Nazgul are Abroad and Half an Eye Open

Where the Virtual Boyz plan their latest capers
marcos
Council Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Jambo wrote:Once per turn a card played in this way, that directly targets a Nazgul creature, does not count against the hazard limit.
i prefer this one, why would you want the card to do more stuff than it already does? You have to keep TNaA in table after all cards been played, so what? :) You already made lots of stuff with it :wink:
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1764
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

hm, I still think it is a rather long-winded way to exclude two cards, and I'm not even sure how it works, if Scimitars targets the nazgul or not etc.
I'm with Bandobras, just to play Scimitars from this card, it was not designed for it, it's not thematic, it creates issues, and what does it really matter if it can backfire, a prepared player always has the upper hand.

You can still play Fury this way, which I consider equal problem to Scimitars, you can Voice Scimitars, you can't dodge a Furied Abductor.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

But it's not just two cards, there's also Long Dark Reach, Two or Three Tribes Present, Fury of the Iron Crown, Words of Power and Terror, Scimitars/Helms, and then all the cool Nazgul cards like Black Breath and Out of the Black Sky to consider. Listing exceptions is ok, as long as there's not too many of them.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1764
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

I thought LDR and Morgul Horse were agreed upon, and then discussion focussed on Scimitars and Fury. Nobody seems to think Two Tribes is problem, personally I don't see problem with Helms, though it's same thematically like Scimitars I agree. So that would make 4 cards, is that longer or shorter than the target construction?

WoPT is no problem, except for WoPT V, which boosts man attacks, and imho the problem lies there not with playing it from TNaA.

But ok, if listing 4 cards is too much, then yeah we should take this road.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
marcos
Council Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

i think that "two tribes" is more problem than scimitars... play a free hazard that provide free creatures is way too much. I think if we have to exclude anything, exclude two or three tribes
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

marcos wrote:
Jambo wrote:Once per turn a card played in this way, that directly targets a Nazgul creature, does not count against the hazard limit.
i prefer this one, why would you want the card to do more stuff than it already does? You have to keep TNaA in table after all cards been played, so what? :) You already made lots of stuff with it :wink:
Hi Marcos, can you elaborate a little more on what you're saying here? Found it hard to follow lol. Cheers.

Anyhow, I think if we can make non-Nazgul specific booster cards like Scimitars and Helms now count against the hazard limit, I'd like to keep the option for them to be under TNaA. Let's face it, before this card we rarely saw scimitars and helms in action. They come with the potential to backfire, so I don't inherently have much issue with them at present, just that they're currently free! :)

The other thing to consider is that a pure Nazgul dedicated hazard strat is impossible since the 12 creature restriction puts pay to that. So, some boost to another strat, whether it be orcs, men or trolls is quite important.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1764
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Hmm, a pure nazgul attack portion will never work because it has too many blind spots, but that doesn't mean you have to up the assassins...if I hugg the coast, it'll be small chance the Scimitars will backfire on me in general. Just saying (once more), the prepared player always has the advantage.

Scimitars don't see play in tourneys maybe, but that's true for about 90% of the cards :wink:

Personally I think Scimitars from TNaA is still pretty good, also for the speed with which you can get them, normally to build up 3 Scimitars could take you a full cycle, now you can do it alot faster. And most people have an Ioreth sitting around somewhere, so I'm not sure letting it count really matters much. But, nuff said about this.
Two Tribes is also problem but at least the playability restrictions are alot bigger, so it's a bit easier to digest.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Frodo
Ex Council Member
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 5:09 am
Location: NYC, NY

All right. After reading your arguments, I am just about sold on believing that 3 Scimitars from TNAA, whether you can occasionally play them for free or not, is too strong.

It’s unfortunate that there’s no way (not that I can think of, anyway) to SLIGHTLY bolster this strategy without making it the absolute killer it has become. But I don’t like the clunky way we’re trying to word the clause about Nazgul targets…

So let’s simply list the cards that are excluded. This list should include: Scimitar (not Helms though), LDR, Morgul Horse. I’m not sure about Fury of the Iron Crown; perhaps that should be on the list too, but I’m on the fence. Two or Three Tribes Present is a bit strange, I admit, but it’s only once per turn that you can pull this off, and perhaps this is along the lines of a small “booster” that Jambo said was needed for creatures.

Oh, I just thought of an interesting way to slightly limit TNAA. We can say, “If there is a Nazgul on table, you may play non-creature hazards placed with this card that have the word “Nazgûl” in their game text (except <foo>) as if they were in your hand. You may not tap or discard that Nazgul this turn.” This would slow down the Scimitar decks, and create an interesting theme. I don’t know, maybe it’s silly.

By the way, I do understand the issue with Words of Power and Terror and the boost it is giving now, as Thorsten complained about in the beginning. I think we should either: A) eliminate the prowess line entirely so that it only creates an unstoppable Nazgul attack, or B) switch the prowess line for a body boost to that strike, like +8 body.

Thorsten, I’m missing your reasoning with why, “not discarding TNAA ever makes it less strong.” How do you see this as the case in terms of deck exhaustion? You get your TNAAs back into your deck upon exhaust, but there’s nothing in your discard pile to use if you even redraw them.

It would also be very strange to have an empty host hazard that still remains on the table… I don’t think there is a card in all of MECCG that functions like that.

Frodo
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Frodo wrote:Oh, I just thought of an interesting way to slightly limit TNAA. We can say, “If there is a Nazgul on table, you may play non-creature hazards placed with this card that have the word “Nazgûl” in their game text (except <foo>) as if they were in your hand. You may not tap or discard that Nazgul this turn.” This would slow down the Scimitar decks, and create an interesting theme. I don’t know, maybe it’s silly.
Interesting idea. Let's try along this line and see if it's workable. It would need refined though. For instance, does the Nazgul have to be yours? I think no would be more interesting. You reference "that Nazgul". Should it be "a Nazgul"? Also, currently it would completely prohibit Scimitars and Helms, so there'd be no need to reference them in the exceptions.
Frodo wrote:Thorsten, I’m missing your reasoning with why, “not discarding TNAA ever makes it less strong.” How do you see this as the case in terms of deck exhaustion? You get your TNAAs back into your deck upon exhaust, but there’s nothing in your discard pile to use if you even redraw them.


If TNaA is discarded along with the cards underneath it when a play deck is exhausted, then you can get quick access to those cards again. Remember you can put your 4 Nazgul boosters back into the sideboard! If we end up limiting the cards able to be played with it, then I don't see this remaining a major issue to be honest.
Frodo wrote:By the way, I do understand the issue with Words of Power and Terror and the boost it is giving now, as Thorsten complained about in the beginning. I think we should either: A) eliminate the prowess line entirely so that it only creates an unstoppable Nazgul attack, or B) switch the prowess line for a body boost to that strike, like +8 body.
I agree. Arbitrary prowess boosting is a dangerous thing to do, particularly as orcs, trolls and men already have prowess boosting cards The body boost is a cool alternative. When using small orcs, trolls and men, preventing that MP being awarded might make a fairer theme. Plus, just now this card is primarily being used as a Wizard killer, which is not helping to promote active Wizard decks.

How do people feel about the Great Goblin? That has a +2!
Frodo
Ex Council Member
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 5:09 am
Location: NYC, NY

As I was falling asleep last night I kept thinking about these cards, and I thought of a way to make Half an Eye Open slightly less difficult to play (since Jambo and Marcos pointed out its a bit clunky), given the amount of at-homes you need.

Rather than its current playability clause, HaE would no longer need a "host" dragon at home. However, in order to use the card, there must be an At-Home on table (kind of like my recent TNAA suggestion).

This small difference creates two very important changes:
1) The hazard player need not clog his hand with a copy of HaE until after he has sideboarded AND put an At-home into play; now he just needs to have sideboarded.
2) Previously, in a situation in which there were two of his at-homes on table, and the hazard player had two HaE in hand, the haz player would place one HaE on each dragon. The res player need use only one Marvels to knock out one of these half an eye strategies (and make it more delicate for the haz player to play his third, since he'd have to put it on the same overburdened at-home). In the same situation with only one at-home at table, the res player would knock out TWO HaE strategies with only one Marvels Told. And, frankly, Gentlemen, HaE is rarely so powerful anyway!

But now, in the first card, the res player can only knock out one HaE and not make it delicate to play the third copy because HaE simply requires one at-home on table to use. In the second case, the res player can STILL only knock out one HaE strategy, and there's STILL a dragon at-home on table.

The only possible weakness of this suggestion is a construction issue: that the haz player must still include at least 4 at-homes in his play deck if he wants to be guarranteed to draw one up. But perhaps this is not a big deal. Eliminating the dragon at-home requirement entirely is another option, but this is slightly less thematic perhaps? and we need not go that route until playtesting shows that even my first suggestion is not enough.

Thoughts? I love HaE, in theory anyway, and I have been recently playtesting this card so much that I dream about it, but I often wonder if it's even worth the effort. This could help.

Frodo
Frodo
Ex Council Member
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 5:09 am
Location: NYC, NY

If TNaA is discarded along with the cards underneath it when a play deck is exhausted, then you can get quick access to those cards again. Remember you can put your 4 Nazgul boosters back into the sideboard! If we end up limiting the cards able to be played with it, then I don't see this remaining a major issue to be honest.
My god, I'm stupid! I never thought of that!

AND I USED THIS STRATEGY IN MY WORLDS VIRTUAL DECK!!

Sigh... this is why more than one cook is a good idea... and why hobbits travel in packs... more beer, but more brains too...

Frodo
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Good idea Frodo regarding HaEO. That would really help with hand clog. If we make TNaA work in the same way then there's some consistency across boosters.

Plus the nice thing about this mechanic, is they'll also work if your opponent happens to have an At Home or Nazgul on the table! Thereby making their playing of Daelomin at Home potentially more risky. :twisted:

I like!
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

So, we'd have:
New TNaA wrote:When this card is played, take up to four cards from your sideboard or discard pile and place them face-down with this card. If there is a Nazgûl in play, you may play non-creature hazards placed with this card that have the word “Nazgûl” in their game text (except Long Dark Reach, Two or Three Tribes Present and Morgul Horse) as if they were in your hand. You may not tap or discard a Nazgûl on the same turn a card is played from undernearth this card. Once per turn, a card played this way does not count against the hazard limit. Discard if there are no cards with it, or when any play deck is exhausted.
This would cut out Scimitars, Helms and those in the list of exceptions. Thoughts/suggestions please. Should it state non-unique to cut out Fury of the Iron Crown?
New HaEO wrote:When this card is played, take up to three cards from your discard pile and place them face-down with this card. If there is an "at Home" manifestation in play, you may play short- or permanent-event hazards (except “at Homes” and Parsimony of Seclusion) placed with this card that mention a named Dragon or the word “Dragon” in their game text or title as if they were in your hand. All hazards targeting unique Dragon creatures do not count against the hazard limit. Prowess of Age can only be played to give a prowess bonus. Discard if there are no cards with it, or when any play deck is exhausted.
Should this also be sideboard too? Or should TNaA be discard pile only? Should the number of cards (3 or 4) remain different between the cards?
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1764
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

this looks very promising! We'll see about Fury then, maybe it is not disastrous after all.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
marcos
Council Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

do you think HaEo taking cards from sb will be very powerful? Just thinking about make the 2 cards even more similar to each other
Locked

Return to “Development”