>Heh, just thought of another thing. Long Dark Reach costs 2 Nazgul from underneath TNaA, and yet only costs against the hazard limit from underneath HaEO! Arrrgh.
True, but this is itself is not unbalanced; stuffing your deck with the 7-9 requisite Nazgul for LDR is not a complete waste if LDR fails because these Nazgul are playable as very useful events. The 7-9 Dragon creatures, on the other hand, are most certainly NOT useful.
>One of my decks uses a combination of both TNaA and HaEO and Long Dark Reach, hence the reason I noticed this.
Doh! THIS is something I hadn’t thought of. (There’s always something.) Hmm. Still, does this create any bad balances? To use HaEo you must have a Dragon at home in play, which means a minimum of 4 in a deck to guarantee one out within a reasonable amount of time (2 turns); if you are also stuffing 7-9 Nazguls that makes about 12 half-creatures; plus the 3 TNAA and 3 HaE required… all to try and pull-off the LDR that you don’t want cramping your hand… hmm, I think you’re still right on this one, Jambo. Even with 6 haz events required it can still make LDR pretty powerful, I think, and more unfair. But YOU’VE played this kind of deck; tell us about it! I assume combining Dragons and Nazs makes for high playability and success with LDR? If so, yes, add LDR to both cards.
>Ok, thoughts on these? Long Dark Reach added to exceptions (it's the only way). I changed the free hazard down to one per m/h phase. It's a little fairer. Otherwise any Nazgul is going to come with Pale Sword and Fell Beast and only for the cost of one against the HL!
Actually, Fell Beast will always count against the HL. The CRF says this card must be played first, and resolve completely. Then, the Nazgul must be the first card played in the next chain. Thus, the Nazgul being enhanced is not targeted by Fell Beast until the next chain of effects. Furthermore, if we read TNAA, it says, “Once per movement/hazard phase, hazards targeting Nazgûl creatures do not count against the hazard limit. Discard when any play deck is exhausted,” and there is text on Fell Beast which says, “In additionally, target Nazgul…” but this text is merely referencing the word Nazgul, which is not a creature. End result: Fell Beast can never be a free hazard, unless you are playing it only for it’s first playability clause (extra strike). I mentioned this some pages back.
You hit upon the most powerful Nazgul combo, of course, but this combo requires an HL of 2, which means with one Nazgul and one Fell Beast against a small company, you can’t do anything else. I’m not saying that this isn’t necessarily balanced, but especially if this is the only Nazgul attack you pull off all game, it would be nice if some kind of fun hazard (beyond a keyability one) was actually playable! Given the above, and that Fell Beast counts as a haz, I would recommend we stick to the 2/per mh idea for playtesting.
Also, partly to keep things parallel with TNAA, but also because all playtesting results have suggested this card is really underpowered, we should keep the 2 per m/h on HaE as well. Dragon’s Breath is playable on very few dragons.
I’d love to have the 2 per/mh affect athomes too--just add “or at homes” to the card. Personally I think it’s fine to affect ahunts as well but I think several of us didn’t like the idea of encouraging these cards any more given their ease of play. (I don’t mind it thought: anyone who adds 3 HaE to a drop-and-draw deck that purely has Ahunts is wasting 3 card slots because the Ahunts will rarely get a chance to be enhanced. Anyone who is actually trying to make a deck that has a CHANCE of using HaE will be forced to add at least 2-3 Dragon creatures to the deck because these are the only ones compatible with the dragon-keyability cards, which call
for creatures.)
>Thorsten wrote:
I thought we established that discard upon empty only increases the recycling ability. Ok so now Fury/Scimitars are no longer a problem, but do you still want to be recycling TNAA each turn? I can also play Summons from under HaEO, so you want to be recycling that each turn? Just play HaEO and summons, discard HaEO and a cave drake 2@12, and then play them both again with third HaEO to repeat the trick each turn. Who needs Dragon boosters anyway when you have Summons?
Thorsten, I might be missing something in your explanation, but because of timing rules it’s not quite as easy to recycle HaEO as you suggest. Okay, so you play your first copy of HaEO with only Summons attached, then play Summons off of it, discarding HaEO. You play a Cave-drake on Summons and attack easily enough, discarding Summons. You draw up your second copy of HaEO, and play it, and recycle your first HaEO and Summons from discard pile to attach it. You play Summons, then you draw up your second Cave-drake for Summons, then attack, discarding Summons. With only one card on HaEO (the first HaEO copy), you know play it. Immediately, you must choose up to 4 cards from discard pile. You can grab that discarded Summons, sure, but you *can’t* grab the HaEo still on table with no cards attached to it, because that HaEO does not get discarded until the HaEO you are playing finishes resolving. So that’s the last play you’ll get out of Summons (until you draw your third HaEO); there is no such thing as “infinite” HaEO recycling with only 2 HaEOs.
Furthermore, in order to guarantee to easy discard of HaEO, you can never attach anything to it save HaEO and Summons. So you are also putting all your eggs into enhancing HaEO for a Summons-Drake strategy. Why should that not be a big deal? Well, if you’re going to stuff your deck with three HaEOs that do nothing but recycle Summons, **why not just stuff your deck with 3 Summons**??
>btw.@Memories Stolen. Your average dragon is 2@15, your average char 4/8. Even with 2x Memories he'd be 2@12, so your average char would have to roll more than average to even tie. Either way, with unlimited hazards it's easy to compensate for Memories' loss of prowess.
My main point about Memories Stolen should have been that the most easily playable creature is a Cave-Drake. Multiple Memories Stolen on a Cave-Drake is not too broken, is it? (That takes up 3 SB slots too if you want 3 copies.)
>I thought about chopping out Prowess of Age entirely. There's Dragon's Desolation, Prowess of Age and Prowess of Might and the latter two won't see the light of day if Prowess of Age is allowed for half its function. Plus it would save us some space.
It saves space, but at the expense of card combos. Prowess of Age with HaE allows for a possible (but still difficult to pull off) double play of this card (if you have a second HaE) with only one copy, which is pretty cool to try for. Dragon’s Desolation is SO necessary in a HaE deck already. Prowess of Might admittedly looks weakest at first glance, but this is the only card (isn’t it?) that can possibly screw over the body check for a KuTM deck (and can be played multiple times with 2 HaE), so there’s some use there, though admittedly this is still the weakest card.
--Frodo