Loving this card. It's sure to be a staple, as well as a good justification for splashing lion. Nice art too.
Troll5R - The Best Podcast!
Great card!
It does make me wonder about which point in development these card images are from. There seems to be a lack of consistency in templating. This card being a "Reaction" and Way of the Unicom being an "Interrupt" seems a little wonky to me.
I don't really see the reason to have both types.
Maybe interrupt is before an event happens and reaction after it happened ?
25 minutes ago, Ishi Tonu said:Great card!
It does make me wonder about which point in development these card images are from. There seems to be a lack of consistency in templating. This card being a "Reaction" and Way of the Unicom being an "Interrupt" seems a little wonky to me.
I don't really see the reason to have both types.
I don't remember if I'm remembering my brief stint in AGOT 2.0 or the end of my OL5R career, but I seem to remember Interrupt and reaction having different meanings. I believe Reaction resolves after the effect its reacting to and interrupt resolves before the effect its reacting to. In this case, the WotU keeps you from passing it and the RfB goes off after the bow effect has taken place. Normally this has no meaning but when you have multiple things reacting to the same effect, the interrupts will resolve before the reactions
I suppose.....however they could just label them all interrupts and just change the wording to make sure they are all consistent, in order to avoid extra rules.
For example:
Interrupt: before an action or ring effect would bow your character, prevent that character from being bowed by the action or ring effect.
Something like that
Edited by Ishi TonuI think it would be consistent is all Reactions were after and all interrupts were before.
1 hour ago, Ishi Tonu said:I suppose.....however they could just label them all interrupts and just change the wording to make sure they are all consistent, in order to avoid extra rules.
For example:
Interrupt: before an action or ring effect would bow your character, prevent that character from being bowed by the action or ring effect.
Something like that
You could do something like that (allthough I'd argue it'd be better to name them all reactions since the ones triggering after wouldn't really interrupt anything), but I think it's less about when the effects resolve and more about when you can trigger them. In a lot of card games you can just stack any number of effects on top of each other regardless of how they interact and them they just resolve in reverse order of activation. FFG has moved away from this design and in most of their games you have to wait till an effect resolves to play another ones unless they are Interrupt effects. If you had interrupts which let the effect resolve and interrupts that stoped the effects, then you'd have some inconsistency as to when interrupt effects are meant to be triggered (because it doesn't make a lot of sense for you to trigger the effect, then wait for the other effect to resolve, then return to resolve the previously triggered effect, but if you don't allow interrupt effects to trigger before others, then they can't be cancels, for instance).
Considering they wanted to move awat from the "all effects stack" model, I think their solution is very elegant.
Reaction or Interrupt is irrelevant. It's an action that breaks the normal cycle of priority. Although an Interrupt occurs before something happens and a reaction occurs after something happens.......there still needs to be a trigger. I can't play an Interrupt before I knowing if it's an effect that can be interrupted. Sure reaction may be the better word. I don't really care what its tagged as I just don't see the need for separating them into two different categories.
Ultimately ill be fine with it, i get the intent and can appreciate the attempt to clear things up but I don't see how this is an elegant solution to eliminate "the stack" when multiple interrupts and/or reactions are played. It's an attempt for sure but it's really only realized as a "fix" when only one Interrupt one Reaction are played in response to the same trigger. As long as the wording in the card clearly explains what and when something happens I don't care what they call it.
Again I don't think it's better or worse than anything else that I've seen from any other card game in the last 25 years. Just seems a little awkward to me. If this one of the minor oddities to me then it's not going to be a big deal at all.
Interesting. As someone who doesn't have a history with card games beyond one other FFG LCG, Interrupt and Reaction seem clear and simple to me.
4 hours ago, Ishi Tonu said:Reaction or Interrupt is irrelevant. It's an action that breaks the normal cycle of priority. Although an Interrupt occurs before something happens and a reaction occurs after something happens.......there still needs to be a trigger. I can't play an Interrupt before I knowing if it's an effect that can be interrupted. Sure reaction may be the better word. I don't really care what its tagged as I just don't see the need for separating them into two different categories.
Ultimately ill be fine with it, i get the intent and can appreciate the attempt to clear things up but I don't see how this is an elegant solution to eliminate "the stack" when multiple interrupts and/or reactions are played. It's an attempt for sure but it's really only realized as a "fix" when only one Interrupt one Reaction are played in response to the same trigger. As long as the wording in the card clearly explains what and when something happens I don't care what they call it.
Again I don't think it's better or worse than anything else that I've seen from any other card game in the last 25 years. Just seems a little awkward to me. If this one of the minor oddities to me then it's not going to be a big deal at all.
You're right, it's not that big a deal. I'm sorry if I got too excited (I don't really know if it's better then the other model myself, I guess it just doesn't seem awkward to me).
Edited by Zalari15 hours ago, Ishi Tonu said:Great card!
It does make me wonder about which point in development these card images are from. There seems to be a lack of consistency in templating. This card being a "Reaction" and Way of the Unicom being an "Interrupt" seems a little wonky to me.
I don't really see the reason to have both types.
In Game of Thrones, an interrupt occurred before a reaction.
It's a little frustrating at times, but there were several cards that had effects that occurred or lasted until the end of the phase.
The Wall was a location that, if you had not allowed an unopposed challenge, you gained 2 power "When the phase ends."
Nightmares was an event that blanked any card "until the end of the phase."
Then there was a card called Tears of Lys that killed a character "At the end of the phase."
The Wall was an interrupt, so it resolved at the end of the phase first. Then Nightmares and then Tears of Lys.
We, colloquially called it the "WUA" (When, until, at) rule as in:
Because it's so needlessly burdensome on the timing of the game.
But it created weird scenarios like, if you Nightmares'd the Wall, it couldn't resolve its trigger because at the "W" part of the WUA order, it was still blank. By the time Nightmares wore off during the "U" part of the WUA order, the opportunity to trigger the Wall had already passed.
I am sure they'll maintain the same stupid timing structure in this game too, since it is FFG haha.
Edited by Joe From Cincinnati
Episode 5 is now up! Give a listen and remember to like our page and follow so you get automatic notifications when new episodes go up!
Episode 6 is now up! Give a listen!!
https://www.facebook.com/Troll5R/?ref=aymt_homepage_panel
EPISODE 7 IS NOW UP!!!! ALL ABOARD THE HYPE TRAIN!!!! CHOOCHOOCHOOCHOO!
https://www.facebook.com/Troll5R/?ref=aymt_homepage_panel
On 02/06/2017 at 11:03 PM, Joe From Cincinnati said:But it created weird scenarios like, if you Nightmares'd the Wall, it couldn't resolve its trigger because at the "W" part of the WUA order, it was still blank. By the time Nightmares wore off during the "U" part of the WUA order, the opportunity to trigger the Wall had already passed.
... weird? That is the point of that interaction though?
I'd also like to point out that Troll5R is the ONLY podcast entirely hosted by L5R playtesters!
7 hours ago, Sparks Duh said:I'd also like to point out that Troll5R is the ONLY podcast entirely hosted by L5R playtesters!
That's almost correct.
Carl, Doug and I (
The Art of WarCast
) are all playtesters as well.
-tpl
2 hours ago, tobinator said:That's almost correct.
-tpl
Oh snap!!!
3 weeks in a row!! What is goin on here???
Episode 8 is up. Won't be one next week as I will be in Gencon playing in all the l5r events! Wooooohooooo!!!
hope to see a lot you there!
https://www.facebook.com/Troll5R/?ref=aymt_homepage_panel
Appreciate you guys answering my stupid question. A little disappointed in both of you for not recognizing a Red Dwarf reference. Looking forward to seeing Sparks in a few days!
After listening regularly, I can't wait to win GenCon*!
*Please no last place.
For your listening pleasure, Episode 9 of Troll5r is now up! We cover Gencon stuff. 2 special guests come on and talk about their well placing at Gencon. AND we cover the new spoilers for the first Dynasty pack!!!
EPISODE 10!!!!! We are in double digits now!
https://www.facebook.com/Troll5R/?hc_ref=ARTNaljEChRkLxXDHT5Gi2dVvahtfghpjrYCVVQd_MB560FxV8SapwTtEHDmWTsMl_g&fref=gs&dti=1015757681822883&hc_location=group
Episode 11 is now up!!!!!
Give a listen.
https://www.facebook.com/Troll5R/?hc_ref=ARRW5hV99-c2WVWsZDOHCdk90JQJP9I7Ju_O6rGnZ-oMKUtat5QRv6v6rxrE_MiArjg&fref=nf
Episode 12 'A quite fortnight' is UP!!!!!!
Check it out!
https://www.facebook.com/Troll5R/