| Register Now | |
| My Points | |
| My Games | |
| Page 2 of 2 (21 messages) | « First page... 1 2 |
Well, she could easily be in a dual faction deck and then it is no longer so suspicious. Bottom line is that it's a loophole of sorts and it would be cleaner without it being Forced. Not a big problem, just … untidy.
Without Signature
AGoT DC Meta said:
Huh. You got a point about that. I can only assume that the card likewise assumes that if you had a Cthulhu character in your hand, that you would want to play it instead of cheating and not abiding by the forced response.
I never even saw it as a problem until you mentioned it, only because I wouldn't dream of avoiding the forced response voluntarily. After paying 5 for her, I damn well better get a character in play. heh. But I guess you are right that there may be need to hold a character back. I agree with Dboeren, it should have just been a response.
I'm sure several others must have noticed this combo by now…
Turn 1: Drop any cost 0-1 weenie of any faction, play Disguised Threat - he turns into Padma
Whenever she dies, replace her with a cost 6 (or whatever you have) character from your hand. Naturally you may not have both cards on turn 1, but it's just as good on turn 2, etc… and since it only uses 1-domains it doesn't interfere with typical early Cthulhu resourcing of building up one "big" domain first.
Without Signature
Magnus Arcanis said:
I'm curious if they're trying to make it legal for Nationals at gencon.
That's my guess as well.
Hellfury said:
AGoT DC Meta said:
Huh. You got a point about that. I can only assume that the card likewise assumes that if you had a Cthulhu character in your hand, that you would want to play it instead of cheating and not abiding by the forced response.
I never even saw it as a problem until you mentioned it, only because I wouldn't dream of avoiding the forced response voluntarily. After paying 5 for her, I damn well better get a character in play. heh. But I guess you are right that there may be need to hold a character back. I agree with Dboeren, it should have just been a response.
I agree that Padma's poorly worded, and I'm not a fan of any card ability that should really require you to check your opponent's hand. Still, the main difference between a Response and Forced Response is that the Forced Response can trigger during the resolution of stories, immediately after Padma dies in the Combat struggle or if you win a story and use its effect to sacrifice all characters committed to the story, etc.
Without Signature
.Zephyr. said:
I think ST necronomicon might be there to get rid of other more scary necronomicons. I would not feel good about paying 3 and a card for one bounce that shrinks my table, but if you can destroy Cthulhus necro and maybe use it later it seems so much better.
One note on this - it is expensive, as you note, as it costs 3, a card, and a character. Its main advantage, however, is not getting rid of other copies of the Necronomicon - although that is nice - but because it can be triggered as an Action. That provides a big advantage over the Initiate of Huang Hun and Lord Jeffery Farrington, both of which are Operations phase only. The possibility of using the Necronomicon as a critically timed action - e.g., after characters have been committed at stories - is something of a strength. Also, it allows you to pick up (and hence replay) your characters, which can be nice if they have "when enters play" powers and you don't want to otherwise include the Initiate of Huang Hun or the Knight of the Outer Void.
| Page 2 of 2 (21 messages) | « First page... 1 2 |