8 hours ago, Kiseki said:Dragon was often green with yellow highlights or yellow with green highlights depending on the era. I'd imagine that the yellow version of the mon is from before they settled on green being the official main color.
The mon avatars were added right after the sale and used the aeg avatars.
1 hour ago, Robin Graves said:I did notice that. But that's more a mechanic so you don't get penalised for using many unqiue cards. I wonder if they got that idea from Magic:
I was reminded more of how power-ups work in Vs. System.
Either way, it's a good way to keep multiple uniques from being a dead draw.
15 minutes ago, Vlad3theImpaler said:I was reminded more of how power-ups work in Vs. System.
Either way, it's a good way to keep multiple uniques from being a dead draw.
Didn't they also say something about Uniques tending to stick around longer (perhaps in the AMA)? It may also help explain that remark, too.
38 minutes ago, Toqtamish said:The mon avatars were added right after the sale and used the aeg avatars.
That's what my ambien addled brain was getting at.
5 hours ago, JJ48 said:Didn't they also say something about Uniques tending to stick around longer (perhaps in the AMA)? It may also help explain that remark, too.
I believe it was more that players would be more likely to add more Fate to them, as they are more powerful and worth more bang for their buck. And I guess the duplicate mechanic does help with that statement too.
On 4/26/2017 at 0:01 PM, JJ48 said:There's no Ring cards , but there are Ring tokens, and now every conflict will be aligned to one of the Rings, with the winner getting some bonus based on which Ring it is. Since every conflict will be aligned with a Ring, and people can no longer just leave some or all of them out of their decks and ignore them, the Rings will actually have a much larger, more prominent role than they did before! Now every deck will care about the Rings, not just those pursuing a specific victory condition!
This is a really good point. Thank you.
Yes, when you initiate a conflict, it'll be to maybe destroy a province, but it'll for sure be to get a Ring's benefit. The type (MIL/POL) is just the way you favor to win it.
On 4/26/2017 at 1:01 PM, JJ48 said:There's no Ring cards , but there are Ring tokens, and now every conflict will be aligned to one of the Rings, with the winner getting some bonus based on which Ring it is. Since every conflict will be aligned with a Ring, and people can no longer just leave some or all of them out of their decks and ignore them, the Rings will actually have a much larger, more prominent role than they did before! Now every deck will care about the Rings, not just those pursuing a specific victory condition!
Note, I think it is only the attacker who can claim the ring. Otherwise that crab province doesn't make sense.
1 minute ago, Mirith said:Note, I think it is only the attacker who can claim the ring. Otherwise that crab province doesn't make sense.
On the contrary, I think there is a difference between claiming a Ring and gaining the benefits of claiming that Ring. Defend the Wall says "resolve the ring effect" rather than "claim the ring" whereas the description of a conflict says that the "winer claims the ring".
2 minutes ago, Tonbo Karasu said:On the contrary, I think there is a difference between claiming a Ring and gaining the benefits of claiming that Ring. Defend the Wall says "resolve the ring effect" rather than "claim the ring" whereas the description of a conflict says that the "winer claims the ring".
This is my interpretation, too, though Mirith is right that what I actually said was that "the winner get{s} some bonus", which doesn't actually fit with what we know.
Edited by JJ486 minutes ago, Tonbo Karasu said:On the contrary, I think there is a difference between claiming a Ring and gaining the benefits of claiming that Ring. Defend the Wall says "resolve the ring effect" rather than "claim the ring" whereas the description of a conflict says that the "winer claims the ring".
You may be correct in there could be a difference between "claiming the ring" and gaining its benefit, though that seems a bit extra fiddly and confusing. I actually hope for simplicity sake that they are the same.
Actually that leaves to an interesting thought though, if somewhat separate. If you want to use the ring of air, you will need to attack. Defenders won't be able to claim the ring normally, which promotes, to some extent, honor decks attacking.
2 minutes ago, Mirith said:Actually that leaves to an interesting thought though, if somewhat separate. If you want to use the ring of air, you will need to attack. Defenders won't be able to claim the ring normally, which promotes, to some extent, honor decks attacking.
I believe that this was deliberate
1 minute ago, Tonbo Karasu said:I believe that this was deliberate
I agree, just was a realization against the whole defensive honor self-gratification solo decks.
4 minutes ago, Mirith said:You may be correct in there could be a difference between "claiming the ring" and gaining its benefit, though that seems a bit extra fiddly and confusing. I actually hope for simplicity sake that they are the same.
Actually that leaves to an interesting thought though, if somewhat separate. If you want to use the ring of air, you will need to attack. Defenders won't be able to claim the ring normally, which promotes, to some extent, honor decks attacking.
It appears that every deck, whether military, honor, or dishonor, will focus on the conflicts in some way. It seems FFG is very consciously ensuring that we don't have games of just "which of us can honor-out first?" or "can you enlighten before I reduce you to 20 honor?"
9 hours ago, Shadow Dragon said:
I miss my clan...