This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.

How should the CC deal with Raise the Stakes?

Find a way to "fix it" as an ante card.
5
13%
Redesign it to respect the story but with new mechanics.
9
24%
Leave it alone as part of history.
24
63%
Other (please elaborate with a reply).
No votes
0%
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#560800
BCSWowbagger wrote: Sun Aug 29, 2021 7:53 pm
Besides, Decipher was right: you get a card, in a pack or in a printer, you should be allowed to play with it. It feels bad to have a card you like that is gone indefinitely-- much less forever. Even if you have to play it with errata, that's better than not playing with it at all ever.
Given some of the more notorious errata, I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with this one. Hard.
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#560807
Smiley wrote: Sun Aug 29, 2021 7:38 pm I hear the words "zero ban list" all the time and I don't get it! It's a tool to balance the game. If you take it away you remove a tool that's useful.
A ban list is a good tool for balancing the game. But I like it as a temporary "time out" to protect the game until we can fix the card, not as a permanent place of exile.

I get the argument that a card on the ban list isn't hurting anything, especially in the virtual era, so what's the harm of leaving things there indefinitely? (I'll point out in passing that the same argument can be made about making a broken link that's never fixed -- it's not hurting anything, so who cares?)

I suppose I'm a completist, and leaving loose ends dangling just doesn't sit right with me. We've got a card depicting a classic TNG moment and the potential for a good story, and it's a shame to let it linger on the ban list forever just because Decipher didn't anticipate how the game would evolve. I imagine I'm not the only one that feels an itch when a collection is incomplete (CCGs are magnets for such people), but I fully admit it's an aesthetic preference rather than a gameplay-driven one.
User avatar
 
By Boffo97 (Dave Hines)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Retired Moderator
#560808
Of course, as mentioned elsewhere, zero ban list can't happen for OTF. The cards that became rules have to stay banned. Unless you want to errata them to something completely different, which then dramatically changes Open.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#560817
Armus wrote: Sun Aug 29, 2021 7:59 pm
BCSWowbagger wrote: Sun Aug 29, 2021 7:53 pm
Besides, Decipher was right: you get a card, in a pack or in a printer, you should be allowed to play with it. It feels bad to have a card you like that is gone indefinitely-- much less forever. Even if you have to play it with errata, that's better than not playing with it at all ever.
Given some of the more notorious errata, I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with this one. Hard.
How so?

I agree that errata can fail. I'm an advocate for re-errata'ing failed errata to be less bad. Q is the first item on my list (and I assume everyone's list).

But even a highly attenuated card that you are legally allowed to play seems like less of a feel-bad than an awesome card you're not allowed to play at all. The Q errata makes me sad. The Red Alert! ban makes me much sadder.
Rachmaninoff wrote:I get the argument that a card on the ban list isn't hurting anything, especially in the virtual era, so what's the harm of leaving things there indefinitely? (I'll point out in passing that the same argument can be made about making a broken link that's never fixed -- it's not hurting anything, so who cares?)
I'd just like to add to this that the principle that the ban list is a temporary holding area is a very important part of its usefulness as a Design tool. If there's a risk that a card which goes on the ban list will never come off, there will be much stronger resistance to allowing any cards to go on in the first place. (Certainly from me.)

I feel like the Vulcan [Sch] deck needs exactly one more [Sch] to work really really well... and, lo, the [Sch] they need is sitting on the banlist, banned since 2018, and doesn't feel like it ought to be that hard of a fix if Balance knows the purpose of the card. That's a very tough feeling for me.
Of course, as mentioned elsewhere, zero ban list can't happen for OTF. The cards that became rules have to stay banned. Unless you want to errata them to something completely different, which then dramatically changes Open.
Like Rachmaninoff, I pretend that "cards with a [Ref] icon can't be played in this format" just means they all got seeded for free.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#560942
BCSWowbagger wrote: Sun Aug 29, 2021 7:53 pm Besides, Decipher was right: you get a card, in a pack or in a printer, you should be allowed to play with it. It feels bad to have a card you like that is gone indefinitely-- much less forever. Even if you have to play it with errata, that's better than not playing with it at all ever.
And yet, Decipher never did get around to making RTS playable - even while they kept pushing Premiere in OTSD, SD2, etc, etc, etc. They could have done a reprint-errata (like Phaser Burns) in any set.

So.. I don't think Decipher minded that particular ban overmuch? :)
User avatar
 
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#561223
The history tells a different story don't it? WotC started with banning card and they are still in print. Decipher decided to go a different route and the game is not in print any more. =/

I know it's a bit of a hard line to draw but it was a bad busniess and desing desission to not use ban/limitation/restriction/rotation as other games does and even the LCG of later years that wanted to go the same route was forced to either do a second edition or start rotation...
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#561933
What if you made a series of cards called "Raise the Stakes: ..." that let players bet on cards draws, mission attempts, battle outcomes, etc. while playing. Some ideas for names:

Raise the Stakes: Deal the Cards
Raise the Stakes: Shuffle the Deck
Raise the Stakes: Roll the Dice
Raise the Stakes: Blind Man's Bluff
Raise the Stakes: Misdirect
Raise the Stakes: Place the Bet
Raise the Stakes: Fold

You get to leave the original card alone while making some fun new cards that pay homage to it.
Vulcan Lander and its ability

What constrains this strategy is the number of c[…]

Ignoring point losses & Timing

I would be interested in the answer to this as wel[…]

Greetings 'trek fans! As discussed in our Februar[…]

1EFQ: Game of two halves

First: Rescue Captives is OP, there should[…]