Monday, March 23, 2009

Rule Changes #1

http://www.tcdop.com/chaotic/article/27

New topic on tcdop.com is up! Check it out, and discuss here :).

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm quite saddened by this turn around because now infection has been toned down and danians are again a little bit weaker.

Anonymous said...

Wow.... the infection thing is insane... it doesn't alter infection vs non infection at all, but infection vs infection becomes absolutely Massive...

Invisibility changes are just... well textile only, not effect changes. Though I think the whole "natural" invisibility vs "given" invisibility should be addressed since getting invisibility through mugic/location/effect doesnt negate invisibility that creatures already have naturally, which makes no sense since invisibility is invisibility...

The element X thing... all I can say is it's about time. :D

Fox said...

well as the second commenter said, the alteration to infection, only will really make a difference in Bug on bug games, though by changing the rules on it, they've basically created a HUGE list of Erreta's.

Invis, just have to see how that alteration play's out, but it's effectivly just streamlining things.

Element X change. Oi, sure new players will catch on, but the current leagion will cry havok as they just spent the last 2 years playing it the other way. plus it deminishes many equip cards to the realm of toss'ers now as they were really only usefull to average out in a army (say based on fire) where everyone just didn't have fire element. Oh well.

GryeDor said...

Unfortunately, the Element X rule always made sense to me the original way, and quite frankly I don't like the "new way" and here's why. Players should learn the rules - the developers shouldn't change the game to fit what the players are playing.

I have no problem sitting down with a friend and saying, "Hey let's play this round without the rule of two" or whatever it may be (can you imagine playing a 6v6 with only 1 creature though?). It's called House Rules, everyone plays them, variants or adding more complexity. To Essentially canonize a "house rule" is really stupid to me, TCD needs to grow a pair.

I'm okay with the Invisibility thing and to some extent the Infection thing, but the Element X thing seems a little pointless and I'm really disappointed to see it happen.

Anonymous said...

Infection hasn't been toned down, what are you guys talking about?

Anyways, nice job to Majesk, these are some nice changes.

Abraxas said...

Sounds like rule changes are for new players, potential players should I say. But what about actual players, the ones who've supported the game since its beginning? No matter how good or bad these changes are, they shouldn't be, period. The ink on our cards is dry and they should remain as printed.

TCD game design team are the ones who made the rules. I suggest they spend more time designing proper rules, instead of hurrying to print new cards for new players.

Want to make the game easier to understand? How easy will it be when we'll have to deal with all the upcoming erratas? Will TCD supply errata stickers to put on our cards?

Darkwing13 said...

I believe that the whole infection deal will improve danian vs danian games. It will revolutionize infection and hive. The mipedian change made the mipedians weaker because of the whole "negate" invisibility if your opponents creature has invisibility. O well there goes the era of mipedian striker decks. |sigh|. I greatly disagree with the element X rule and it greatly upsets me to see that they are trying to adjust to the newer players. Why not just tell the newbies to read the rules from DoP-RotO in chronological order. That would solve their problem. I wonder why they are paying excessive attention to the confusion because they do have an online guide to the rules. :P

Anonymous said...

Sorry to be a bit off-topic, but did anyone notice the link to the other blog?

Anonymous said...

Yes a long time ago, and your example about how Mipedian Stikers will be weaker makes no sense, only wording has changed.

Anonymous said...

The element X rule makes perfect sense. It more or less changes the text from " ___ element attacks deal X additional damage" to "When this creature deals _____ element damage deal X additional damage". If a creature doesn't have wind element, that means it doesn't know how to use it, so it makes sense for a creature not to have attacks it can't actually use enhanced. You get more use out of Destructozooka with a couple of gear grinds anyway because that gear gives you both the element, and element X for a turn.

I'd rather deal with a few sensible rule changes here and there, then deal with things like the excessively changing ban/restricted lists of YuGiOh, or the constant set cycling of MTG. These changes make sense, if you don't like them it doesn't matter because they're here. It's better to understand why the changes were made, and the logic behind them than to start arguements over why you don't like it. It's here, if we want to play by the rules we use them, if we don't, then don't. House rules exist for every game, but they don't matter in tournaments, so just know the rules, even if you don't wanna use them.

Anonymous said...

Random stump occasus question: if I have Nauthilax tainted and he is playing against takinom shadowknight, Nauthilax has 25 more power than takinom and on my turn I play ash torrent to gain the element fire, does ash torrent deal fire damage?

Anonymous said...

I'm not Occasus but I can tell you that Nauthilax will not gain fire. He only gains an element when he wins a Power Challenge, therefore when he wins the one from Ash Torrent, the attack would already have resolved and the Fire element will be added after it, not resulting in 5 more Fire damage.

michael said...

umm can anyone else not get on the forums right?

caliburman1 said...

i suppose the changes make sense. i mean, they really won't be effecting me, as I play a fire deck where all the creatures have fire. Besides, i thought the rule for element X worked like that already!