[FIST] Hacker, Mobility questions
Henry Vogel
While playing a game last night we had a couple of situations come up
that raised questions. Here they are:
1) You can play Hacker at no cost to cancel an event that toasts your
cards. The situation was an attempt to play Hacker to cancel Curtain
of Fullness (discard three cards from target player's hand at random).
As discarded cards go into the toasted pile, the group decided to
allow the play but to also get a ruling.
2) Mobility allows a character to change locations without turning
and without distance restriction. Does this allow a player who is not
the target of an attack to intercept attacking characters without
turning? The logic used in support of this is that Mobile characters
controlled by the player who is the target of the attack can change
locations to intercept with turning so the same should apply to
players who simply wish to join in the defense.
Thanks in advance for the answers!
Henry
Red Adept
On Sat, 19 Oct 1996 11:54:12 GMT, vog...@dstm.com (Henry Vogel) wrote:
>While playing a game last night we had a couple of situations come up
>that raised questions. Here they are:
>1) You can play Hacker at no cost to cancel an event that toasts your
>cards. The situation was an attempt to play Hacker to cancel Curtain
>of Fullness (discard three cards from target player's hand at random).
>As discarded cards go into the toasted pile, the group decided to
>allow the play but to also get a ruling.
Discards go to the toasted pile, but aren't Toasted. Hacker wouldn't
work on a Curtain. Resistance Squads would, if they were one of the
cards discarded in that fashion though...
>2) Mobility allows a character to change locations without turning
>and without distance restriction. Does this allow a player who is not
>the target of an attack to intercept attacking characters without
>turning? The logic used in support of this is that Mobile characters
>controlled by the player who is the target of the attack can change
>locations to intercept with turning so the same should apply to
>players who simply wish to join in the defense.
Mobility allows you to change locations without needing to turn. Yep,
you can move to an opponent's location with intent to intercept
without turning, with mobility.
>Thanks in advance for the answers!
You're welcome.
--Red, King of the Chaos Pagoda
San Antonio Shadowfist Stunt-Team member
reda...@cris.com reda...@concentric.net
Joseph William Dixon
In a fit of madness Dave Van Domelen (dva...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu) wrote:
: >2) Mobility allows a character to change locations without turning
: >and without distance restriction. Does this allow a player who is not
: >the target of an attack to intercept attacking characters without
: >turning? The logic used in support of this is that Mobile characters
: >controlled by the player who is the target of the attack can change
: >locations to intercept with turning so the same should apply to
: >players who simply wish to join in the defense.
: Sure thing. Those who help on defense are turning to change location
: then intercepting, so those with Mobility can do it until the cows come
: home.
*ALMOST* right. Mobility doesn't allow movement without distance
restrictions (as the previous poster assumed and you didn't correct).
Characters with Mobility must still move one location at a time - each of
which is a separate effect (assuming that movement is an effect that can
be responded to). Normally there's no real need to resolve separately,
but if, for example, a state on a site had text such as: "Characters at
the location of subject site cannot move," then you couldn't just use
Mobility to avoid moving through the location if it was between your
starting point and eventual destination - you have to pass through each
location, which means that a Mobility character would have to stop there.
[see the FAQ for the full definition & explanation of Mobility]
***********************************************************************
* "Hot funk, cool punk, even if it's old junk * aa...@chebucto.ns.ca *
* It's still rock and roll to me" (Billy Joel) * Gumby * Team AMIGA *
***** My homepage is http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~aa343/Profile.html ****
Dave Van Domelen
In article <54l164$d...@vulcan.netdepot.com>,
Henry Vogel <vog...@dstm.com> wrote:
>1) You can play Hacker at no cost to cancel an event that toasts your
>cards. The situation was an attempt to play Hacker to cancel Curtain
>of Fullness (discard three cards from target player's hand at random).
>As discarded cards go into the toasted pile, the group decided to
>allow the play but to also get a ruling.
Discarding is not toasting. That also applies to Darkness Priestess's
ability. I believe it's Resistance Squad which is your discard defense
bobo.
>
>2) Mobility allows a character to change locations without turning
>and without distance restriction. Does this allow a player who is not
>the target of an attack to intercept attacking characters without
>turning? The logic used in support of this is that Mobile characters
>controlled by the player who is the target of the attack can change
>locations to intercept with turning so the same should apply to
>players who simply wish to join in the defense.
Sure thing. Those who help on defense are turning to change location
then intercepting, so those with Mobility can do it until the cows come
home.
Dave Van Domelen, likes the trend towards resource characters which
pop out if the right type of card is played....
Jasper Phillips
>that raised questions. Here they are:
>
>cards. The situation was an attempt to play Hacker to cancel Curtain
>of Fullness (discard three cards from target player's hand at random).
>As discarded cards go into the toasted pile, the group decided to
>allow the play but to also get a ruling.
Nah, discarding isn't toasting, even if the cards do end up in the same
place.
>2) Mobility allows a character to change locations without turning
>and without distance restriction. Does this allow a player who is not
>the target of an attack to intercept attacking characters without
>turning? The logic used in support of this is that Mobile characters
>controlled by the player who is the target of the attack can change
>locations to intercept with turning so the same should apply to
>players who simply wish to join in the defense.
Yes. Although you don't need to turn to intercept in the first place:
you only turn to change location (if neccesary).
>Thanks in advance for the answers!
>
>Henry
-Jasper
--
/\ Jasper Phillips (Pit Fiend) ______,....----,
/VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|==================="""""""""""" ___,..-'
`^^^^^^^^^^^^^^|======================----------""""""
\/ http://www.cs.orst.edu/~philljas/
Judas Iscariot
On Sat, 19 Oct 1996, Henry Vogel wrote:
> 1) You can play Hacker at no cost to cancel an event that toasts your
> cards. The situation was an attempt to play Hacker to cancel Curtain
> of Fullness (discard three cards from target player's hand at random).
> As discarded cards go into the toasted pile, the group decided to
> allow the play but to also get a ruling.
Sounds like a legal move to me. Also, Hacker is great for stopping those
pesky Dangerous Experiments, since after all DE does toast a card other
than itself.
#################################################################
# Judas Iscariot ju...@gladstone.uoregon.edu 541.302.5722 #
# gzu...@cs.uoregon.edu #
# #
# "WAAAAA!! SHAA-SHAA-SHWAAAAAA!!!" - Tony #
#################################################################
Dennis F. Hefferman
|While playing a game last night we had a couple of situations come up
|that raised questions. Here they are:
|1) You can play Hacker at no cost to cancel an event that toasts your
|cards. The situation was an attempt to play Hacker to cancel Curtain
|of Fullness (discard three cards from target player's hand at random).
|As discarded cards go into the toasted pile, the group decided to
|allow the play but to also get a ruling.
No. Discarded cards go to the toasted pile, but discard != toast.
This came up with the Darkness Priestess before.
|2) Mobility allows a character to change locations without turning
|and without distance restriction. Does this allow a player who is not
Actually you can only change locations one column at a time whether you
have Mobility or not; it's just that Mobile characters can do so repeatedly.
|the target of an attack to intercept attacking characters without
|turning? The logic used in support of this is that Mobile characters
|controlled by the player who is the target of the attack can change
|locations to intercept with turning so the same should apply to
|players who simply wish to join in the defense.
Indeed it does. You'll need Mobility in multiplayer games for
precisely this reason, as otherwise you can't intercept Superleaping attackers
targetting another player.
--
Dennis Francis Heffernan IRC: FuzyLogic heff...@pegasus.montclair.edu
Montclair State University #include <disclaim.h> Computer Science/Philosophy
"I guess my work around here has all been done."
-- The Devil, in "The Garden of Allah", Don Henley
Henry Vogel
I posted this earlier today but forgot I had changed my computer's
system date (testing date sensitive software). Then I posted it but
forgot to put [FIST] in the subject. Not a good day for posting
messages... Anyway, thought I'd move this to the "current" area and
mark it properly...
While playing a game last night we had a couple of situations come up
that raised questions. Here they are:
1) You can play Hacker at no cost to cancel an event that toasts your
cards. The situation was an attempt to play Hacker to cancel Curtain
of Fullness (discard three cards from target player's hand at random).
As discarded cards go into the toasted pile, the group decided to
allow the play but to also get a ruling.
2) Mobility allows a character to change locations without turning
and without distance restriction. Does this allow a player who is not
the target of an attack to intercept attacking characters without
turning? The logic used in support of this is that Mobile characters
controlled by the player who is the target of the attack can change
locations to intercept with turning so the same should apply to
players who simply wish to join in the defense.
Thanks in advance for the answers!
Henry
Kalon Jelen
Henry Vogel wrote:
>
> While playing a game last night we had a couple of situations come up
> that raised questions. Here they are:
>
> 1) You can play Hacker at no cost to cancel an event that toasts your
> cards. The situation was an attempt to play Hacker to cancel Curtain
> of Fullness (discard three cards from target player's hand at random).
> As discarded cards go into the toasted pile, the group decided to
> allow the play but to also get a ruling.
>
First off, these are not legal clarifications, only MHO. That being
said, let me respond.
1. NOOOOO! Toasting a card and discarding a card are two functionally
different terms, even though the result of discarding a card is for it
to go to the toasted pile. The FAQ on Netherworld, specifically the
Darkness Priestess, clarifies this, I believe. Even if this were the
case, there is another way to stop this : Resistance Squad. Hacker does
not supersede this, even though it is, IMHO, a better card, simply
because it's special ability comes into play more often. Remember,
unless a card specifically states that it Toasts a card other than
itself, the Hacker's ability cannot be used.
> 2) Mobility allows a character to change locations without turning
> and without distance restriction. Does this allow a player who is not
> the target of an attack to intercept attacking characters without
> turning? The logic used in support of this is that Mobile characters
> controlled by the player who is the target of the attack can change
> locations to intercept with turning so the same should apply to
> players who simply wish to join in the defense.
> 2. Forgive me for being a bit rude here, but I thought Mobility was
pretty well covered elsewhere. Try Bryant Durrell's Webpage for all the
FAQ's. Anyway, Mobility lets you change location without turning. As
long as no one responds to you changing location using mobility, you can
move as much as you want during anyone's main phases. Tony used to have
a dumb hood deck (as opposed to those killer hood decks) that had
speedboats and an ungodly site structure. When someone took too long to
take their turn, he'd move his guys around using the speedboat about a
million times, using the annoying "VVVVRRRRRROOOOOOOOMMMMM" noise. In
any case, the answer is yes, you can intercept an attack on a character
or a site you or someone else controls without turning using Mobility.
Assuming that you were not the originator of the attack. Also a side
note: you can change location while turned. This is why mobility is a
useful ability aside from hosing Superleap.
> Thanks in advance for the answers!
>
> HenryHope it helps,
Kalon
Tony Hafner
> Tony used to have
> a dumb hood deck (as opposed to those killer hood decks) that had
> speedboats and an ungodly site structure. When someone took too long to
> take their turn, he'd move his guys around using the speedboat about a
> million times, using the annoying "VVVVRRRRRROOOOOOOOMMMMM" noise. In
I resent that. I never had Speed Boats in there. The Sports Cars
went VVVVVRRRROOOOOMMMMMM, the Attack Helicopters went CHOCK, CHOCK,
CHOCK, and the Floating Fortress just made kind of a WHOOSHing sound.
--
Tony Hafner
ton...@microsoft.com
"Love is thicker than most bodily membranes, but not quite as sticky."
-The Tick
Bryant Durrell
In article <54r0g6$9...@dorsai.dorsai.org>,
Joshua Kronengold <mn...@dorsai.org> wrote:
>In article <326FC3...@pond.net>, Kalon Jelen <kalj...@pond.net> wrote:
>>Henry Vogel wrote:
>>In any case, the answer is yes, you can intercept an attack on a character
>>or a site you or someone else controls without turning using Mobility.
>>Assuming that you were not the originator of the attack. Also a side
>
>Quite useful, too, occasionally.
Nay. This has been disallowed by the FAQ.
--
Bryant Durrell (sysadmin, cynic, coyote) | "well, it seems doable so we should
dur...@innocence.com / dur...@bofh.net | do it. if we can't then we should
http://www.innocence.com/~durrell | get no biscuits." -- t...@meer.net
Dennis F. Hefferman
|This caveat does not exist. You can too intercept your own attacks.
|Quite useful, too, occasionally.
You can NOT intercept your own attacks, and have not been able to for
quite some time. This was on the Flashpoint info card, too.
Judas Iscariot
On 25 Oct 1996, Tony Hafner wrote:
> > Tony used to have
> > a dumb hood deck (as opposed to those killer hood decks) that had
> > speedboats and an ungodly site structure. When someone took too long to
> > take their turn, he'd move his guys around using the speedboat about a
> > million times, using the annoying "VVVVRRRRRROOOOOOOOMMMMM" noise. In
>
> I resent that. I never had Speed Boats in there. The Sports Cars
> went VVVVVRRRROOOOOMMMMMM, the Attack Helicopters went CHOCK, CHOCK,
> CHOCK, and the Floating Fortress just made kind of a WHOOSHing sound.
errrhhmmmmmm... Tony, you forgot the Motorcycle sound,
BBBBBRRRRRRRRRMMMM... did I just add fuel to a fire? good!
Joshua Kronengold
In article <326FC3...@pond.net>, Kalon Jelen <kalj...@pond.net> wrote:
>Henry Vogel wrote:
>In any case, the answer is yes, you can intercept an attack on a character
>or a site you or someone else controls without turning using Mobility.
>Assuming that you were not the originator of the attack. Also a side
This caveat does not exist. You can too intercept your own attacks.
Quite useful, too, occasionally.
--
mn...@dorsai.org Josh Kronengold |\ _,,,--,,_ ,)
^ "No matter how subtle the sorceror, a knife between/,`.-'`' -, ;-;;'
/\\ the shoulder blades will seriously |,4- ) )-,_ ) /\
/-\\\cramp his style." -- Taltos '---''(_/--' (_/-'
Andy Holt
Dennis F. Heffernan wrote:
>
> You can NOT intercept your own attacks, and have not been able to for
> quite some time. This was on the Flashpoint info card, too.
last Sunday. All these version of the question are only possible in a multiplayer
game.
A attacks D's site using character p
B joins in the attack using q
1) can another of As characters intercept q
2) can another of Bs characters intercept p
3) can C join attack with character r and intercept q with character s
(1) may perhaps be considered covered by the letter and spirit of the
FAQ ruling, but is not totally clear
(2) and (3) would at most be covered by the spirit of the ruling
I'm not clear enough about the nature of the FIST universe to decide which
ruling fits best in that respect ... the spirit of OnTE would certainly allow
- even encourage - setting-up someone as your ally and then double-crossing, but I
don't think the level of paranoia of the FIST factions is quite that high.
clarification, please.
Andy
Bryant Durrell
In article <3272936e...@news.cris.com>,
Red Adept <reda...@cris.com> wrote:
>Hackers MAY be able to stop a DE, if the person to the left decides to
>toast a card. The Experiment uses the word "MAY", so whether a Hacker
>can stop it depends on if a card gets toasted.
>
>Then again, this could be semantical and a Hacker stops a DE, whether
>or not a card is toasted, which would be strange.
No, it can stop a DE -- Jose made this ruling a little back, I believe.
Red Adept
On Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:46:53 -0700, Judas Iscariot
<ju...@gladstone.uoregon.edu> wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Oct 1996, Henry Vogel wrote:
>> 1) You can play Hacker at no cost to cancel an event that toasts your
>> cards. The situation was an attempt to play Hacker to cancel Curtain
>> of Fullness (discard three cards from target player's hand at random).
>> As discarded cards go into the toasted pile, the group decided to
>> allow the play but to also get a ruling.
>Sounds like a legal move to me. Also, Hacker is great for stopping those
>pesky Dangerous Experiments, since after all DE does toast a card other
>than itself.
Sorry, this still isn't legal. Toasting and Discarding are different
things.
Hackers MAY be able to stop a DE, if the person to the left decides to
toast a card. The Experiment uses the word "MAY", so whether a Hacker
can stop it depends on if a card gets toasted.
Then again, this could be semantical and a Hacker stops a DE, whether
or not a card is toasted, which would be strange.
--Red, King of the Chaos Pagoda
Red Adept
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996 06:14:54 -0700, Andy Holt <an...@netcomuk.co.uk>
wrote:
>Dennis F. Heffernan wrote:
>> You can NOT intercept your own attacks, and have not been able to for
>> quite some time. This was on the Flashpoint info card, too.
>> That is quite clear, but a derivative question came up at the Pitsea tournament
>last Sunday. All these version of the question are only possible in a multiplayer
>game.
>A attacks D's site using character p
>B joins in the attack using q
>
>1) can another of As characters intercept q
>2) can another of Bs characters intercept p
>3) can C join attack with character r and intercept q with character s
You CAN intercept your own attacks. That is, an attack you declared.
You can't intercept your own attackers.
The Flashpoint Rules card says this:
YOU are not allowed to intercept characters you control.
In all of the instances above, A, B, and C can intercept the
characters in question.
Clearer?
Tony Hafner
> > > Tony used to have
> > > a dumb hood deck (as opposed to those killer hood decks) that had
> > > speedboats and an ungodly site structure. When someone took too long
to
> > > take their turn, he'd move his guys around using the speedboat about
a
> > > million times, using the annoying "VVVVRRRRRROOOOOOOOMMMMM" noise. In
> >
> > I resent that. I never had Speed Boats in there. The Sports Cars
> > went VVVVVRRRROOOOOMMMMMM, the Attack Helicopters went CHOCK, CHOCK,
> > CHOCK, and the Floating Fortress just made kind of a WHOOSHing sound.
>
> errrhhmmmmmm... Tony, you forgot the Motorcycle sound,
> BBBBBRRRRRRRRRMMMM... did I just add fuel to a fire? good!
In the early days, yes there were bikes. I believe that the sound
was more like BU-BU-BU-BU-BU-BU-BU-BU... Sort of a throaty, manly
Motorcycle sound. After all, they were there to put on the enemy's
Big Guys to make my Grenade Launchers and Marshes work better.
But for Chrissakes let it rest!
--
Tony Hafner
ton...@microsoft.com
"AAAAAUUUUGGGGHHHHHHAAAAAAIAIIIIIII"
-The Tick
Travis Archer
mn...@dorsai.org (Joshua Kronengold) writes:
>In article <326FC3...@pond.net>, Kalon Jelen <kalj...@pond.net> wrote:
>>Henry Vogel wrote:
>>In any case, the answer is yes, you can intercept an attack on a character
>>or a site you or someone else controls without turning using Mobility.
>>Assuming that you were not the originator of the attack. Also a side
>This caveat does not exist. You can too intercept your own attacks.
>Quite useful, too, occasionally.
No, you absolutely cannot intercept your own characters, and
you also cannot attack your own sites or characters, even using a Fox
Pass.
You say this caveat does not exist,
which means, I assume you have read at least the rules text, and most
probably the faq, otherwise, you would not claim that it did not exist.
Which means, therefore, that you overlooked this very important fact. :)
Either that or you just assumed it didn't exist without actually checking.
Jose Garcia
vog...@dstm.com (Henry Vogel) wrote:
>While playing a game last night we had a couple of situations come up
>that raised questions. Here they are:
>
>cards. The situation was an attempt to play Hacker to cancel Curtain
>of Fullness (discard three cards from target player's hand at random).
>As discarded cards go into the toasted pile, the group decided to
>allow the play but to also get a ruling.
Nope, discard isn't considered to be toasting cards.
>
>2) Mobility allows a character to change locations without turning
>and without distance restriction.
Well actualy not without distance restriction but since you can do
it as often as you like, the distinction is practicaly meaningless.
Does this allow a player who is not
>the target of an attack to intercept attacking characters without
>turning?
Sure, all you are doing is changing location in such instances.
The logic used in support of this is that Mobile characters
>controlled by the player who is the target of the attack can change
>locations to intercept with turning so the same should apply to
>players who simply wish to join in the defense.
>
Joseph William Dixon
In a fit of madness Travis Archer (arc...@rintintin.Colorado.EDU) wrote:
: >This caveat does not exist. You can too intercept your own attacks.
: >Quite useful, too, occasionally.
: No, you absolutely cannot intercept your own characters, and
: you also cannot attack your own sites or characters, even using a Fox
: Pass.
: You say this caveat does not exist,
: which means, I assume you have read at least the rules text, and most
: probably the faq, otherwise, you would not claim that it did not exist.
: Which means, therefore, that you overlooked this very important fact. :)
: Either that or you just assumed it didn't exist without actually checking.
Actually, you *CAN* intercept your own attacks, at least according to
FAQ #4.5:
"(Note that the attacker can choose to intercept his own characters)"
That's a direct quote from the section entitled, "The Steps of an
Attack." (around line 625 of the FAQ)
Jose Garcia
aa...@chebucto.ns.ca (Joseph William Dixon) wrote:
>In a fit of madness Travis Archer (arc...@rintintin.Colorado.EDU) wrote:
>: >This caveat does not exist. You can too intercept your own attacks.
>: >Quite useful, too, occasionally.
>
>: No, you absolutely cannot intercept your own characters, and
>: you also cannot attack your own sites or characters, even using a Fox
>: Pass.
>: You say this caveat does not exist,
>: which means, I assume you have read at least the rules text, and most
>: probably the faq, otherwise, you would not claim that it did not exist.
>: Which means, therefore, that you overlooked this very important fact. :)
>: Either that or you just assumed it didn't exist without actually checking.
>
> Actually, you *CAN* intercept your own attacks, at least according to
>FAQ #4.5:
>
> "(Note that the attacker can choose to intercept his own characters)"
>
> That's a direct quote from the section entitled, "The Steps of an
>Attack." (around line 625 of the FAQ)
could intercept your own attacks in the past because some players
pointed out that there was no rule that explicitly stated you couldn't.
However eventualy we came to the realization that was silly, it wasn't
how most people were playing and if we had to have a FAQ entry about
something it may as well reinforce what was intended as to what some
rules lawyer finagled.
BTW, if you check the various Shadowfist pages you should find
FAQ 5.0
Andy Holt
Unfortunately, Jose, that sentence quoted above can still be found in FAQ 5.0
You do emphasise that the attacker cannot intercept his own characters in
two other sections earlier, but you have left that aside in "The Steps of an
Attack".
That is one recommended change for FAQ 5.1 (!)
another recommended change is to reinstate all the card errata that has not
been superceded by the much clearer formulation of the rules.
From the way you are "beta-testing" that wording before Throne Wars, I assume
that TW rules have not yet been typeset ... which in turn implies we will not
see TW in 1996?
Andy
Jose Garcia
Andy Holt <an...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>Jose Garcia wrote:
>>
>> aa...@chebucto.ns.ca (Joseph William Dixon) wrote:
>
>> > Actually, you *CAN* intercept your own attacks, at least according to
>> >FAQ #4.5:
>> >
>> > "(Note that the attacker can choose to intercept his own characters)"
>> >
>> > That's a direct quote from the section entitled, "The Steps of an
>> >Attack." (around line 625 of the FAQ)
>>
>> This ruling got overturned in the info card. We had ruled that you
>> could intercept your own attacks in the past because some players
>> pointed out that there was no rule that explicitly stated you couldn't.
>> However eventualy we came to the realization that was silly, it wasn't
>> how most people were playing and if we had to have a FAQ entry about
>> something it may as well reinforce what was intended as to what some
>> rules lawyer finagled.
>>
>> BTW, if you check the various Shadowfist pages you should find
>> FAQ 5.0
>
>Unfortunately, Jose, that sentence quoted above can still be found in FAQ 5.0
>You do emphasise that the attacker cannot intercept his own characters in
>two other sections earlier, but you have left that aside in "The Steps of an
>Attack".
>That is one recommended change for FAQ 5.1 (!)
Doh!!!
>another recommended change is to reinstate all the card errata that has not
>been superceded by the much clearer formulation of the rules.
>From the way you are "beta-testing" that wording before Throne Wars, I assume
>that TW rules have not yet been typeset ... which in turn implies we will not
>see TW in 1996?
Correct, we'd have announced a release date it if it was coming out
that soon.
>
>Andy
Andrew S. Davidson
Andy Holt <an...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>From the way you are "beta-testing" that wording before Throne Wars, I assume
>that TW rules have not yet been typeset ... which in turn implies we will not
>see TW in 1996?
The October Duellist said:
> The Throne War stand-alone expansion, planned for November, contains 120
> original cards plus 40 previously published Shadowfist cards (three rarities),
> sold in starters and boosters. Daedalus president, Jose Garcia, call this
> "the Jet Li expansion", invoking the HK martial arts film star. The set
> "has kung fu powers with names you hear Jet Li crying out as he attacks."
Nathan Doster, on the other hand, recently said that Throne Wars will
be released in summer 97. I said that this seemed a long wait, but
Nathan said that this delay was deliberate - Daedalus felt that
too-frequent expansions would overload players and burn them out.
Their release policy is designed for the long term.
Nathan did suggest that some of the Throne Wars cards might appear in
revised starters before the main release. It is obviously important
that starter decks be readily available in all areas and another print
run might be required to maintain stocks.
Just Games have some retailer news which tends to confirm Nathan
comments while Jose's recent answers on this subject are inscrutable.
Putting all these rumours together, I opine that Throne Wars is on the
back burner while Daedalus give priority to other products like Feng
Shui supplements. Expect it when you see it.
We know that there are playtest groups for Throne Wars and there is
reputed to be a play-test mailing list. Rob has indicated that
Daedalus has too many play-testers but we never get to hear much from
them - the code of omerta must apply. I did take part in a Flashpoint
play-test game in Seattle once but am otherwise outside the magic
circle. This is rather frustrating. Jose likes this suspense and
secrecy but I would prefer a crack in the curtain to peek through.
How about Daedalus publishing details of a "Throne Wars
card-of-the-week preview" here? Assuming that Summer 97 is about
right, this would mean giving details of about 30 cards between now
and then - not too many, I think. This would give us something to
chew on and discuss while we wait. Our opinions of the card might be
of value. At the very least, Dennis could tell us whether it will be
a coaster or not...
Andrew
Joseph William Dixon
In a fit of madness Jose Garcia (jga...@halcyon.com) wrote:
: > Actually, you *CAN* intercept your own attacks, at least according to
: >FAQ #4.5:
: >
: > "(Note that the attacker can choose to intercept his own characters)"
: >
: > That's a direct quote from the section entitled, "The Steps of an
: >Attack." (around line 625 of the FAQ)
:
: This ruling got overturned in the info card. We had ruled that you
: could intercept your own attacks in the past because some players
: pointed out that there was no rule that explicitly stated you couldn't.
: However eventualy we came to the realization that was silly, it wasn't
: how most people were playing and if we had to have a FAQ entry about
: something it may as well reinforce what was intended as to what some
: rules lawyer finagled.
: BTW, if you check the various Shadowfist pages you should find
: FAQ 5.0
I got the FAQ from your distribution list, but it came well after I
answered that question, using a FAQ which really needed updating before
Flashpoint ever came out...
Jose Garcia
>
>We know that there are playtest groups for Throne Wars and there is
>reputed to be a play-test mailing list. Rob has indicated that
>Daedalus has too many play-testers but we never get to hear much from
>them - the code of omerta must apply.
Yup, they're doing their job properly and keeping tight lipped.
I did take part in a Flashpoint
>play-test game in Seattle once but am otherwise outside the magic
>circle. This is rather frustrating. Jose likes this suspense and
>secrecy
That's not true actualy. I would rather not say anything about a
subject than say something that proves to be incorrect later on. I've
done that enough times that I don't want to repeat the process. We're
working on Throne War (and some other Shadowfist products) when they're
just about ready to ship we'll announce them.
I will confirm your assessment of what Nathan has said. We are
reconsidering how Shadowfist support product is done. Its becoming
increasingly difficult to attract new players and thats in part of the
ever widening gulf both in ability and in terms of financial investment
made between experienced players and newbies. This is a Bad Thing in the
long term. At the same time we're
committed to fully supporting Shadowfist, we're just considering
different ways of doing it. More on this later.
There will be something out for Shadowfist before now and next
summer, I'm just not in a position to announce what it will be and
when its coming out.
but I would prefer a crack in the curtain to peek through.
>How about Daedalus publishing details of a "Throne Wars
>card-of-the-week preview" here? Assuming that Summer 97 is about
>right, this would mean giving details of about 30 cards between now
>and then - not too many, I think. This would give us something to
>chew on and discuss while we wait. Our opinions of the card might be
>of value.
Hmm, this could also lead to flamewars. After a card has been
released its too late to argue about it but I'd hate to be arguing
with 100+ people about a work in progress on a public forum. I'd much
rather focus on getting the job done and delivering them the highest
quality product I can.
At the very least, Dennis could tell us whether it will be
>a coaster or not...
Maybe he can do the pyschic thing that Johhny Carson used to do.
We right the name of the card on a piece of paper and place that in
an envelope. Dennis holds the envelope up to his hand and pronounces
"coaster", "in the deck", "cute but probably not worth it". That way
people can get a taste and Daedalus can maintain the confidentiality
of its works in progress.
Russel Lowe
Andrew S. Davidson (7271...@compuserve.com) wrote:
: How about Daedalus publishing details of a "Throne Wars
: card-of-the-week preview" here? Assuming that Summer 97 is about
: right, this would mean giving details of about 30 cards between now
: and then - not too many, I think. This would give us something to
: chew on and discuss while we wait. Our opinions of the card might be
: a coaster or not...
I dunno how this stands legally (copyright, all of that), but if it
didn't leave Daedalus open to getting their card ideas stolen I'd love to
see something like this.
A few crap cards always seem to sneak through the playtesting process and
into the final booster packs. It'd be nice if we got a chance to say mean
things about cards like Drop Troopers before we ended up paying for them.
:-)
Kevin Lowe, Brisbane, Australia.
p...@janhagel.cis.ohio-state.edu
Jose Garcia <jga...@halcyon.com> wrote in article <55itkj$p...@nwnews.wa.com> :
>>We know that there are playtest groups for Throne Wars and there is
>>reputed to be a play-test mailing list. Rob has indicated that
>>Daedalus has too many play-testers but we never get to hear much from
>>them - the code of omerta must apply.
>
> Yup, they're doing their job properly and keeping tight lipped.
Tight lipped, and frustratingly so. Oh, well. In any case, the confidentiality
agreement I signed says that if I squeal, I get fed to the Biomass Reprocessing
Center...
Kai Poh
Elect Amy Racecar/Snake Plisskin '96!
"They _also_ support the recycling of stoolies."
-Brought to you by the Nihilist Party
Dave Van Domelen
In article <55jgm4$i...@hobyah.cc.uq.oz.au>,
Russel Lowe <s33...@student.uq.edu.au> wrote:
>I dunno how this stands legally (copyright, all of that), but if it
>didn't leave Daedalus open to getting their card ideas stolen I'd love to
>see something like this.
>A few crap cards always seem to sneak through the playtesting process and
>into the final booster packs. It'd be nice if we got a chance to say mean
>things about cards like Drop Troopers before we ended up paying for them.
>:-)
The problem with that idea is that often the cards will be changed one
last time before being shipped to the printer, with no time for further
playtest, just Jose's best shot at fixing old problems. Drop Troopers are
an example of this. They had problems all the way through playtest,
getting tweaked here and there but never quite working. Last time I saw
them before they hit the shelves they still had a high Fighting score...
Jose's best guess wasn't on the mark that time.
Anyway, here's a Throne War playtest report that doesn't violate any
confidentiality agreements and is about as useful as one which did.
[Card 1] is a cool card, it's the center of one of my playtest decks,
and every time I manage to get it out (about every other game), that's
pretty much it, I win. Ten to one it gets changed.
[Card 2] is a coaster, but I stuck it in a deck just to make sure.
I never, ever played it, always sending it to the discard pile. The other
day I finally yanked it for [Card 3].
[Card 3] is pretty good, perhaps a little too powerful. It helped out
quite a bit Friday night, but on Saturday Jose changed it. Looks like it'll
be better in some limited cases, but overall a little weaker.
[Card 4] will go in every deck I make if it's not changed. It utterly
makes [existing card 1] obsolete. Of course, I nearly lost a game because
of [Card 4] as well, so it's not perfect.
[Card 5] works well, but helped my opponents more than it did me.
Probably my fault, though. However, I managed a really hosy combo with it
a few weeks ago, so I wouldn't be surprised if it gets changed.
And so on. This is playtest. The too-cool cards will change, as
will the coasters (we hope). We've already got more than enough armchair
playtesters without bringing in the entire newsgroup, and probably as many
actual playtesters as can be usefully coordinated. Design by committee
ALWAYS breaks down when the committee gets too big. And I think we have
enough already to catch most of the problems, any more would hurt more than
help. Sorry.
Dave Van Domelen, needs to fiddle with [Card 6] some more and build
a new deck to try and break [Card 7] and [Card 8]....
Andrew S. Davidson
Jose Garcia <jga...@halcyon.com> wrote:
> I will confirm your assessment of what Nathan has said. We are
>reconsidering how Shadowfist support product is done. Its becoming
>increasingly difficult to attract new players and thats in part of the
>ever widening gulf both in ability and in terms of financial investment
>made between experienced players and newbies. This is a Bad Thing in the
>long term.
I agree but it is to some extent unavoidable. It can be mitigated by
making tuned starters available. I am very surprised that you haven't
yet done Combat in Kowloon - I would have though this would have been
a lot easier than a complete new expansion. Chaosium did something
similar for Mythos recently - a matched pair of 52 card decks. I have
found it difficult to build Mythos decks with just a few hundred
random cards and so snapped this up straight away.
> There will be something out for Shadowfist before now and next
>summer, I'm just not in a position to announce what it will be and
>when its coming out.
This is good to hear. I am quite sure that the Big Mo' matters -
momentum that is. You lost at least one player here because of the
hiatus between Netherworld and Flashpoint - he got tired of waiting
and spent his budget on something else instead. INWO seems to be an
example of a promising game that is now dying for lack of support and
momentum. To maintain momentum I feel you should have one major
release (an expansion) and two or three minor releases (a presentation
set, players' guide, accessories etc) per year.
Andrew
Andrew S. Davidson
dva...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Dave Van Domelen) wrote:
> And so on. This is playtest. The too-cool cards will change, as
>will the coasters (we hope). We've already got more than enough armchair
>playtesters without bringing in the entire newsgroup, and probably as many
>actual playtesters as can be usefully coordinated. Design by committee
>ALWAYS breaks down when the committee gets too big. And I think we have
>enough already to catch most of the problems, any more would hurt more than
>help. Sorry.
I wasn't suggesting an expanded playtest group - the preview cards
should be those that are pretty much frozen. A card like Year of the
Rat would be a good example - there is little scope for adjusting the
strength of a card like this - its effect is all or nothing. Some say
that it is too powerful - a game-breaker. It was used more than once
at Flashpoint Finchley III - it helped me win the final - and there
was some grumbling from those on the wrong end of it. It might be
useful to preview a card like this to see if the general reaction is
horror or delight.
Mind you, there are not that many active [FIST] posters here - about
20 regulars? How many play-testers are there? And how much overlap?
I make no complaint about your playtesting - the results have been
pretty good so far - but there is something to be said for new blood
and fresh ideas too. MtG's Ice Age was developed by a separate group
and was one of their most successful expansions. Throne Wars is
supposed to be a standalone too and so might have been given the same
treatment.
There is another thread which debates the merits of differing numbers
of players in game. There are at least 4 schools of thought:
a) 2-player is best
b) 3-player is best
c) 4-player is best
d) 5+ is good too
I am perhaps the only advocate of case d) but I was surprised at the
degree of support for the 3-player game. How well does the current
play-testing process cover these different formats?
Andrew
Henry Vogel
7271...@compuserve.com (Andrew S. Davidson) wrote:
>Nathan said that this delay was deliberate - Daedalus felt that
>too-frequent expansions would overload players and burn them out.
>Their release policy is designed for the long term.
I can't speak for everyone, but I LIKE the idea of less frequent
expansion sets. One of the biggest problems with Magic -- and one of
the things that finally drove me away from it -- was the frequency of
new releases. CCGs are incredibly expensive compared to virtually ANY
other genre of game and such a heavy release schedule just makes the
games that much more expensive.
If this is the approach Daedalus is taking then I applaud them. Not
only will the game be more affordable on a yearly basis, but they will
also be able to spend more time working on each expansion, thus
improving its quanlity.
Henry
p...@janhagel.cis.ohio-state.edu
Dave Van Domelen wrote in article <55ji2c$5...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> :
> Anyway, here's a Throne War playtest report that doesn't violate any
>confidentiality agreements and is about as useful as one which did.
>
> [Card 1] is a cool card, it's the center of one of my playtest decks,
>and every time I manage to get it out (about every other game), that's
>pretty much it, I win. Ten to one it gets changed.
Aye, [Card 1] must die!
And incidentally, Andrew Davidson's idea for Throne War preview spoilers
wouldn't work...you can bet there'd be waaaay too many arguments over some
of the cards.
But hey, maybe Dave Van Domelen can share some more of his Limited Edition
Playtest war stories with us one of these days. Always fun to see what _might_
have been, before the critical shift. :)
Kai Poh
Elect Amy Racecar/Snake Plisskin '96!
"Put America out of its Misery."
Judas Iscariot
On Mon, 4 Nov 1996, Henry Vogel wrote:
> 7271...@compuserve.com (Andrew S. Davidson) wrote:
>
> >Nathan said that this delay was deliberate - Daedalus felt that
> >too-frequent expansions would overload players and burn them out.
> >Their release policy is designed for the long term.
>
> I can't speak for everyone, but I LIKE the idea of less frequent
> expansion sets. One of the biggest problems with Magic -- and one of
HMMMMM... The only problem I see with this is if the wait is what it was
like between Netherworld and Flashpoint. That was WAY too long... I
hope Throne War comes out before summer...... March/April would be nice
for the latest release date on TW. just my opinion....
#################################################################
# Judas Iscariot ju...@gladstone.uoregon.edu 541.302.5722 #
# gzu...@cs.uoregon.edu #
# #
# "Naked Chic Air Freshners Rule!" - Beavis #
#################################################################
sha...@cyberenet.net
Jose Garcia <jga...@halcyon.com> wrote:
>Andy Holt <an...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>>another recommended change is to reinstate all the card errata that has not
>>been superceded by the much clearer formulation of the rules.
>>From the way you are "beta-testing" that wording before Throne Wars, I assume
>>that TW rules have not yet been typeset ... which in turn implies we will not
>>see TW in 1996?
> Correct, we'd have announced a release date it if it was coming out
>that soon.
Heh, does that mean that we have time to start requesting cards we'd
like to see included in the set? I personally would like to see the
inclusion of a Taosit Monk akin to those found in the Chinese Ghost
Story films. Also, how about including Hung Hey Kwon to round out the
cast of Chinese folk heroes for the Guiding Hand (ok, it's out of
juncture, but there is time travel in the game after all)? Of course,
the coolest would be to include the Poisonous Monk and his funky car
from The New Legends of Shaolin, but that may be pushing it a bit.
Jack Dracula
Andrew S. Davidson <7271...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>There is another thread which debates the merits of differing numbers
>of players in game. There are at least 4 schools of thought:
>a) 2-player is best
>b) 3-player is best
>c) 4-player is best
>d) 5+ is good too
and e) 1-player is best. Any more than that and I lose.
>I am perhaps the only advocate of case d) but I was surprised at the
>degree of support for the 3-player game. How well does the current
>play-testing process cover these different formats?
Jack Dracula
Monarch Loser
Joseph William Dixon
In a fit of madness Andrew S. Davidson (7271...@compuserve.com) wrote:
: I make no complaint about your playtesting - the results have been
: pretty good so far - but there is something to be said for new blood
: and fresh ideas too. MtG's Ice Age was developed by a separate group
: and was one of their most successful expansions. Throne Wars is
: supposed to be a standalone too and so might have been given the same
: treatment.
Actually, Ice Age was their most successful expansion simply because it
remained in print for an entire year [mid-95 until mid-96]. Mirage will
probably top IA by the time it goes out of print late next year...
Jack Dracula
Henry Vogel <vog...@dstm.com> wrote:
> I can't speak for everyone, but I LIKE the idea of less frequent
> expansion sets. One of the biggest problems with Magic -- and one of
> the things that finally drove me away from it -- was the frequency of
> new releases. CCGs are incredibly expensive compared to virtually ANY
> other genre of game and such a heavy release schedule just makes the
> games that much more expensive.
> If this is the approach Daedalus is taking then I applaud them. Not
> only will the game be more affordable on a yearly basis, but they will
> also be able to spend more time working on each expansion, thus
> improving its quality.
I agree in principle, but this is also a vicious market. You need to
keep the buyer's attention. And, in all honesty, I'm not looking
forward to the Shadowfist drought between now and Throne War. Adding
little things between like Combat in Kowloon (amd, oddly, Feng Shui
releases) help. But Magic is too many. But this thing is too slow.
Jack Dracula
Monarch Bureaucrat
matt
> > Yup, they're doing their job properly and keeping tight lipped.
Hmmgf, hmmsr... nsddgaaw, hmemremrmrrmememm lmnlnww!
[O] Matt
[O] Ducted Tape Hood
[O] bi...@mpb.com
It's shiny AND sticky!
matt
Andrew S. Davidson wrote:
> There is another thread which debates the merits of differing numbers
> of players in game. There are at least 4 schools of thought:
>
> a) 2-player is best
>
> b) 3-player is best
>
> c) 4-player is best
>
> d) 5+ is good too
>
> degree of support for the 3-player game. How well does the current
> play-testing process cover these different formats?
>
In my PT group we play all of the above, even though it is some people's
opinion that D) shouldn't happen. I have some great fun in 5+player
games.
[O] Matt
[O] Gutsy Burger Hood
[O] bi...@mpb.com
matt
p...@janhagel.cis.ohio-state.edu wrote:
> But hey, maybe Dave Van Domelen can share some more of his Limited Edition
> Playtest war stories with us one of these days. Always fun to see what _might_
> have been, before the critical shift. :)
My too scents.
I still wish that Snakeman would have stayed in his original playtest
format, instead of the powered-down version that was released. But
that's just me. I still like Snakeman, even if he is powered-down.
Ori N.Shifrin
Henry Vogel wrote:
>
> 7271...@compuserve.com (Andrew S. Davidson) wrote:
>
> >Nathan said that this delay was deliberate - Daedalus felt that
> >too-frequent expansions would overload players and burn them out.
> >Their release policy is designed for the long term.
>
> expansion sets. One of the biggest problems with Magic -- and one of
> the things that finally drove me away from it -- was the frequency of
> new releases. CCGs are incredibly expensive compared to virtually ANY
> other genre of game and such a heavy release schedule just makes the
> games that much more expensive.
>
> If this is the approach Daedalus is taking then I applaud them. Not
> only will the game be more affordable on a yearly basis, but they will
> also be able to spend more time working on each expansion, thus
>
> HenryI`m sorry,but I have to disagree with the above opinion on the frequency
of Shadowfist expansions.I`ve been collecting CCG`s since Magic first
came out,and while I agree that the current pace of Magic expansions
(Homelands,Alliances and the 300+card ex.Mirage in this year)is probably
too much,not to mention impossible to replicate from a small company
like Daedalus,I think 2 small expansions in a year is too little to
sustain interest.IMHO,3 expansions per year would be as close as
possible to the ideal.I do know the wait from Netherworld until
Flashpoint was released was a lot more ..difficult than it should
have been for me.Just my 2c worth.
Ori
sha...@cyberenet.net
Jose Garcia <jga...@halcyon.com> wrote:
> I will confirm your assessment of what Nathan has said. We are
>reconsidering how Shadowfist support product is done. Its becoming
>increasingly difficult to attract new players and thats in part of the
>ever widening gulf both in ability and in terms of financial investment
>made between experienced players and newbies. This is a Bad Thing in the
>long term. At the same time we're
>committed to fully supporting Shadowfist, we're just considering
>different ways of doing it. More on this later.
> There will be something out for Shadowfist before now and next
>summer, I'm just not in a position to announce what it will be and
>when its coming out.
Hmmm . . . It seems like you have a "rock and a hard place" type of
dilemma here. You don't want to rush out Fist product b/c there isn't
enough of a demand to support it, but if you release product too
infrequently then you run the risk of alienating the following you
already have. Someone mentioned that at least one person publicly quit
the game b/c he got tired of waiting for Flashpoint. While I love the
game too much to do that, I certainly was less than pleased by the
endless delays and long wait.
It would seem to me that you would have to have at least two releases
each year of about 100 cards each to keep the game going. Six months
seems to me to be about the maximum acceptable gap between expansions.
Any longer and you run the risk of alienating existing players as well
as turning off new players for lack of support. I can't really imagine
a set of less than 100 cards being viable either, unless the print run
was kept rather small (which also runs the risk of alienating existing
players).
Of course, I'm just speculating here. I don't know nearly enough about
the CCG industry to say for certain what is financially viable or not.
David Eber
sha...@cyberenet.net
"Love us with money, or we'll hate you with hammers!"
-Milk & Cheese
Joseph William Dixon
In a fit of madness matt (bi...@mpb.com) wrote:
: I still wish that Snakeman would have stayed in his original playtest
: that's just me. I still like Snakeman, even if he is powered-down.
If Snakemen are 'powered-down' compared to the playtest version, the
playtest version must've been quite awesome... [if the released Snakeman
had just one more point of Fighting I'd consider him a great character;
as is, he's right on the edge of greatness, IMHO]
Andrew S. Davidson
dva...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Dave Van Domelen) wrote:
> Anyway, here's a Throne War playtest report that doesn't violate any
>confidentiality agreements and is about as useful as one which did.
>
> [Card 1] is a cool card, it's the center of one of my playtest decks,
>and every time I manage to get it out (about every other game), that's
>pretty much it, I win. Ten to one it gets changed.
>...
> And so on.
Thanks for this but I find it irritates more than it entertains - you
can't even tell us the names of the cards. Confidentiality agreements
may be necessary legal *BS* but I still have the impression that most
of this is just secrecy for its own sake.
Compare this with the computer industry. Microsoft, for example, is
famous for its early product announcements. They take a lot of flak
for producing vapourware but still feel that it makes good commercial
sense to build customer expectations and pre-empt the competition.
They even "play-test" their products with thousands of beta-test
customers and make them pay for the privilege, to boot!
Andrew
Andrew S. Davidson
vog...@dstm.com (Henry Vogel) wrote:
>I can't speak for everyone, but I LIKE the idea of less frequent
>expansion sets. One of the biggest problems with Magic -- and one of
>the things that finally drove me away from it -- was the frequency of
>new releases. CCGs are incredibly expensive compared to virtually ANY
>other genre of game and such a heavy release schedule just makes the
>games that much more expensive.
I think complaints about the expense of CCGs are overdone. People
only seem to compare them with boxed games. Consider other genres
like:
* PBM games in which you pay by the turn - I have played in games
which, at the top end, have turn fees of $50 or so.
* Online games in which you pay by the hour. I gave up one very
quickly after a monthly bill of some $500.
* Arcade games which eat coins. I used to play Gauntlet for hours at
a stretch and had to fill my pockets with change first.
* Computer games which require a $1000+ computer
* Casino games, poker and other forms of gambling. It is possible to
_make_ money at these but don't count on it. In my own poker career,
I claim to have, *ahem*, broken even.
And if you want to spend really serious money, try some of the other
collecting hobbies. The prices paid for some telephone cards make a
Black Lotus look cheap.
In my case, the major cost of all these games is the time they consume
- time is money. CCGs at least have the virtue that they don't take
man-months to play like some of the other games I have tried.
Andrew
Andrew S. Davidson
p...@janhagel.cis.ohio-state.edu wrote:
>And incidentally, Andrew Davidson's idea for Throne War preview spoilers
>wouldn't work...you can bet there'd be waaaay too many arguments over some
>of the cards.
That's not a bug - it's a feature. Some debate and discussion is
desirable as it would maintain a continuous "buzz" about the
forthcoming expansion. At the moment, all we have are the vaguest of
rumours and these do little to build anticipation.
I can see that it might cause some trouble if the more opinionated
amongst us (you know who) get too attached to their vision of the
future and are then upset if this is not accepted. Do the arguments
get out of hand on the play-test mailing list?
But is it better to say nothing and then let the arguments rage after
the event? Why not suck it and see? Preview one card and see how
much trouble it causes...
Andrew
Andrew S. Davidson
aa...@chebucto.ns.ca (Joseph William Dixon) wrote:
>In a fit of madness Andrew S. Davidson (7271...@compuserve.com) wrote:
>: I make no complaint about your playtesting - the results have been
>: pretty good so far - but there is something to be said for new blood
>: and fresh ideas too. MtG's Ice Age was developed by a separate group
>: and was one of their most successful expansions. Throne Wars is
>: supposed to be a standalone too and so might have been given the same
>: treatment.
>
> Actually, Ice Age was their most successful expansion simply because it
>remained in print for an entire year [mid-95 until mid-96]. Mirage will
>probably top IA by the time it goes out of print late next year...
People have an affection for Ice Age which has little to do with the
length of time it has been in print. Contrast this with Fallen
Empires which has been available for even longer but which is
generally seen as a flop.
As for Mirage, I am not buying any of it and welcome the current
renaissance of the Type 1/1.5 formats. Perhaps I can use my Legends
now - another success, for all that it vanished in the blink of an
eye.
Andrew
Andrew S. Davidson
vog...@dstm.com (Henry Vogel) wrote:
>If this is the approach Daedalus is taking then I applaud them. Not
>only will the game be more affordable on a yearly basis, but they will
>also be able to spend more time working on each expansion, thus
>improving its quanlity.
^^^^^^^^
I like your final freudian slip - a cross between "quantity" and "Quan
Lo" - the Perfect Master.
Andrew
Jose Garcia
>
>> Anyway, here's a Throne War playtest report that doesn't violate any
>>confidentiality agreements and is about as useful as one which did.
>>
>> [Card 1] is a cool card, it's the center of one of my playtest decks,
>>and every time I manage to get it out (about every other game), that's
>>pretty much it, I win. Ten to one it gets changed.
>>...
>> And so on.
>
>Thanks for this but I find it irritates more than it entertains - you
>can't even tell us the names of the cards.
I agree, Dave didn't violate his nondisclosure agreement but
dangling vague tidbits isn't good sport.
Confidentiality agreements
>may be necessary legal *BS* but I still have the impression that most
>of this is just secrecy for its own sake.
I feel that there are some very necessary reasons for it. For one
I as a designer don't want 100 back seat designers telling me how to design an upcoming expansion (for every regular poster on this =
list, there's 5 times that number that email me from time to time). I don't
see it as contributing to anything other than Dennis Hefferman vs.
almost everyone else style flamewars. In my experience wide open
discussion on playtest cards just leads to back seat design comments
and playtesters arguing with each other and very little constructive
comments. Any constructive comments that do get through are too few
and far between to be really worth the designer's while.
In the past we've had problems with embroiling and unconstructive
arguments on the playtest mailing list. Not only did these arguments
get in the way of any productive playtesting, they lead to unecessary
hurt feelings as people had internet style rows over certain cards.
And that was amidst a moderated mailing list consisting of a carefuly selected group of playtesters. Open it up to this newsgroup=
and
you've got a nightmare!
BTW, since then the Shadowfist playtest mailing list is announcement
only. The designers communicate to the playtesters and vice versa but
discussion between playtesters is actively discouraged.
In many ways opening up card playtesting in a public forum would
be very much like breaking the ice at a party by starting a discussion
about abortion rights. It is a hot topic but you're not going to
accomplish anything other than get a lot of people pissed at one
another.
>
>Compare this with the computer industry. Microsoft, for example, is
>famous for its early product announcements. They take a lot of flak
>for producing vapourware but still feel that it makes good commercial
>sense to build customer expectations and pre-empt the competition.
Yes but you don't see publishers releasing rough drafts of their
unfinnished manuscripts to the public either. Microsoft is producing
nuts and bolts software, mostly for commercial use and they need all
the playtesting they can get. Playtesting of an expansion set is
much more subjective, for every "this card is broken and I'll tell you
why" comment you recieve you'll get fifty messages from people
arguing with each other about the subjective usefulness of a certain
card and whether or not they like the direction it takes the game in.
>They even "play-test" their products with thousands of beta-test
>customers and make them pay for the privilege, to boot!
For Microsoft playtesting the latest release of Microsoft Word for
bugs is a very real concern and its something that is much less
subjective than what we are dealing with.
With Shadowfist we really don't have a problem with cards in the
expansions breaking the balance of the game. Its pretty safe to say
that none of the expansions contain any "broken" cards. There may be
dissenting opinions on this point but I believe the majority of
Shadowfist players would agree with this assessment. I'm pretty
confident that the current playtest process we undergoe is exhaustive
and sufficient for the task at hand.
Sean Klein
sha...@cyberenet.net wrote:
> It would seem to me that you would have to have at least two releases
> each year of about 100 cards each to keep the game going. Six months
> seems to me to be about the maximum acceptable gap between expansions.
I can't agree more with this. I'd love to see two expansions a year. Summer and winter seem
best - that way you get the end of/out of school playing season as well as the boost from
holiday sales. Small sets are also great. About 125 cards makes it easy for the collector
to get a complete set without spending gobs and gobs of money, easy for the player who wants
decent cards without getting a bunch of junk over and over, and easy for the creative people
to develop expansions that are worthwhile. If every Shadowfist expansion is as great as
Flashpoint, more people will forego Magic in favor of Shadowfist.
Dave Van Domelen
In article <32865dd5...@library.airnews.net>,
Andrew S. Davidson <7271...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>dva...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Dave Van Domelen) wrote:
>
>> Anyway, here's a Throne War playtest report that doesn't violate any
>>confidentiality agreements and is about as useful as one which did.
>>
>> [Card 1] is a cool card, it's the center of one of my playtest decks,
>>and every time I manage to get it out (about every other game), that's
>>pretty much it, I win. Ten to one it gets changed.
>>...
>> And so on.
>
>Thanks for this but I find it irritates more than it entertains - you
>can't even tell us the names of the cards.
Ah, I see someone got one of the two points I was trying to make.
If I can't give real information, it's worse than useless.
Guess what? Even if I filled in all the blanks, odds are it would be
just as useless as [Card 1] and so forth. Because the names will change,
the powers will change, sometimes even the FACTIONS will change in playtest.
To give an old example, the card which became the Monkey King edge was
known in playtest as "Beastie Stuff." Sometimes the name is the last thing
to be determined.
> Confidentiality agreements
>may be necessary legal *BS* but I still have the impression that most
>of this is just secrecy for its own sake.
>
>Compare this with the computer industry. Microsoft, for example, is
>famous for its early product announcements. They take a lot of flak
>for producing vapourware but still feel that it makes good commercial
>sense to build customer expectations and pre-empt the competition.
>They even "play-test" their products with thousands of beta-test
>customers and make them pay for the privilege, to boot!
Microsoft is a juggernaut which can afford to sue the lifeforce out
of anyone who uses advance information to try and steal their trademarks
and copyrights, so no one's going to try. Daedalus can't do that, so they
have to be a lot more careful about avoiding situations where their stuff
can be stolen.
Dave Van Domelen, notes there's several cards in the current playtest
sets which have temporary names even weirder than "Beastie Stuff"....
Tony Hafner
> Hmmm . . . It seems like you have a "rock and a hard place" type of
> dilemma here. You don't want to rush out Fist product b/c there isn't
> enough of a demand to support it, but if you release product too
> infrequently then you run the risk of alienating the following you
> already have. Someone mentioned that at least one person publicly quit
> the game b/c he got tired of waiting for Flashpoint. While I love the
> game too much to do that, I certainly was less than pleased by the
> endless delays and long wait.
I won't be quitting anytime soon either, but I'm with you on the
frustration after that wait. But I don't think it was Daedalus'
fault either.
> It would seem to me that you would have to have at least two releases
> each year of about 100 cards each to keep the game going. Six months
> seems to me to be about the maximum acceptable gap between expansions.
> Any longer and you run the risk of alienating existing players as well
> as turning off new players for lack of support. I can't really imagine
> a set of less than 100 cards being viable either, unless the print run
> was kept rather small (which also runs the risk of alienating existing
> players).
Someone mentioned 3 expansions a year, and I like that figure. I
would like to see 120- to 150-card sets every 4 months.
> Of course, I'm just speculating here. I don't know nearly enough about
> the CCG industry to say for certain what is financially viable or not.
I don't think that anybody knows for certain what is financially
viable in the CCG industry. I am of the opinion that if Magic didn't
have a monstrous existing base of customers before the other games
hit, it wouldn't be alive today because of the horrible mismanagement
of the last year and a half.
--
Tony Hafner
ton...@microsoft.com
"Tropical parasites, your carefree infestation ends here.
Tonight you swim in ointments of righteous hygeine!" -The Tick
Andrew S. Davidson
aa...@chebucto.ns.ca (Joseph William Dixon) wrote:
> If Snakemen are 'powered-down' compared to the playtest version, the
>playtest version must've been quite awesome... [if the released Snakeman
>had just one more point of Fighting I'd consider him a great character;
>as is, he's right on the edge of greatness, IMHO]
The original Snakeman healed after each combat, I believe. This was
not OTT, IMO - the ability would still have been inferior to Ambush.
Andrew
Andrew S. Davidson
dva...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Dave Van Domelen) wrote:
>>Thanks for this but I find it irritates more than it entertains - you
>>can't even tell us the names of the cards.
>
> Ah, I see someone got one of the two points I was trying to make.
>If I can't give real information, it's worse than useless.
> Guess what? Even if I filled in all the blanks, odds are it would be
>just as useless as [Card 1] and so forth. Because the names will change,
>the powers will change, sometimes even the FACTIONS will change in playtest.
>To give an old example, the card which became the Monkey King edge was
>known in playtest as "Beastie Stuff." Sometimes the name is the last thing
>to be determined.
You seem to be undermining your own argument. If the names are so
volatile then why keep them secret? The information may be useless
but it is certainly entertaining to know that there is/was a card
called "Beastie Stuff".
But why was it given this name? It doesn't have much to do with the
power but seems to be a reference to the art. But I thought you
didn't get the art for playtest cards. And the art is obviously a
reference to King Monkey - great Sage, equal of Heaven - from Chinese
mythology. This was a big draw when I first saw the adverts for
Shadowfist - myself and others here were already fans of the Japanese
Monkey series. It was disappointing that the card was of such limited
usefulness. Perhaps we can have a lustful Pigsy or the holy fool,
Tripitaka in Throne Wars...
I bet I can predict one of the names of the cards from Throne Wars -
The Forbidden City. Right?
Andrew
Andrew S. Davidson
Jose Garcia <jga...@halcyon.com> wrote:
> For Microsoft playtesting the latest release of Microsoft Word for
>bugs is a very real concern and its something that is much less
>subjective than what we are dealing with.
There can be a considerable amount of emotion in the development of
computer software. One theory of computer management is the art of
"egoless programming" - just as the Shaolin novitiate is exhorted to
discard anger and cultivate serenity and stoicism.
>...
>confident that the current playtest process we undergo is exhaustive
>and sufficient for the task at hand.
This wasn't my point. This was that, given a long wait for Throne
Wars, it might be a good idea to preview some details from it. This
would not be playtesting but advance publicity. You already do this
to some extent - the web pages with preview art, for example. More
please.
The hubbub resulting from the Flashpoint release has died down now and
Dennis seems to be sulking in his tent. Shall we have a 6 month
silence here while we watch and wait? No doubt the Players' Guide
will keep us busy for while. What then...?
Andrew
Jose Garcia
>
>I bet I can predict one of the names of the cards from Throne Wars -
>The Forbidden City. Right?
Dennis F. Hefferman
|The hubbub resulting from the Flashpoint release has died down now and
|Dennis seems to be sulking in his tent. Shall we have a 6 month
Between having his car rear-ended by a tailgater and his 87-year old
grandmother taking a spill on a bus, Dennis has been slightly busy lately.
But not anymore.
--
Dennis Francis Heffernan IRC: FuzyLogic heff...@pegasus.montclair.edu
Montclair State University #include <disclaim.h> Computer Science/Philosophy
"I guess my work around here has all been done."
-- The Devil, in "The Garden of Allah", Don Henley
Andrew S. Davidson
Jose Garcia <jga...@halcyon.com> wrote:
A hit, a palpable hit!
I expect that this will be a Lotus FSS - similar to Creche of the New
Flesh or the Arcanotowers.
The Arcanotowers aren't FSS but their reduction of the victory
requirement makes them very similar. Why this subtle difference - I
can't see the reason for it?
By the way, my compliments to whoever thought up the time sequenced
cards - Arcanoseed/Arcanotower Now/Arcanotower 2056. This is a really
neat development of the time-war theme.
Andrew
Andrew S. Davidson
p...@hickory.cis.ohio-state.edu wrote:
>>>>I bet I can predict one of the names of the cards from Throne Wars -
>>>>The Forbidden City. Right?
>>>
>>> Correct.
>>
>>A hit, a palpable hit!
>
>
>The Forbidden City didn't exist back in 69 AD. Heck, the Imperial Capital
>wasn't even anywhere near where Beijing/Peking is today!
Ah, but which history? Do you believe that demons are historically
accurate? This may be a different time-line from our own...
Andrew
Bruce Baugh
>But is it better to say nothing and then let the arguments rage after
>the event?
Yes, it is, actually.
Say that they preview a card, only to decide later that it needs
significant work. Forever after, there _will_ be people demanding to use
the originally previewed version, and others who are just honestly
confused, and so forth and so on. This is in addition to the usual
flames and disagreements.
This is as certain as the (napalm) sunrise.
--
Bruce Baugh <*> br...@kenosis.com <*> http://www.kenosis.com/bruce
See my Web pages for...
Daedalus Entertainment, makers of Feng Shui and Shadowfist
Christlib, the mailing list of Christian & libertarian ideas
New sf by S.M. Stirling and George Alec Effing er
Eat Skweeky-Weets, the skweekier weet with the weetier skweek!
p...@hickory.cis.ohio-state.edu
Andrew S. Davidson wrote in article <3287391d...@library.airnews.net> :
>
>Jose Garcia <jga...@halcyon.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>I bet I can predict one of the names of the cards from Throne Wars -
>>>The Forbidden City. Right?
>>
>> Correct.
>
>A hit, a palpable hit!
But historically inaccurate.
The Forbidden City didn't exist back in 69 AD. Heck, the Imperial Capital
wasn't even anywhere near where Beijing/Peking is today!
>I expect that this will be a Lotus FSS - similar to Creche of the New
>Flesh or the Arcanotowers.
Maybe as a modern-day power base, but then it wouldn't fit the theme of Throne
War. Hopefully Jose means to have a Forbidden City card of some sort, but it
better not refer to THE Forbidden City.
>The Arcanotowers aren't FSS but their reduction of the victory
>requirement makes them very similar. Why this subtle difference - I
>can't see the reason for it?
You can seize Mr. Architect's Feng Shui sites. You can't seize the
Arcanotowers.
You can burn his Feng Shui sites for Power or victory. You can't do that to the
Arcanotowers.
You get no resources from Feng Shui Sites. Mr. Architect gets resources from
his Arcanotowers.
All you can do is smoke those damned Arcanotowers!
Kai Poh
"Apologize to the rice!"
-Ken Gor, "A Better Tomorrow Part II"
Jason Langlois
Andrew S. Davidson wrote:
>
> The Arcanotowers aren't FSS but their reduction of the victory
> requirement makes them very similar. Why this subtle difference - I
> can't see the reason for it?
Likely this is because the Towers, while not Feng Shui sites
themselves, are sitting on an important Feng Shui site. The
presence of the Towers is denying that site to everyone else;
therefore, it reduces the number you need by one (two, if
you can hold it in the future, too).
Jason Langlois
p...@hickory.cis.ohio-state.edu wrote:
> Maybe as a modern-day power base, but then it wouldn't fit the theme of Throne
> War. Hopefully Jose means to have a Forbidden City card of some sort, but it
> better not refer to THE Forbidden City.
It may very well. If I recall the ad copy, Throne War is going to also
involve the Guiding Hand making a play to eliminate the Emperor. This
could involve them gaining control of the Forbidden City in 1850 (and
wresting it away from the Eunechs...) Never forget that Shadowfist
spans time, as well as space. (It's about time, it's about space, its
about strange people in an interesting place).
> You can seize Mr. Architect's Feng Shui sites. You can't seize the
> Arcanotowers.
If you were to seize the Tower, it's 'story effect' (the unleashing of
Arcanowave energy across the globe and reverting the Ascended Lodge to
animal forms) would still go off, and the Architects would win. So,
from a story angle, you have to blow the place up.
> You can burn his Feng Shui sites for Power or victory. You can't do that to the
> Arcanotowers.
See above. It doesn't have the Chi of a Feng Shui site, so you don't
get anything for it.
Tony Hafner
> >>I bet I can predict one of the names of the cards from Throne Wars -
> >>The Forbidden City. Right?
> >
> > Correct.
>
> A hit, a palpable hit!
>
> Flesh or the Arcanotowers.
I hope it's closer to the Arcanotowers than the Creche. Any of these
sites have to take up non-FS slots in a deck since they can't be
played to generate power on the first turn. At least the Arcanotowers
can be played when you are one site from victory. The Creche, being a
Feng Shui, doesn't give you this and has no special abilities.
> The Arcanotowers aren't FSS but their reduction of the victory
> requirement makes them very similar. Why this subtle difference - I
> can't see the reason for it?
As far as I can tell, the main reason is for a surprise win by using
Positive Chi to return them to play just before taking a site.
But seriously, I like the fact that they aren't Feng Shui. This means
that they cannot be burned and don't count for various other things
that count Feng Shui. I guess that if you know someone will be
playing the darn things, they make Chimp Shack a decent card too.
sha...@cyberenet.net
7271...@compuserve.com (Andrew S. Davidson) wrote:
>By the way, my compliments to whoever thought up the time sequenced
>cards - Arcanoseed/Arcanotower Now/Arcanotower 2056. This is a really
>neat development of the time-war theme.
I'm pretty sure that either Jose or Robin stated either here or on the
Feng Shui mailing list that The Arcanotower 2056 was NOT the future
version of the Arcanotower Now. Rather, they were two seperate things
entirely, and part of the Architects plot to rule the world that is
the subject of Flashpoint.
David Eber
sha...@cyberenet.net
"You're either with us or against us!
Either way . . we're against you!!"
-Milk & Cheese
Jack Dracula
> If you were to seize the Tower, it's 'story effect' (the unleashing of
> Arcanowave energy across the globe and reverting the Ascended Lodge to
> animal forms) would still go off, and the Architects would win. So,
> from a story angle, you have to blow the place up.
This brings up a question that has been bugging me. When the Architects
finally win, and the critical shift comes down: what will become of the
Lodge? Magic returns to the world, a lot of the Lodge would revert back
(but, given examples like Leatherback, maybe not all.) Would they become
Animal Kings? Or what? I realize the Pledged might survive as a broken
conspiracy (see Mountain Warrior) but I just can't help feeling sorry
for the furry guys...
And on a related note: is there ever gonna be a printed copy of The
Pledge? I would love to carry a copy around, and I might try to
incorporate them into my Vampire LARP...
Jack Dracula
Ascended FanBoy
Jose Garcia
sha...@cyberenet.net wrote:
>7271...@compuserve.com (Andrew S. Davidson) wrote:
>
>
>
>>By the way, my compliments to whoever thought up the time sequenced
>>cards - Arcanoseed/Arcanotower Now/Arcanotower 2056. This is a really
>>neat development of the time-war theme.
>
>I'm pretty sure that either Jose or Robin stated either here or on the
>Feng Shui mailing list that The Arcanotower 2056 was NOT the future
>version of the Arcanotower Now. Rather, they were two seperate things
>entirely, and part of the Architects plot to rule the world that is
>the subject of Flashpoint.
>
This is correct. You can get the full scoop in the Player's Guide
(which ships on the 20th).
Robin D. Laws
In article <56d1od$5...@news.cis.ohio-state.edu>,
p...@hickory.cis.ohio-state.edu wrote:
> Andrew S. Davidson wrote in article
<3287391d...@library.airnews.net> :
>>
>>Jose Garcia <jga...@halcyon.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>The Forbidden City. Right?
>>>
>>> Correct.
>>
>>A hit, a palpable hit!
>
>
>The Forbidden City didn't exist back in 69 AD. Heck, the Imperial Capital
>wasn't even anywhere near where Beijing/Peking is today!
>
>better not refer to THE Forbidden City.
Shadowfist's version of Chinese history is wildly inaccurate,
and deliberately so. We want to cram all sorts of cool images
and folk heroes into a couple of junctures. In the world
of Shadowfist, the 69 juncture contains elements from many
different eras.
Take care >>> Robin
Randall M! Gee
In article <56dsf2$5...@news.cyberenet.net>, <sha...@cyberenet.net> wrote:
>I'm pretty sure that either Jose or Robin stated either here or on the
>Feng Shui mailing list that The Arcanotower 2056 was NOT the future
>version of the Arcanotower Now. Rather, they were two seperate things
>entirely, and part of the Architects plot to rule the world that is
>the subject of Flashpoint.
Yeah, he said it here. I meant to ask him more about that, but then he
left USENET for a while. So how does building two Arcanotowers, one
in a Metropolis (Gotham) in 2056 and one in Brazil in 1996 help the
Architects? And what in an Arcanoseed, anyways?
-- Randall M! Gee, Keeper of Gummi Wisdom
(g...@math.berkeley.edu)
"Achilles....
The Illiad....
by Homer....
READ A BOOK!"
Jose Garcia
>This brings up a question that has been bugging me. When the
Architects
>finally win, and the critical shift comes down: what will become of the
>Lodge? Magic returns to the world, a lot of the Lodge would revert back
>(but, given examples like Leatherback, maybe not all.) Would they become
>Animal Kings? Or what?
Just regular animals, (albiet with unusual backgrounds).
I realize the Pledged might survive as a broken
>conspiracy (see Mountain Warrior) but I just can't help feeling sorry
>for the furry guys...
>
>And on a related note: is there ever gonna be a printed copy of The
>Pledge?
No plans for one at the moment.
Andrew S. Davidson
r...@io.org (Robin D. Laws) wrote:
>>The Forbidden City didn't exist back in 69 AD. Heck, the Imperial Capital
>>wasn't even anywhere near where Beijing/Peking is today!
>
>Shadowfist's version of Chinese history is wildly inaccurate,
>and deliberately so. We want to cram all sorts of cool images
>and folk heroes into a couple of junctures. In the world
>of Shadowfist, the 69 juncture contains elements from many
>different eras.
Why not have more junctures? The cluster of junctures between 1850
and 2056 doesn't seem consistent with the large gap between 69 and
1850.
Andrew
Judas Iscariot
On Sun, 17 Nov 1996, Andrew S. Davidson wrote:
> >>The Forbidden City didn't exist back in 69 AD. Heck, the Imperial Capital
> >>wasn't even anywhere near where Beijing/Peking is today!
The Ascended Lodge didn't exist until 1000 AD, but big deal, I am sure
they will be the tertiary group in Throne War, since this is "a battle
across time" after all....
> >Shadowfist's version of Chinese history is wildly inaccurate,
> >and deliberately so. We want to cram all sorts of cool images
> >and folk heroes into a couple of junctures. In the world
> >of Shadowfist, the 69 juncture contains elements from many
> >different eras.
>
> Why not have more junctures? The cluster of junctures between 1850
> and 2056 doesn't seem consistent with the large gap between 69 and
> 1850.
I'm sure they'll get to it at some point......
#################################################################
# Judas Iscariot ju...@gladstone.uoregon.edu 541.302.5722 #
# gzu...@cs.uoregon.edu #
# #
# "Naked Chic Air Freshners Rule!" - Beavis #
#################################################################
Jack Dracula
>Why not have more junctures? The cluster of junctures between 1850
>and 2056 doesn't seem consistent with the large gap between 69 and
>1850.
I always thought that the Lodge found out some way to shut of their
13th century Juncture, thereby safeguarding their history. But that's
just me.
Jack Dracula
Pledged Monarch
Jack Dracula
Randall M! Gee <g...@phnom-penh.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure that either Jose or Robin stated either here or on the
>> Feng Shui mailing list that The Arcanotower 2056 was NOT the future
>> version of the Arcanotower Now. Rather, they were two seperate things
>> entirely, and part of the Architects plot to rule the world that is
>> the subject of Flashpoint.
> Yeah, he said it here. I meant to ask him more about that, but then he
> left USENET for a while. So how does building two Arcanotowers, one
> in a Metropolis (Gotham) in 2056 and one in Brazil in 1996 help the
> Architects? And what in an Arcanoseed, anyways?
Um, I figured with was all the same tower too. What gives, guys?
And, I operate under the assumption that the Arcanoseed is the
previous version of the Arcanotower, maybe at the 1850 junction.
Jack Dracula
Monarch Theorist
sha...@cyberenet.net
7271...@compuserve.com (Andrew S. Davidson) wrote:
>r...@io.org (Robin D. Laws) wrote:
>>>The Forbidden City didn't exist back in 69 AD. Heck, the Imperial Capital
>>>wasn't even anywhere near where Beijing/Peking is today!
>>
>>Shadowfist's version of Chinese history is wildly inaccurate,
>>and deliberately so. We want to cram all sorts of cool images
>>and folk heroes into a couple of junctures. In the world
>>of Shadowfist, the 69 juncture contains elements from many
>>different eras.
>Why not have more junctures? The cluster of junctures between 1850
>and 2056 doesn't seem consistent with the large gap between 69 and
>1850.
>Andrew
The designers originally chose the four junctures because those are
the ones in which most HK movies are set (well, except for 2056, which
was more or less made up). Guess there just aren't that many HK films
set in, say, the 12th century.
If they were to do another juncture though, the prevailling opinion
seems to be in favor of the 1930's, pulp style. At lease I know that's
what I'd like to see.
David Eber
sha...@cyberenet.net
"Remember kids...there's no justice! There's just us..."
-Milk & Cheese
Jack Dracula
David Eber <sha...@cyberenet.net> wrote:
>> Why not have more junctures? The cluster of junctures between 1850
>> and 2056 doesn't seem consistent with the large gap between 69 and
>> 1850.
> The designers originally chose the four junctures because those are
> the ones in which most HK movies are set
So we should have a juncture in the 70's? The "I'm Gonna Git You, Sucka"
juncture? I'd love a 'Pimp Shoes' state.
> (well, except for 2056, which
> was more or less made up). Guess there just aren't that many HK films
> set in, say, the 12th century.
Hmm, maybe. We could have samurai, and, of course, More Ninjas.
To drag up that ol' can o' worms, we could have a juncture to
Rokugan, the world of Legend of the Five Rings.
> If they were to do another juncture though, the prevailling opinion
> seems to be in favor of the 1930's, pulp style. At lease I know that's
> what I'd like to see.
Ah, but that'd be your prevailing opinion, then. :} I wouldn't mind
seeing more Netherworld stuff myself. We need something for the new
players who only have a handful of Monarch stuff. Netherworld 2:
Electric Boogaloo?
Jack Dracula
Monarch Sorcerer
Jasper Phillips
In article <56thvd$j...@news.cyberenet.net>, <sha...@cyberenet.net> wrote:
>7271...@compuserve.com (Andrew S. Davidson) wrote:
>
>was more or less made up). Guess there just aren't that many HK films
>set in, say, the 12th century.
>seems to be in favor of the 1930's, pulp style. At lease I know that's
>what I'd like to see.
>
Hey, what about a juncture in the 70s? You could have cards like
"I'm gonna get you sucka!", Dragon characters with huge sideburns
or 'fros, not to mention all of the funky music that would now be in theme!
-Jasper
PS Personally I'm looking for a "Bad Mother Fucker" card; which card am
I gonna get back from my smoked pile? The one that says Bad Mother Fucker.
--
/\ Jasper Phillips (Pit Fiend) ______,....----,
/VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|==================="""""""""""" ___,..-'
`^^^^^^^^^^^^^^|======================----------""""""
\/ http://www.cs.orst.edu/~philljas/
Robin D. Laws
In article <328ee229...@library.airnews.net>,
>>Shadowfist's version of Chinese history is wildly inaccurate,
>>and deliberately so. We want to cram all sorts of cool images
>>and folk heroes into a couple of junctures. In the world
>>of Shadowfist, the 69 juncture contains elements from many
>>different eras.
>
>Why not have more junctures?
It's simpler. Simple means accessible. Accessible is good.
>The cluster of junctures between 1850
>and 2056 doesn't seem consistent with the large gap between 69 and
>1850.
And in the real world, people can't run along the treetops or
up walls.
Take care >>> Robin
Jose Garcia
vam...@wam.umd.edu (Jack Dracula) wrote:
>David Eber <sha...@cyberenet.net> wrote:
>
>>> Why not have more junctures? The cluster of junctures between 1850
>>> and 2056 doesn't seem consistent with the large gap between 69 and
>>> 1850.
>
>> the ones in which most HK movies are set
>
>juncture? I'd love a 'Pimp Shoes' state.
Cute, but not really HK action. BTW, you don't have to go back to the 70s to play such characters. Someone played a blaxploitati=
on hero in my Feng Shui campaign and it fit perfectly. One of the big blaxploitation stars is still doing movies, they're direct to =
video actioners (I can't remember his name but he was in Black Caeser "This Caeser's come to bury you!!!" and From Dusk Till Dawn "I=
t was in 'Nam.."
>
>> (well, except for 2056, which
>> was more or less made up). Guess there just aren't that many HK films
>> set in, say, the 12th century.
>
>Hmm, maybe. We could have samurai, and, of course, More Ninjas.
>
>To drag up that ol' can o' worms, we could have a juncture to
>Rokugan, the world of Legend of the Five Rings.
I wasn't aware that this was an old can of worms. We haven't heard much about it but in fact we're planning on doing it right af=
ter we publish our DC Hero Universe Vs. Marvel Universe storyline crisis expansion set for Shadowfist, the working title is The Secr=
et Crisis of Final Infinite Night Wars, but we're thinking that it may be too short to properly convey all the plot twists we want t=
o convey. This is also the expansion set where we're going to switch to using 2.5pt Roman for all rules text which is going to open =
up a whole new world of possibilities for us. The entire set is going to be published as stick ons which must be adhered to Magic ca=
rds in order to be legal. And there will be no rarities in the set. Each booster contains 1 sticker and retails for $3.00.
And once we've published that, things get really interesting.
>
Jack Dracula
Robin D. Laws <r...@io.org> wrote:
>> The cluster of junctures between 1850
>> and 2056 doesn't seem consistent with the large gap between 69 and
>> 1850.
> And in the real world, people can't run along the treetops or
> up walls.
Well, the rest of you can't.
Jack Dracula
can
Jack Dracula
Jasper Phillips <phil...@az.ENGR.ORST.EDU> wrote:
> Hey, what about a juncture in the 70s? You could have cards like
> "I'm gonna get you sucka!", Dragon characters with huge sideburns
> or 'fros,
Why do we all keep coming up with this? Must be the collective
unconscious impressive images of the future on our brains.
> not to mention all of the funky music that would now be in theme!
Fishbone could be the Silver Band! No wait.
> PS Personally I'm looking for a "Bad Mother Fucker" card; which card am
> I gonna get back from my smoked pile? The one that says Bad Mother Fucker.
I-deal. That could be Shaft's designator.
Jack Blacula
Jack Dracula
Jose Garcia <jga...@halcyon.com> wrote:
> Cute, but not really HK action. BTW, you don't have to go back
> to the 70s to play such characters. Someone played a blaxploitation
> hero in my Feng Shui campaign and it fit perfectly. One of the big
> blaxploitation stars is still doing movies, they're direct to
> video actioners (I can't remember his name but he was in Black
> Caeser "This Caeser's come to bury you!!!" and From Dusk Till Dawn
> "It was in 'Nam.."
Fred Williamson, who was also in the luminary "Hell Up In Harlem."
>>To drag up that ol' can o' worms, we could have a juncture to
>>Rokugan, the world of Legend of the Five Rings.
> I wasn't aware that this was an old can of worms.
OK, you also have to understand I pronounce "can of worms" so
it sounds more like "old silly thread."
> We haven't heard much about it but in fact we're planning on
> doing it right after we publish our DC Hero Universe Vs. Marvel
> Universe storyline crisis expansion set for Shadowfist, the
> working title is The Secret Crisis of Final Infinite Night Wars,
> but we're thinking that it may be too short to properly convey
> all the plot twists we want to convey. This is also the expansion
> set where we're going to switch to using 2.5pt Roman for all rules
> text which is going to open up a whole new world of possibilities
> for us. The entire set is going to be published as stick ons which
> must be adhered to Magic cards in order to be legal. And there will
> be no rarities in the set. Each booster contains 1 sticker and
> retails for $3.00.
1) De-amn!
2) There were so many references and cuts on other companies in there,
I would say there's about Nine Cuts!
3) Sure, but if it don't contain an UR, I won't buy it (obligatory
Decipher cut.)
4) 2.5 Roman? That's a treat! But could we have some rare six-sided
dice in there too?
Jack Dracula
been schooled
Sean Klein
Jack Dracula wrote:
> Jasper Phillips <phil...@az.ENGR.ORST.EDU> wrote:
[70s stuff snipped]
> > PS Personally I'm looking for a "Bad Mother Fucker" card; which card am
> > I gonna get back from my smoked pile? The one that says Bad Mother Fucker.
> I-deal. That could be Shaft's designator.
In our group we refer to Sun Chen as "the Superleaping Mother Fucker." This is based on some
song the local alternative radio station was playing a while ago that had a chorus "... mother
fucker" where ... is some term I can't remember anymore. The nickname stuck, the song didn't.
As for this 70s stuff, how about:
Fantasy Island - FS Site
Studio 54 - FS Site
CB radio - state
Disco Queen - dragon or ascended character
stop me before I go on...
Tony Hafner
> PS Personally I'm looking for a "Bad Mother Fucker" card; which card am
> I gonna get back from my smoked pile? The one that says Bad Mother
Fucker.
Well, since everyone else is getting into this craze, I might as well
throw in my 2c:
Mother F***ing Process
Edge
Cost: 1[Dra][Dra]
When Mother F***ing Process enters play, choose any f***ing
designator you please. Turn Mother F***ing Process to play a
character with that designator from your smoked pile. Instead
of paying the power for the character, give the power to a player
who controls a character who is the subject of a weapon state.
And I haven't seen the movie enough to give a good quote off of
the top of my head. But I'm sure there is some good material
there.
brian kawano
Jose Garcia wrote:
>
> The entire set is going to be published as stick ons which must
> be adhered to Magic cards in order to be legal. And there will
> be no rarities in the set. Each booster contains 1 sticker and
> retails for $3.00.
>
big is the set?
:)
--- brian
p...@janhagel.cis.ohio-state.edu
Jose Garcia <jga...@halcyon.com> wrote in article <570lge$sd...@nwnews.wa.com> :
> One of the big blaxploitation stars is still doing movies, they're direct to =
>video actioners (I can't remember his name but he was in Black Caeser "This Caeser's come to bury you!!!" and From Dusk Till Dawn "I=
>t was in 'Nam.."
Fred Williamson. Didn't he do "Original Gangstas" with a bunch of other
blaxploitation stars last year?
matt
Jose Garcia wrote:
> Cute, but not really HK action. BTW, you don't have to go back to the 70s to play such characters. Someone played a blaxploitation hero in my Feng Shui cam
It's Fred Williamson! He's a Bad Mo' Fo'. He's also been in some of
those cheesy/campy American Ninja flicks.
[O] matt
[O] Throckmorton Hood
[O] bi...@mpb.com
Jasper Phillips
In article <570lge$sd...@nwnews.wa.com>,
Jose Garcia <jga...@halcyon.com> wrote:
>vam...@wam.umd.edu (Jack Dracula) wrote:
>>
>>So we should have a juncture in the 70's? The "I'm Gonna Git You, Sucka"
>>juncture? I'd love a 'Pimp Shoes' state.
>
>on hero in my Feng Shui campaign and it fit perfectly. One of the big blaxploitation stars is still doing movies, they're direct to =
>video actioners (I can't remember his name but he was in Black Caeser "This Caeser's come to bury you!!!" and From Dusk Till Dawn "I=
>t was in 'Nam.."
I think that's the same guy in all the Shaft Movies...
>>To drag up that ol' can o' worms, we could have a juncture to
>>Rokugan, the world of Legend of the Five Rings.
>
> I wasn't aware that this was an old can of worms. We haven't heard much about it but in fact we're planning on doing it right af=
>ter we publish our DC Hero Universe Vs. Marvel Universe storyline crisis expansion set for Shadowfist, the working title is The Secr=
>et Crisis of Final Infinite Night Wars, but we're thinking that it may be too short to properly convey all the plot twists we want t=
>o convey. This is also the expansion set where we're going to switch to using 2.5pt Roman for all rules text which is going to open =
>up a whole new world of possibilities for us. The entire set is going to be published as stick ons which must be adhered to Magic ca=
>rds in order to be legal. And there will be no rarities in the set. Each booster contains 1 sticker and retails for $3.00.
Hey, don't forget to make the stickers scrath 'n sniff!
-Jasper
Jasper Phillips
In article <32949E...@ceb.ucop.edu>,
Sean Klein <KLE...@ceb.ucop.edu> wrote:
>As for this 70s stuff, how about:
>
>Fantasy Island - FS Site
Argh! Although this one might really fit in, considering all the
time-tripping and reality bending that Mr Rourke brought about.
>Studio 54 - FS Site
>CB radio - state
This starts to bring up memories of Smokie and the Bandit, not to mention
Dukes of Hazard. Heh, now you'd better stop me before I _really_ go
to far. ;-)
>Disco Queen - dragon or ascended character
>stop me before I go on...
Heh, how about a Chi state called "The Glow"? To be put, of course, upon
the Shogun of Harlem.
Jasper Phillips
In article <571ps2$9...@rac6.wam.umd.edu>,
>> "I'm gonna get you sucka!", Dragon characters with huge sideburns
>> or 'fros,
>
>Why do we all keep coming up with this? Must be the collective
>unconscious impressive images of the future on our brains.
>
>> not to mention all of the funky music that would now be in theme!
>
>Fishbone could be the Silver Band! No wait.
>
>> I gonna get back from my smoked pile? The one that says Bad Mother Fucker.
>
>
You know, I'm seriously thinking about printing up some stickers (cause
I don't think this juncture is gonna open up -- it's just barely out
of theme), and making some custom cards just for personal use.
Now I just need to come up with a few new abilities to go with the genre,
or at least new names for old ones. ;-)
Seriously though, I think a touch of 70's blaxplotian stuff would fit right
in. I mean, there's already the redeemed gunman...
Nick F Brienza
Jasper Phillips (phil...@az.ENGR.ORST.EDU) wrote:
: Hey, what about a juncture in the 70s? You could have cards like
: "I'm gonna get you sucka!", Dragon characters with huge sideburns
:
: -Jasper
:
: PS Personally I'm looking for a "Bad Mother Fucker" card; which card am
: I gonna get back from my smoked pile? The one that says Bad Mother Fucker.
How's this for a start?:
The Man
Buro Honky
Cost: [ARC][ARC] 3
Fighting 3
Unique. Turn to return any [DRA], [JAM] or Hood foundation character to
the hand of its owner. Gain 1 Power each time you do this.
"I don't care if you're saving the world, buddy. Just shut your mouth and
gimme your goddamn driver's license."
--
"My son, your ineptitude is so vast, your incompetence so profound, that I
am certain you are inhabited by greater power than I have ever known."
--Peter S. Beagle, _The Last Unicorn_
John M. Huber
>Jose Garcia wrote:
>>
>> The entire set is going to be published as stick ons which must
>> be no rarities in the set. Each booster contains 1 sticker and
>> retails for $3.00.
>>
>is the sticker designed for alpha or beta Magic cards? and how
>big is the set?
>
What about "power pop-ups" cards of our favorite characters? Like in the Fox
Kids Network trading cards last year?
Ting-Ting for sure!
john m huber
John M. Huber
>
>4) 2.5 Roman? That's a treat! But could we have some rare six-sided
>dice in there too?
> Jack Dracula
> been schooled
Too easy to make your own. How 'bout 7-sided?
John Huber
Fool Me Once -- shame on you
Fool Me Twice -- shame on me
Fool Me Thrice -- Nope, I'll wait a month or so before diving into
X-Files.
>
sha...@cyberenet.net
"Tony Hafner" <ton...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>Well, since everyone else is getting into this craze, I might as well
>throw in my 2c:
My thoughts exactly . . .
Takin' Down the Man
Cost: Dra 1
Event
Play only during your turn. All Asc characters become turned. All your
attacking characters inflict +1 damage against players who control any
Asc cards.
Artwork shows a conference table in the foreground around which sit
several men in suits. They are all turned in surprise toward the
background, where the door is being kicked open by a bad mother f****r
with a big afro and an even bigger shotgun.
The scary thing is that I thought of this long before this thread
every began, and I thought of it as a serious card too!
David Eber
sha...@cyberenet.net
"I'm a carton of hate! I'm a wedge of spite!"
-Milk & Cheese
ro...@aol.com
David Eber badmouthed the Ascended with a new Dragon card:
All your
attacking characters inflict +1 damage against players who control any
Asc cards.
*(*(*(*
Dude, you're breaking my fourth wall again and causing untold havoc at the
gaming table as cards somehow learn to inflict damage onto players. Ouch
ouch ouch!
--Rob Heinsoo
sha...@cyberenet.net
sha...@cyberenet.net wrote:
>Takin' Down the Man
>Cost: Dra 1
>Event
>Play only during your turn. All Asc characters become turned. All your
>attacking characters inflict +1 damage against players who control any
>Asc cards.
You know, I really, really, really hate it when I slip back into Magic
mode. Almost a year of being clean & sober, and I still lapse back
with things like this. What the card should have said was:
Play only during your turn. All Asc characters become turned. all of
your attacking characters inflict +1 damage against all characters and
sites controled by any player who controls any Asc cards.
BTW, I tried posting this before Rob had a chance to point out my
embarassing mistake. Supposedly it went through to the group, but I
don't see it up here. Damn thing has been screwing up like this
lately.
Joseph William Dixon
In a fit of madness ro...@aol.com wrote:
: David Eber badmouthed the Ascended with a new Dragon card:
: All your
: attacking characters inflict +1 damage against players who control any
: Asc cards.
: *(*(*(*
: Dude, you're breaking my fourth wall again and causing untold havoc at the
: gaming table as cards somehow learn to inflict damage onto players. Ouch
: ouch ouch!
Then insert "targets controlled by" between 'against' and 'players'.
Sheesh.
***********************************************************************
* "Hot funk, cool punk, even if it's old junk * aa...@chebucto.ns.ca *
* It's still rock and roll to me" (Billy Joel) * Gumby * Team AMIGA *
***** My homepage is http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~aa343/Profile.html ****