Name: Wheel of Fortune
Cardtype: Political action
Choose a Methuselah. Successful referendum means this card is put into play under the chosen Methuselah's control. During your untap phase, show your hand to all Methuselahs. If you have no master card in hand, give control of this card to another Methuselah; otherwise, discard all master cards, burn 1 pool for each card discarded this way and burn this card.
Art: a colossal symbolic wheel of fortune rolling throught hills leaving only rubble in its wake and leaving everything else unharmed.
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
I don't get the name, but it should properly hit MPA decks, while being an annoyance to other decks.
I am not sure I would prefer this over a KRC, but it can be tested.
> Ohlmann wrote:
> I am not sure I would prefer this over a KRC.
>
This. It takes 4 master cards in hand to deal more damage than a KRC. For a card with an opportunity cost, delayed damage and a risk to backfire, the reward is not nearly high enough. Add that several copies stack poorly since you are very unlikely to hit the same target two turns in a row.
With 2 pool damage per master card, it would be playable. It could also be a Sabbat vote: rebelling against the Methuselahs is thematically in line with the Sabbat.
2 pool per master mean you can do 14 pool damage max. It would be a random fluke, but no card should be able to randomly do that much damage without some kind of combo.
Maybe 2 pool in the limit of 8 burned pool, which is already extremely painful.
Also, we can count people having one master in hand on average. So, compared to a KRC, it would be 2 damage, no damage to yourself when at 2 player, and look at the hand of the player. So I would gladly replace half my KRC by this given that I love see the hand of other player.
> Ohlmann wrote:
> no card should be able to randomly do that much damage without some kind of combo.
>
Ancilla Empowerment already can. Having 7 masters in hand is even less likely than having 14 minions. Besides, you missed the part about making it a Sabbat vote. The game already has more than enough generic votes. Rather than yet another generic sucky vote than will never see play, make a good one with restrictions.
Seeing your prey's hand during his untap phase is nice, but not nearly as useful as seeing it during your own turn. It helps your grandprey more than you.
> Ohlmann wrote:
> I don't get the name
>
I suppose it refers to MtG's Wheel of Fortune, where everyone would discard their hqnd and redraw a full handsize (afair, the card is banned)
Comparing it to KRC is a bit a nonsense. If you want to deal damage, play KRC, Conservative or Ancilla.
If you want to see the hand of any Methuselah and discard all master cards of it (while dealing some damage), play this card.
I would probably add 1 or 2 copies of it in vote decks with not a lot of masters (in case it backfires).
As for the name: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rota_Fortunae
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
It's not a nonsense, because a dead player won't cause you trouble with his master. Also, both seeing the hand of a player and discarding card in it are reasonably minor effect - that's why you added damage on top of that I suppose - so I am unsure whether it make sense even against master-heavy deck. Still, it's would be worth trying it I think.
Maybe make discarded card not replaced before the end of the master phase, so it have more consequence to master-heavy deck ? One of the problem of the card right now is that the discard may very well not affect them at all, because they can replace discarded master with new drawn master, and/or retrive the important master via Anthelios if they draw an unadapted one. It would also prevent them from using Anthelios this turn.
> Ankha wrote:
> Comparing it to KRC is a bit a nonsense. If you want to deal damage, play KRC, Conservative or Ancilla.
>
It's not nonsense, because you have to gauge the hidden cost of the card. I could be playing KRC instead. Since I'm not, what drawbacks am I getting? Do the benefits outweigh those? Since it's quite a variable card, am I comfortable with (plucking numbers out of thin air) getting a poor card 90% of the time and an awesome card 10% of the time? (Say, Kindred Segregation could be an amazingly solid vote if everyone consistently had lots of costly library allies. But they don't.)
If the card strays too far from admittedly-fungible 'acceptable' parameters, it won't see solid play. It might see play as a prayer card (that one copy of Peace Treaty you include to piss off the .44 Magnum player). It won't be in a deck 4, 6, 8 times, and won't cause a significant shift in master card decks, because few people play it. Because they're just playing KRC or Parity Shift instead.
"Playing a Pentex on Una. It costs 2 pools.
The face on Una controler when he has to discard his own copy. It is priceless"
On the same level, playing it on your ravnos embrace predator who was carefully stacking his week of nightmare for the lunge (you can replace with pala grande).
The main interest of the card is too make sure that the chosen Methuselah will probably won't play any master card during his or her next turn (plus seeing his hand is nice). This goes well in a control deck (make sure your prey's plan is foiled by discarding a Sudden Reversal, a DI, a Haven Uncovered or Frontal Assault) or in an agressive deck (remove Blood Doll, Vessels and Villeins). You can even remove a Archon Investigation which is nice.
Additionally, there's some pool damage to keep the card interesting. Comparing the amount of pool damage has no sense imho, since it's variable and not the main interest (just like comparing the pool that a Banishment would cost to a player compared to a KRC).
This "why wouldn't I play KRC instead" argument is a bit fallacious to me. Vote cards are not necessarily meant to deal damage. I've never seen anyone ask "Why wouldn't I play a Govern the Unaligned instead of a Bum's Rush?".
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
You should not find that fallacious, because there is a limited number of political action you can cram in a deck. (or action at all for that matter). For example, I would better play a Govern than Thank for the donation on the idea that even when Thank For the Donation is useful (say, when someone contest my Eze), the action will be better spent killing my target. It's a bit of the same here, since the effect is pretty minor.
If the idea is to hope your target will not play any master, it will not work well against decks with a lot of master ; Anthelios alone kind of defeat it in MPA deck (less so with other, since you still gain one turn at the very least).
Against deck with few master but important one this may fare a bit better, but then the odds of doing nothing are a lot bigger too.
On it's face, this card is very, very powerful, and would be an auto-include in any vote deck.
I think its power level is very close to some of the most powerful votes in the game. Masters tend to be the most powerful cards, and people base their strategy on what masters they are going to play. If you think you're getting out Villein/Blood Doll/Pentex/Haven Uncovered/whatever next round, and then you're probably not, it's a huge swing in play. It's like sitting next to the Dementation bleed deck that packs 12 Suddens/Washes.
The pool damage is almost incidental, since the other effects are so powerful. Maybe 1 pool damage per every 2 masters discarded, rounded up?
A vote to look at someone's hand has never been done, but could be a decent vote unto itself.
It is a nice punishment for MMPA decks that is useful against non-MMPA decks.
It should be unique once in play.
I like the idea of changing the fluff so that it has to do with rebelling against the Methuselahs. That is what you are doing very literally - revealing the Methuselah's plan and taking away his ability to act. The idea of making it Sabbat only is very interesting, but I'm not sure I'm in favor. Technically the Sabbat is against the antediluvians, not the methuselahs (I think).
I like the idea of the vote. As I saw the subject I imagined a vote to look at other Meth's hands and thought "wow, a good new idea and also powerful". Getting rid of a.o.'s Master cards is even more powerful. Letting that effect cost also pool is over the top IMHO.
Master cards are a very important resource in VtES. An effect to look on one's hand AND discard them should be enough.
Baron of Frankfurt
I love the card! I would include one or two copies of this into most of my vote decks (if not all of them). The ability to look at a player's hand with the addition of disrupting their plans is certainly a very strong ability.
I am not too sure about the pool loss effect, since that might be a bit too much, but only playtest will tell if it is indeed so.
Seconding Aaron's suggestion to make it unique, maybe even a way to get rid of it once it is in play (either via a vote or action).
Suaku
Inceptor Asian Continental Championship
興っ
www.youtube.com/SuakuOz
> the1andonlime wrote:
>
> Seconding Aaron's suggestion to make it unique, maybe even a way to get rid of it once it is in play (either via a vote or action).
>
There should definitely be a way to remove it. I falsely thought the effect triggers once. If it stays in game a removal should get +1 stealth and I'd prefer a d-action. Hard enough to pass an eventual Second Tradition, a card most often played in combination with vote-decks.
Baron of Frankfurt
> Joscha wrote:
>
> > the1andonlime wrote:
> >
> > Seconding Aaron's suggestion to make it unique, maybe even a way to get rid of it once it is in play (either via a vote or action).
> >
> There should definitely be a way to remove it. I falsely thought the effect triggers once. If it stays in game a removal should get +1 stealth and I'd prefer a d-action. Hard enough to pass an eventual Second Tradition, a card most often played in combination with vote-decks.
>
iT DOES trigger only once.
> AaronC wrote:
> I think its power level is very close to some of the most powerful votes in the game. Masters tend to be the most powerful cards, and people base their strategy on what masters they are going to play. If you think you're getting out Villein/Blood Doll/Pentex/Haven Uncovered/whatever next round, and then you're probably not, it's a huge swing in play. It's like sitting next to the Dementation bleed deck that packs 12 Suddens/Washes.
>
You have seen that the card burn once you discard, so basically you lose 1 turn maximum, and 0 turn if you redraw another copy or can use Anthelios to retrieve it ? Because what you say don't make too much sense to be honest.
If for you that's one of the most powerful vote you have seen, I would suggest to look at parity shift or Alastor.
> Ohlmann wrote:
>
> You have seen that the card burn once you discard, so basically you lose 1 turn maximum, and 0 turn if you redraw another copy or can use Anthelios to retrieve it ? Because what you say don't make too much sense to be honest.
> .
>
To be honest, what doesn't make sense to me is the fact that you have the second-most number of posts on this forum after the VEKN rules director, but yet you remain completely anonymous.
Oh, and the fact that about 90% of your posts seem to be very negative.
So I guess we're even.
If people look at the number of post to see if someone is right or important, they are wrong. At best, they may look at it to see who is chatty. If they were an option to hide post count, I would certainly use it.
And, honestly, I believe the post I quoted to be way too optimistic, for the reason I exposed. I believe at the current state of the game, new cards should be few in number, and consequently have quite an impact each. Here, on the proposed form, I may test it and/or run 1-2 of them, but it's not something I would rely on in any case.
It also seem to hurt significantly more decks with relatively few master than deck with a lot, both because of Anthelios and the fact you have better odds to redraw what you have lost.
> Ohlmann wrote:
> If people look at the number of post to see if someone is right or important, they are wrong. At best, they may look at it to see who is chatty. If they were an option to hide post count, I would certainly use it.
>
> And, honestly, I believe the post I quoted to be way too optimistic, for the reason I exposed. I believe at the current state of the game, new cards should be few in number, and consequently have quite an impact each. Here, on the proposed form, I may test it and/or run 1-2 of them, but it's not something I would rely on in any case.
>
> It also seem to hurt significantly more decks with relatively few master than deck with a lot, both because of Anthelios and the fact you have better odds to redraw what you have lost.
>
I seldom agree with you, but i feel you are right about current gamestate.this card didnt awe me. I didnt post about it. The premise is bad, because mmpa decks dont care aboit pool damage, the gain plenty, and they recur masters with anthelios and tablets.
Seeing hands and discarding is hot. Im just not impressed by this card. Maybe runable as a one of if at all.
> ReverendRevolver wrote:
> I seldom agree with you, but i feel you are right about current gamestate.this card didnt awe me. I didnt post about it.
>
If you don't like an idea, in most cases, just don't post anything! It works for me - I don't feel the need to attack each and every idea that I dislike, unlike Mr.(Ms.?) Ohlmann.
Ohlmann continues to dodge to the question as to his(?) identity. So many posts in this forum by him, and yet I don't know who he(?) is, unlike the other frequent posters here. There is no good reason to remain anonymous in this community forum.
Why should anyone take your frequent critiques seriously at all, Ohlmann, unless we know who you are, the kind of groups you play in, and what kind of decks you've added to the TWDA? Where are your card ideas for the rest of us to tear down?
> AaronC wrote:
>
> > ReverendRevolver wrote:
> > I seldom agree with you, but i feel you are right about current gamestate.this card didnt awe me. I didnt post about it.
> >
> If you don't like an idea, in most cases, just don't post anything! It works for me - I don't feel the need to attack each and every idea that I dislike, unlike Mr.(Ms.?) Ohlmann.
>
> Ohlmann continues to dodge to the question as to his(?) identity. So many posts in this forum by him, and yet I don't know who he(?) is, unlike the other frequent posters here. There is no good reason to remain anonymous in this community forum.
>
> Why should anyone take your frequent critiques seriously at all, Ohlmann, unless we know who you are, the kind of groups you play in, and what kind of decks you've added to the TWDA? Where are your card ideas for the rest of us to tear down?
>
For the record, im not anonomous at all, and you can find my decks in the tlda, if we had such a thing
Seriously though, ohlmann, who are you? Have we played?
> ReverendRevolver wrote:
> The premise is bad, because mmpa decks dont care aboit pool damage, the gain plenty, and they recur masters with anthelios and tablets.
>
Hm, IMHO no deck can ignore pool damage, even if it recoups much.
And Anthelios helps you to gain back lost important master cards, true, but you are hampered by the fact, that you most likely have fewer master cards in your hand after this pol. action.
I think this action can be a pain in the, erm, side.
Baron of Frankfurt