 |
|
|
|
Next: LSJ: Swarm question
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Feb 01, 2005
Posts: 92
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 9:58 am
Post subject: Strike with Conviction
Archived from groups: rec>games>trading-cards>jyhad (more info?)
|
|
|
Name: Strike with Conviction
[NoR:C]
Cardtype: Conviction
Burn to make a hand or weapon strike against a monster at +1 damage.
Burn to bleed at +1 bleed as a (D) action.
If Strike with Conviction is used to attempt a hand or weapon strike in
combat, is it burned on declaration, or on resolution? I figure probably
declaration.
Last night, my group had another 'unintuitive experience' with the "bleed at
+1 bleed" part of SwC - I think this is because the effect sounds just like
an action card, and action cards are normally always burned when announced.
The interpretation that it is merely a card in play that *allows* an action,
with a cost of burning itself, and therefore isn't burned unless the action
succeeds, seems unnatural in comparison to "regular" actions - it reads as
if it allowed the *declaration* of an action by burning itself, just as
actions played from hand do (and strike cards from hand, for that matter).
It has also seemed overpowered to us, incidentally, that the card doesn't
burn if the action is blocked, since that lets you effectively use the same
copy of the card a second time in the same action, for an additional damage
in the resulting combat. The efficiency advantage over a weenie-vampire
deck with Computer Hackings and Lucky Blows is impressive.
Josh
the empire strikes back |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Jun 14, 2004
Posts: 649
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 9:58 am
Post subject: Re: Strike with Conviction [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Joshua Duffin wrote:
> Name: Strike with Conviction
> [NoR:C]
> Cardtype: Conviction
> Burn to make a hand or weapon strike against a monster at +1 damage.
> Burn to bleed at +1 bleed as a (D) action.
>
> If Strike with Conviction is used to attempt a hand or weapon strike in
> combat, is it burned on declaration, or on resolution? I figure probably
> declaration.
Resolution. Like a Grenade.
> Last night, my group had another 'unintuitive experience' with the "bleed at
> +1 bleed" part of SwC - I think this is because the effect sounds just like
> an action card, and action cards are normally always burned when announced.
Action cards are "normally always" played from hand when announced.
Army of Rats in play is not burned when someone announces the action to
burn it, for example. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 14, 2004
Posts: 649
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 9:58 am
Post subject: Re: Strike with Conviction [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Joshua Duffin wrote:
> Grenade is written "burn after use" rather than "burn to strike" for
> this very reason (clarity), isn't it?
I couldn't say. I didn't write it. It seems clearer, yes.
> Yes, it is typical for actions provided by cards in play to not have their
> cost paid until resolution. But those cards don't normally allow themselves
> to be used twice, whereas Strike with Conviction can be used both to attempt
> a bleed at +1 and to strike for +1 with the same card in the same action.
You mean like Bomb?
> And computer hackings don't reappear out of the ash heap during the untap
> phase either.
Not seeing the connection to the current point, sorry. >> Stay informed about: Strike with Conviction |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 14, 2004
Posts: 649
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 9:58 am
Post subject: Re: Strike with Conviction [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Joshua Duffin wrote:
> "LSJ" <vtesrep.RemoveThis@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
> > Joshua Duffin wrote:
> >> But those cards don't normally allow
> >> themselves
> >> to be used twice, whereas Strike with Conviction can be used both to
> >> attempt
> >> a bleed at +1 and to strike for +1 with the same card in the same action.
> >
> > You mean like Bomb?
>
> Exactly. Bomb costs a pool and takes an action to put in play, and doesn't
> come back after you use it, whereas Strike with Conviction takes no action
> to put in play and comes back once per turn per Imbued.
How does that make it impossible to conceive a card that allows itself
to be "used" twice, both to attempt an action and to strike with the
same card in the same action?
> >> And computer hackings don't reappear out of the ash heap during the untap
> >> phase either.
> >
> > Not seeing the connection to the current point, sorry.
>
> That's on the 'balance' point. Comparing Strike with Conviction to Computer
> Hacking and Lucky Blow, it is something like twice as good as they are
> card-for-card. And Computer Hacking is a benchmark strong card. In other
> words, balance is another reason (IMO) that Strike with Conviction ought to
> burn on declaration rather than resolution.
Oh. OK. I was just addressing the mechanics issue. I'm not arguing
balance in general, and especially this early in the exposure to the
set. >> Stay informed about: Strike with Conviction |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 11, 2005
Posts: 567
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 9:58 am
Post subject: Re: Strike with Conviction [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Joshua Duffin wrote:
> Fair enough. Submitted for your future consideration, then. 
So as I'm too lazy to actually find the answer by reading the whole
thread, have we determined that you do not burn Strike with Conviction
for the +1 bleed until the action resolves, so if the bleed is blocked,
you don't burn the Strike with Conviction?
Thanks,
-Peter >> Stay informed about: Strike with Conviction |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 01, 2005
Posts: 92
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 10:45 am
Post subject: Re: Strike with Conviction [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"LSJ" <vtesrep DeleteThis @white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:1147876201.485707.260450@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Joshua Duffin wrote:
>> Name: Strike with Conviction
>> [NoR:C]
>> Cardtype: Conviction
>> Burn to make a hand or weapon strike against a monster at +1 damage.
>> Burn to bleed at +1 bleed as a (D) action.
>>
>> If Strike with Conviction is used to attempt a hand or weapon strike in
>> combat, is it burned on declaration, or on resolution? I figure probably
>> declaration.
>
> Resolution. Like a Grenade.
You're the boss, of course, but it would make more sense to me the other
way. Grenade is written "burn after use" rather than "burn to strike" for
this very reason (clarity), isn't it?
>> Last night, my group had another 'unintuitive experience' with the "bleed
>> at
>> +1 bleed" part of SwC - I think this is because the effect sounds just
>> like
>> an action card, and action cards are normally always burned when
>> announced.
>
> Action cards are "normally always" played from hand when announced.
Well yeah.
> Army of Rats in play is not burned when someone announces the action to
> burn it, for example.
Sure, but Army of Rats doesn't say "burn this card to take an action to burn
this card", either.
Yes, it is typical for actions provided by cards in play to not have their
cost paid until resolution. But those cards don't normally allow themselves
to be used twice, whereas Strike with Conviction can be used both to attempt
a bleed at +1 and to strike for +1 with the same card in the same action.
And computer hackings don't reappear out of the ash heap during the untap
phase either.
Josh
clear like a scientologist >> Stay informed about: Strike with Conviction |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 01, 2005
Posts: 92
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 10:56 am
Post subject: Re: Strike with Conviction [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"LSJ" <vtesrep.TakeThisOut@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:1147877362.906357.17620@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Joshua Duffin wrote:
>> Grenade is written "burn after use" rather than "burn to strike" for
>> this very reason (clarity), isn't it?
>
> I couldn't say. I didn't write it. It seems clearer, yes.
>
>> Yes, it is typical for actions provided by cards in play to not have
>> their
>> cost paid until resolution. But those cards don't normally allow
>> themselves
>> to be used twice, whereas Strike with Conviction can be used both to
>> attempt
>> a bleed at +1 and to strike for +1 with the same card in the same action.
>
> You mean like Bomb?
Exactly. Bomb costs a pool and takes an action to put in play, and doesn't
come back after you use it, whereas Strike with Conviction takes no action
to put in play and comes back once per turn per Imbued.
>> And computer hackings don't reappear out of the ash heap during the untap
>> phase either.
>
> Not seeing the connection to the current point, sorry.
That's on the 'balance' point. Comparing Strike with Conviction to Computer
Hacking and Lucky Blow, it is something like twice as good as they are
card-for-card. And Computer Hacking is a benchmark strong card. In other
words, balance is another reason (IMO) that Strike with Conviction ought to
burn on declaration rather than resolution.
Josh
tried, sentenced, and hanged >> Stay informed about: Strike with Conviction |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 01, 2005
Posts: 92
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 11:12 am
Post subject: Re: Strike with Conviction [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"LSJ" <vtesrep DeleteThis @white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:1147878072.701069.259240@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Joshua Duffin wrote:
>
>> Exactly. Bomb costs a pool and takes an action to put in play, and
>> doesn't
>> come back after you use it, whereas Strike with Conviction takes no
>> action
>> to put in play and comes back once per turn per Imbued.
>
> How does that make it impossible to conceive a card that allows itself
> to be "used" twice, both to attempt an action and to strike with the
> same card in the same action?
It's not impossible, obviously. Just unintuitive that it works this way,
given the wording.
>> That's on the 'balance' point. Comparing Strike with Conviction to
>> Computer
>> Hacking and Lucky Blow, it is something like twice as good as they are
>> card-for-card. And Computer Hacking is a benchmark strong card. In
>> other
>> words, balance is another reason (IMO) that Strike with Conviction ought
>> to
>> burn on declaration rather than resolution.
>
> Oh. OK. I was just addressing the mechanics issue. I'm not arguing
> balance in general, and especially this early in the exposure to the
> set.
Fair enough. Submitted for your future consideration, then.
Josh
it might be early, but for my taste, it already seems too long by half >> Stay informed about: Strike with Conviction |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 01, 2005
Posts: 92
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 11:55 am
Post subject: Re: Strike with Conviction [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
<pdb6.DeleteThis@lightlink.com> wrote in message
news:1147881182.133910.107510@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Joshua Duffin wrote:
>> Fair enough. Submitted for your future consideration, then.
>
> So as I'm too lazy to actually find the answer by reading the whole
> thread, have we determined that you do not burn Strike with Conviction
> for the +1 bleed until the action resolves, so if the bleed is blocked,
> you don't burn the Strike with Conviction?
That is correct. In addition, if you use Strike with Conviction for the +1
damage with a hand or weapon strike, you don't burn SwC until resolution in
that case either (like Grenade). Which matters if your opponent uses
Strike: Combat Ends or something.
Josh
drive down the cost >> Stay informed about: Strike with Conviction |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 01, 2006
Posts: 16
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 8:11 pm
Post subject: Re: Strike with Conviction [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Joshua Duffin wrote:
> <pdb6.DeleteThis@lightlink.com> wrote in message
> news:1147881182.133910.107510@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
>>Joshua Duffin wrote:
>>
>>>Fair enough. Submitted for your future consideration, then.
>>
>>So as I'm too lazy to actually find the answer by reading the whole
>>thread, have we determined that you do not burn Strike with Conviction
>>for the +1 bleed until the action resolves, so if the bleed is blocked,
>>you don't burn the Strike with Conviction?
>
>
> That is correct. In addition, if you use Strike with Conviction for the +1
> damage with a hand or weapon strike, you don't burn SwC until resolution in
> that case either (like Grenade). Which matters if your opponent uses
> Strike: Combat Ends or something.
>
>
> Josh
>
> drive down the cost
>
>
Sweet. This exact situation occured in casual play last weekend, and we
thought about both points of view. We decided (for that game) that
conviction acts like a cost.
- Brett >> Stay informed about: Strike with Conviction |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Mar 08, 2006
Posts: 50
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Thu May 18, 2006 2:37 am
Post subject: Re: Strike with Conviction [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Joshua Duffin wrote:
> That is correct. In addition, if you use Strike with Conviction for the +1
> damage with a hand or weapon strike, you don't burn SwC until resolution in
> that case either (like Grenade). Which matters if your opponent uses
> Strike: Combat Ends or something.
That's similar to wolf claws etc... as well though. In saying that,
would have to agree with you that a card that is a lucky blow and a
computer hacking in one is very good by itself, not having to use them
until successful is pretty strong.
I haven't seen enough imbued decks to say whether it's balanced or
otherwise though. >> Stay informed about: Strike with Conviction |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
| Related Topics: | [LSJ] Strike with conviction - Hello, I would like to confirm the following about Strike with conviction : Strike with conviction Conviction "(...). Burn to bleed at +1 bleed as a (D) action." If the bleed is blocked, do I burn the card ? Thank you, François
New NoR preview - conviction/second sight - Text with the new card: 2. Conviction Conviction is a new card type. It is played in the untap phase, so it is an "untap" card, not a master or minion or discard (event) card. During your untap phase, you may play 1 conviction on each of yo...
Control of Conviction cards (LSJ) - Since conviction cards are neither master nor minion cards, the question arises: If control of an imbued changes, who controls any conviction on him/her? I assume it follows the minion-card precedent (the controller of the minion controls the conviction...
Burning Excess Conviction - Quoting New Rule #2: Conviction is a new card type. It is played in the untap phase, so it is an "untap" card, not a master or minion or discard (event) card. During your untap phase, you may play 1 conviction on each of your imbued. You may ...
Puppeteer vs. React With Conviction - React with Conviction [NoR:C] Cardtype: Conviction When an effect that would change control of this imbued is played or announced, you may burn this card to cancel that effect. Burn this card to cancel either a (D) action against this imbued that.. |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
