Some card ideals, need criticism
20 Jul 2014 15:10 #63780
by ReverendRevolver
Replied by ReverendRevolver on topic Re: Some card ideals, need criticism
Still see absolutely no benefit, amd several impedences here.
Your good point was the translating optional manuevers. Not a linguist, cant help, outside of abbreviating and adding rulebook notes.
Again, choosing a crypt cars instead of flipping the top one was my problem with the hunt thing.
James is valid that turbi Baron gains from it, but necro sucks so bad it still has potential.
"Shadow" was removed from mtg when it rotated initially because it decreased interactivity, and i feel the same about this concept. What about fae and wolves and aus/tha spirit trips all going to other reality layers? How many regions of Umbra neex to be around? Surely necro and wraiths need skinlands and shadowlands?
Its a vampire game thats already too complicated by rules. Adding more for no gain is bad.
Your good point was the translating optional manuevers. Not a linguist, cant help, outside of abbreviating and adding rulebook notes.
Again, choosing a crypt cars instead of flipping the top one was my problem with the hunt thing.
James is valid that turbi Baron gains from it, but necro sucks so bad it still has potential.
"Shadow" was removed from mtg when it rotated initially because it decreased interactivity, and i feel the same about this concept. What about fae and wolves and aus/tha spirit trips all going to other reality layers? How many regions of Umbra neex to be around? Surely necro and wraiths need skinlands and shadowlands?
Its a vampire game thats already too complicated by rules. Adding more for no gain is bad.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- ReverendRevolver
-
- Offline
- Antediluvian
-
Less
More
- Posts: 2436
- Thank you received: 407
Time to create page: 0.110 seconds
- You are here:
-
Home
-
Forum
-
V:TES Discussion
-
Expansion Sets & Card Ideas
- Some card ideals, need criticism