be just as underplayed.:)

[Osion]

I'd say...at least let us print a card before you go trying to break it!

Haha, sounds good, can do.

How long do the standard internal beta testing for these new sets take?

[DoughboyDominatrix]

Another one I like to note as extremely powerful is Eccentric Inquisition. First, it has a low cost of two, and a four threshold isn't impossible. But if any of the top 7 cards of your opponents deck are tactics they get removed and you can play them without the threshold? Holy crap! What if you're playing warlord and remove a distraction (zero cost-deplete a character)? You can deplete all of your opponents characters for free anytime you want! It's an automatic win condition!

[scuba_steve]

can anyone say "dethmurderbludgeon, the Craghammer" i mean really combo with 700160x 31f seriously a first turn 3,3,3 that when blocked your opponents lose 2 or not blocked poke some character for 2 and it has the recycle abilty

WOW:eek:

[DoughboyDominatrix]

can anyone say "dethmurderbludgeon, the Craghammer" i mean really combo with 700160x 31f seriously a first turn 3,3,3 that when blocked your opponents lose 2 or not blocked poke some character for 2 and it has the recycle abilty

WOW:eek:

Anything with a craghammer is just asking for a finger trap or jewelry. It'll prevent the craghammer from getting returned and prevent it from having any major effect.

[strategin]

What if you're playing warlord and remove a distraction (zero cost-deplete a character)? You can deplete all of your opponents characters for free anytime you want! It's an automatic win condition!

It doesn't work that way. The tactics go to your opponent's discard pile after they are played.

[SRT4Void]

I won't tell you the card(s) that i really looking forward to drop jaws, but I will tell you one of them that i can't wait to use: Mau Party! Oh YA, i said it, Mau Party. And if you don't recall what this bad boy does, you just might want a refresher. 5 cost 4 banker thresh tactic. cost: play this only during your turn. effect: draw 5 cards. your faction gains 2 influance. Now what is bad about this card???? the 4 thresh is what you are thinking, but with all of the crazy good new banker cards, that were soooo greatly needed and :chomp: provided us with, the thresh is irrelavent! who doesn't want to try a mono banker deck with a first turn erotic assassin and embezzling bookeeper.... followed a few turns later by one of these bad boys! refill and repeat 4tw!

Chris :cool: