|
Post by Slartucker on Jan 1, 2009 0:08:34 GMT -5
Well, what does everybody think? Do you like it?
One thing is that it completely transfigures opening theory, since DPP/PSD cannot loop, and both DSF/FOD and FFF/FOD are ineffective.
|
|
|
Post by xade on Jan 1, 2009 1:39:03 GMT -5
v. interesting.
The paramancer will be a lil pissy... that said, chaining bolts is out the window as well...
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Jan 1, 2009 1:40:06 GMT -5
What about turn count ("Five consecutive turns pass...") and haste\timestop? How do they interact?
|
|
|
Post by awall on Jan 1, 2009 3:05:02 GMT -5
Sorry, I should have specified. Generally, when I refer to "turns" I'm speaking of normal time turns. Any extra turns granted from Time Stop and/or Haste are counted as extensions of the previous turn. This is kind of how I see those spells as being designed to work, and it feels like the most natural way to handle them.
|
|
|
Post by maven on Jan 1, 2009 10:12:28 GMT -5
The rule certainly is interesting. We'll see how it plays out. It would seem to take the wind out of the sails of paramancers though. Doing that the very first month seems slightly cruel
|
|
|
Post by maven on Jan 1, 2009 10:34:19 GMT -5
Probably the thing more interesting to me than the rule is the pairings. Because clan membership isn't taken into account (and I understand why, given the unbalanced size of the clans), it can be possible for a clan to stack the deck. For example, Vermont plays three people from his clan this month. If all three conspired to fix those games in Vermont's favor, he could gain enough points that his other two wouldn't matter much.
Please note, I don't really think Vermont or the Isle would really desire the win enough to fiz the games, but I wanted to point out the possibility. Next month it could be Dubber playing most the Black Rose, and we all know how devious Dubber is (wink, wink)
|
|
|
Post by Slartucker on Jan 1, 2009 10:43:01 GMT -5
Note however that games played against your own clan members have limited impact. They affect intra-clan rankings and they do affect the High Champion title -- however, the High Champion doesn't choose the new rule, the High Clan does. Games against your own clan have no impact on Clan Scores or Versus Scores.
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Jan 1, 2009 11:26:23 GMT -5
I have another question about rule.
Do I understand correctly that 1) in 'limitation' part of rule by 'once you cast a mindpell' you mean 'once you complete a mindspell and target it at a player or monster'. I.e. if a mindspell got countered\dispelled\mirrored or clashed with another mindspell, you still have to wait 5 turns or cast other 2 mindspells before casting it again? what about charming a monster that was not summoned (does that count as casting at nobody?)? 2) for purposes of 'scoring' clashed mindspells doesn't count either?
|
|
|
Post by mikeEB on Jan 1, 2009 12:29:52 GMT -5
I have a more serious question. If you land a permanent disruption, do you need to finish it in 2 turns or surrender?
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Jan 1, 2009 12:36:19 GMT -5
mikeEB you still cast disruption once, it is just it's effect that is permanent. so there is no problems for permanent enchantments with this rule.
|
|
|
Post by awall on Jan 1, 2009 12:50:00 GMT -5
@bio: 1) Yes, you still have to wait five turns or cast two other mindspells even if your first one clashed/got countered/etc. 1b) Casting at a monster that is not summoned is NOT the same as casting at nobody. Therefore, yes, you do have to wait 5 turns or cast two other mindspells before you can repeat it.
2) For purposes of scoring, clashed mindspells DO count as having been cast (for the +3 points for casting all 6 in sequence) but do NOT count as having successfully hit your opponent with them (for the +1 point for each mindspell you hit with).
|
|
|
Post by awall on Jan 1, 2009 13:01:26 GMT -5
Another clarification: To be most in line with the way the game already works, I believe the most straightforward thing to do with Magic Mirror is: Player 1: PSDF (target Player 2) xxxx
Player2: xxCW xxCW Player 1 gets credit for having cast Charm Person. Player 2 gets credit for hitting his opponent with Charm Person. This is in line with the fact that Magic Mirror seems to transfer ownership of the spell to the caster of the mirror (i.e. Player 2 will be the one choosing the charmed gesture, not Player 1).
Does this make sense, or do people feel this isn't the best way to handle Mirror?
|
|
|
Post by Slartucker on Jan 1, 2009 13:19:48 GMT -5
Ah, I knew I forgot a clarification. Thanks for remembering that one awall.
|
|
|
Post by maknud on Jan 1, 2009 18:32:54 GMT -5
For the 6-in-a-row, does PSDD cast at yourself/opponent qualify, or only at a monster? I assume PSDF at a monster is good for both the +1 and the +3?
|
|
|
Post by awall on Jan 1, 2009 18:48:44 GMT -5
For the 6-in-a-row, does PSDD cast at yourself/opponent qualify, or only at a monster? I assume PSDF at a monster is good for both the +1 and the +3? PSDD at yourself (or an opponent) counts as casting it, both for purposes of disabling it/re-enabling other mindspells and for purposes of the 6-in-a-row bonus. However, it does not count as successfully hitting with it. PSDF is works similarly; casting it at a monster satisfies the requirement for casting it, but NOT for successfully hitting with it (even if you used the PSDF to do something useful like block a charm).
|
|