Hi,

I agree with FFG's decision to ban VtHC from tournament play and I applaud their openness in detailing their rationalle. However I really think that they should have gone further. In their statement FFG detail some of the problems with the card, including :

Quote -

"Being able to move your opponent’s support cards as well with Visit the Haunted City warped the game, and created a card that could dictate the terms under which your opponent played. This is a design problem that should have been corrected."

"Multiple copies of Visit the Haunted City in play made it worse and were practically impossible to recover from."

"Visit the Haunted City undermined the core mechanics of the game."

"It was not enjoyable to play against, and mirror matches were almost exclusively decided by the luck of the draw."

"Even decks built specifically to control this card were far from sure things, which implies an unhealthy and unbalanced play environment."

"...we apologize for releasing Visit the Haunted City in such an unbalanced state."

So, FFG have banned the card from tournament play and rightly so. However 99% of games played around the world are not tournament games. Local groups playing friendly games, casual play and local leagues still want a balanced and fun game. Surely a local casual game with friends still deserves a game system that is not beset by the problems outlined by FFG above. I think that the card should have had either a significant nerf through errata or the ban should have existed for all play. Leaving the card unchanged for those games that are played outside the tournament scene implies that fun and balanced mechanics are only important for tournaments. I'd like FFG to aspire to deliver fun and enjoyable games in everything I play, whether its a luck-fest game of Talisman or a tournament game of W:I.

They only can ban it for tournament play because they can control it.

If you and your friends do not like it, just do not play with the card.

Many people follow the tournament guidelines even in casual play, so why don't you do that and ban the card? You don't need anything from FFG to change casual gaming according to your preferences, and you don't need to feel bound by any rules or errata they issue (or don't issue). Restrict, ban any cards you like, change any rules you like. It's your game, play it in whatever way is the most fun for you and your partners. Get rid of Visit the Haunted City, or houserule it yourself.

I understand that but having to have a conversation with every Empire player about whether he agrees to ditch his most powerful card dosn't reflect well on the state of the game. If my opponent wants to play with VtHC I have a game to look forward to that is broken by all the problems outlined by FFG above.

If we simply take the approach of "don't use it if you don't like it" then it really doesn't matter if any game system is released in any sort of balanced or broken state because we can all just house-rule our way out of the problem. That's not what I want from FFG.

Others may resent the fact that they have bought a card that needs torn up and thrown away but that's such small beer in the scheme of things that it hardly matters.

I'm sorry you're in this situation. Try to convince people that following the tournament rules (the restricted and ban lists) improves the casual game experience. If everyone is still running the Core 9 in every deck, every Dwarf deck has them and Mining Tunnels and Reclaiming the Fallen, and every Empire deck uses VTHC ... that's just going to get boring. All the gaming groups for CCGs/LCGs I've known automatically followed the tournament rules, because we never made a difference between "rules" and "tournament rules", and that was simply out of common sense. Cards get restricted and banned for a reason, and following these guidelines makes the game better on every level.

I'm lucky enough to play with a really nice bunch of guys so I'm not saying that it is a problem at the moment, but I really don't want to have to ask an Empire player to nerf his deck just to suit my perception of what should be in or out of the game. It really seems strange that after six updates of the Errata/FAQ the card remains untouched outside tournament play. Why don't FFG just errata the card to death, or just eliminate it altogether?

Umm...do they follow the restricted list? If so, then they shouldn't have a problem with the banned list.

mkultra said:

Well no, as the restricted list is also a tournament format rule and is also outside of the normal game rules in the same way as the banned card. If the restricted list and the banned card are both rules that help sort out the problems outlined by FFG then I think that they should be brought into the core rules by an errata, not left outside of the game rules.

If you check the very first paragraph of the FAQ, you'll find it tells you that "all official play and tournaments" are to use this document to supplement the core rules, which casual play and your local leagues aren't. It doesn't say you have to use it for casual play, since FFG can't enforce anything for casual play of course. In my view, if you're just using some parts of the FAQ (like erratas) while ignoring others (like the restricted and banned lists), you are already following that "don't use it if you don't like it" approach you don't want to follow. And an errata to VTHC wouldn't help you, since anyone could just claim erratas don't have to be considered in casual play.

To the Paleking,

Where do you play at? I will send a bruiser to make sure everything is straight and fair play. Gota hurry though because NFL is about to start.

Curator said:

Cheers for the offer but I live in Scotland - everyone is a bruiser here!

PaleKing said:

Part of the MacDonald clan here. Seriously. Here is my crest. Forever, right wing of Robert the Bruce and the Scottish army. I wasn't aware that Warhammer: Invasion was part of the Scottish Games.

By sea and land.

I love this thread!

the original post reads like an article from the onion.

i've never read anything else on this forum that's made LOL this hard.

f7eleven said:

I have to agree. I can't tell if this is seriously being argued or if the OP is laughing under his breath.

Nope, I'm serious, but I'm not going to die in a ditch over it. I've been a gamer for 30 years and in that time we've had plenty of discussions across plenty of game systems about whether certain mechanics/units/rules are broken or need an errata. This is just another example of that so I don't quite get why this would make anyone "lol this hard".

Maybe I've been misunderstood. I'm only making the point that in my opinion FFG did half a job by banning the card for tournaments but leaving it unaltered for other play in their erratas.

Doc9 said:

PaleKing said:

Listen man, we all have desires for this world, but we need to accept that somethings will remain. I thought you were joking too.
Some of the things I wish were changed but won't be are:

I want Blizzard to cater to the Warcraft fans and less to the world populace.

LOL should have many more maps and gameplay aspects, but instead they are afraid of failing so they just make more champions.

I want a south american Bane and a classy catwoman in The Dark Knight Rise.

I want FFG to stop producing errors.

I want DnD to stop with all the G** D*** books. 3 player's guides REALLY!?!

I want Call of Duty fad to be done with.

I wish Champions Online didn't cater to furry fandom.

etc.

Life is too short too waste time not having fun and instead griping about the issues that bug you, so try to just live the funnest life you can.

Still not sure what you're on about.

Just listen to some Bob Marley...

Cuz everything little thing's going to be alright.

I agree with all that, so I guess there's not a lot of anyone posting thoughts about the game at all?

I think that you may believe I'm angrier than I am. I'm not angry or stressed about it, it's just a view on what I'd like to see in the next errata. Surely we are allowed a view on errata?

PaleKing said:

How angry or not you are doesn't matter. FFG doesn't listen at all to the customers. Sometimes they like to make you think they do but they don't. The only time they will reply is if you praise their work. If you are negative they will throw out a new edition of a FAQ. Regardless, you still will get nothing much more than that from them. Just ask the Descent players if they ever got that formal apology for the Quest Compendium being a complete waste of their money and well known other game designers time.

Here is how you need to picture this...

They are Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory. You are the outsider. In fact that is exactly how I picture FFG now days. Never know what is going on in the inside. For all we know they do have Loompas.

But the Chocolate sure does taste great...right?

Best. Thread. Ever.

I think the issue is the fact that the OP takes issue with FF not laying down more strict rules for casual play. FFGcn not and will not make the restriction list or ban list official for casual play. That is something that each group can house rule for themselves. Hell, even the official rules can only be suggestions for how to play the game. You know why? Because FFG can not and will not enforce any of the rules outside of an officially sanctioned game. How could they possibly tell you how to play at home and then make sure that you play that way? Never gonna happen. I guess it's a matter of what you choose to complain about. I seriously thought that you might be joking because your complaint was actually very funny. Just house rule it. Or play with a group that plays by the FAQ's and updates. It doesn't seem to be that big an issue really.

No offense intended to anyone, but when I read this thread title, I actually thought....

"What? So you want them to tear up every copy of the card, pour gasoline over the tattered remnants, burn them, then plow salt into the earth so that nothing green will ever grow there again?".

They can't do more than ban it. How you play the game within the confines of your own homes walls is of course up to you.

Papa

Papa Khann said:

Nice Roman/Carthaginian reference there.

This thread is pretty silly, you want them to errata a card that they have banned ? That makes no sense, what is then to make anyone use the errata'd version. Nothing. FFG has no control outside of tournament play. Your group should just decide, use FAQ or don't use FAQ and move on from there.

FFG is an awesome company and listens well to their fans and stuff but even they cannot control casual play.

PaleKing said:

I think that somehow you and your playgroup are the only people in the world for which this is a problem. And that's why people think you are trolling. Like you said, if the cards are unbalanced for tournament play, then that seems like a pretty solid argument that you can put forth against an Empire player that wants to play VtHC. Its not just you "telling him not to use a card because you don't like it". Obviously if you use the ban list, you should also use the restricted list.