| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
Slade7170
Sneak
123 Posts
    
 | | 06/12/2006 1:07 PM |
| This probably won’t go anywhere, but I have put some thought and effort into it so wanted to share.
Drider Sorcerer. Anyone who has been playing for a while knows the agony of the slow games this piece caused. The only CE piece that was perhaps more ubiquitous in CE bands was the Orc Warrior.
Just to recap, here are the stats:
Drider Sorcerer
CE Large Aberration
Rare; 30 Points; Level 6; AC 17; 45 HP
Melee: +6 (5 + Poison)
Ranged: +5 (5)
Conceal 6; Poison (5 damage whenever poisoned creature activates; DC 16); Spell Resistance
Sorcerer Spells 2nd -- [][][] baleful transposition (range 6; any two creatures switch position; DC 14; Creatures may voluntarily fail this save.), blur (touch; target creature gains Conceal 6), 3rd -- [][][] lightning bolt (line; 20 electricity damage; DC 15)
That was GoL, that was 2004, that was set 4. In current play the Wardrummer is perhaps even more common in CE bands than the Drider ever was (cheaper and far more overarching abilities).
It just seems…. Almost funny.. that we have one figure banned out of 560. In this age of Sacred Watchers, Aspects of Kord, FB’s, HH’s, Beholders, and yes, Wardrummers. Does it still need to be banned? I am leaning towards no. Does it slow down games? Perhaps it will, but the current environment is far far different. I mean, no speed 2, no tiles, even have Counterspell coming in WotDQ, and it looks like it will be able to counter baleful transposition.
I completely 100% agree with the decision to ban it then, it was (IMO) the right call. But literally 300 figures in all their myriad glory have been released since then. I say un-ban it. The game itself has passed it up. Try it for yourself perhaps, in unsanctioned play. I tried it once and will likely test more soon. It’s not the bane it used to be, though still a very aggressively costed figure. Couatl’s basically all but negate it’s lightning bolt (not to mention Dragon Shrine and far more hitters with immune electricity). Blur is good, but with blind-sight and fight abounding.. not so much anymore. Speed and flyers with immune or resistance electricity are pretty common too, Rikka for instance would chew a Drider to pieces (not to mention, Justice Archons, Sword Archon, HH’s, Archmage, or Sacred Watchers).
Baleful Transposition. He might get to use it once. Maybe, before a number of creatures in any number of warbands gets to him. 30 points spent for an even odds shot of getting off that one keynote spell? Some will take that chance, some will appreciate the 30 points killing or routing the Drider will net them.
I have put the stats below, would appreciate your thoughts. We have accepted it as banned for so long, it is almost a habit. I hope we can break the habit sometime in the future (next floor rules for instance).
One final note, I am not saying that Drider Sorcerer is not an excellent figure for it’s cost and abilities still. I am just saying that the environment and metagame have perhaps advanced enough that we don’t need to ban it. That we can be that one great mainstream collectable game that has no banned list.
Have a great day!
Slade7170
| |
| |
| Knight of Argenis
Corim Danex
Warlord
6842 Posts
West Valley City, Utah
| | 06/12/2006 1:15 PM |
| | Nope. It should not be unbanned. | |
"Look to God and live." Alma 37:47
Vindicated Champ of Hippogriff (Arcadian Hippogriff) and Uncommon Horse | |
|
robby
Sergeant
918 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 1:16 PM |
|
I don't think the current metagame has addressed what seemed to be the ultimate reason the Drider was banned - the time of play issue. Moves have been made (8 figures, maps, OOC rules) to speed up the game. Bringing back the Drider, IMO, is a step backwards from that.
Imagine a pair of Driders and an HGB, and the time that player would spend plotting and adjusting so that he could transpo the HGB up 12 squares, hit twice with him, then transpo him back. Yuck.
| |
To the list with you!
Email: robby.anderson@yahoo.com | H/W List | My Trade Interface | Reference Thread/Completed Trades
| |
|
Sammael
Underboss
1881 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 1:20 PM |
| Drider Sorcerer is certainly not as powerful in today's metagame (whatever it is [)]) as he was before the banning. However, as stated, the main reason for his banning wasn't power - it was the innane amount of time spent to calculate optimal transposition scenarios. Although maps may have alleviated that problem somewhat, it is my belief that Drider Sorcerer would still slow the play down significantly.
He shouldn't be unbanned. | |
Hypethetical Blood War Set List | Champion of the Gelugon | Vindicated Prophet of Blood War
Ha 69/80 | De 60/60 | Ar 57/60 | GoL 72/72 | Ab 60/60 | DK 60/60 | AF 60/60 | UD 59/60 | WD 57/60 | WDQ 3/60| BW
Total DDM Count: 1037 | No chance of finishing the set | Will finish the set | Set | |
|
PatEllis15
Commander
4463 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 1:20 PM |
| Yep, its the play speed out our of faction abilities that caused it to be banned, not it's cost effectiveness.
I don't think enough has changed to warrant revisiting the issue. Things have only just gotten back to a point where most games can finish on time, or well on their way...
Pat E | |
"Games evolve. Otherwise we'd still be pushing rocks around the dirt. What do you think the cavemen said when some dude showed up with sticks?" - Chairman7w | |
|
Gloom_
Sergeant
583 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 1:30 PM |
| | I thought at the time that it should be un-eratta'd (so that allies could not voluntarily fail). i still do. Uneratta'd I see no reason for it to be banned.. | |
| |
|
nyjastul69
Commander
2731 Posts
Rhode Island
| | 06/12/2006 1:32 PM |
| | IIRC the designers also didn't think it fit the flavoe of CE as well. | |
| |
|
Felagund
Sergeant
922 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 1:34 PM |
| | I agree with those who have said that nothing has changed. The reasons for banning it still stand. | |
Champion of Gnomes | |
|
Benimoto
Underboss
1125 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 1:38 PM |
| | If the next set of floor rules had better rules for time enforcement (although I don't know what those would be) then I could see un-banning the Drider. Right now, maybe. Perhaps if there were any kind of good way to give him a probationary period, to see if he still causes the problems he did. | |
Champion of the Rakshasa. Check out my Mini Terrain Maker, or my new Dungeon Map Maker (under development). | |
|
Username
Warlord
5692 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 1:53 PM |
| I say release another drider instead!
[:D] | |
Originally posted by Schooly_D
Username - he deals in minis
Champion of Lhesh Haruuc Shaarat'kor | |
|
millygoat
Warrior
297 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 1:54 PM |
| Ayup, even in today's enviroment you still see games that get in only a couple of rounds. Adding a drider into that again could be icky.
I've always thought they should just release a Drider Epic Card so that people can still get some use out of the mini.
| |
Jason Kean
Champion of the Entropic Reaper
Strong Advocate of the Lich Necromancer (Viva Lichdom!)
Winter Fantasy Vintage Winner (go go umber-hulk pull) | |
|
Dordledum
Commander
3463 Posts
Netherlands
| | 06/12/2006 2:11 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Slade7170
one figure banned out of 560.
572 (632 after WotDQ).
on topic: I'd like to see the Drider unbanned, but that's just because I dislike the entire concept of banning a figure. My opinion is not formed from an arguable point of view.
D.
| |
Member of the Bearded Devils
Champion of the Huge Spider (WotDQ 46/60), A New Umber Hulk (DoDe 57/60), and the Orog Fighter! | |
|
Brimulk
Sneak
162 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 2:23 PM |
| I think if they changed the description of the spell, that they could un-ban it. Either of these two descriptions would significantly lower the time it takes to use the spell:
Baleful transposition - (range 6; swap closest ally and closest enemy creatures. If either creature would not fit in the swapped space, the spell fails. If the enemy succeeds at the DC save, the spell fails; DC14)
OR
Baleful transposition - (range 6; two closest enemies swap positions. If either of the enemy creatures succeed against the save, the spell fails; DC 14)
Basically, this takes the 'swapping allies' aspect out of the spell, which is what seemed to take so long. Also, it takes some of the selection out, as they have to be closest figures, rather than any figure in the range 6. | |
Vindicated Champion of Green Slaad
Champion of the Feyr
Correct Unhallowed Called Shot - Bone Naga
Night Below Called Shot - Skulk | |
|
Slade7170
Sneak
123 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 2:38 PM |
| To be more precise (thoguh I had thought it apparant, I was obviously incorrect). I have been specifically referring to 200 point play, hence did not include any Huge figures in the numbers. So, 560 and 48 more (608) from the next set.
Thanks!
Slade7170
quote:
Originally posted by Dordledum
quote:
Originally posted by Slade7170
one figure banned out of 560.
572 (632 after WotDQ).
on topic: I'd like to see the Drider unbanned, but that's just because I dislike the entire concept of banning a figure. My opinion is not formed from an arguable point of view.
D.
| |
| |
| 
Most Edumacated
zenthrus
Warlord
5132 Posts
SLC, UT
| | 06/12/2006 2:40 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Felagund
nothing has changed. The reasons for banning it still stand.
Yup. Drider will still slow down gameplay too much, it's abilities are still out-of-faction, and it's still slightly undercosted. | |
Knight Warlord a.k.a. Commander (#32) in only 6 months. Where's my pie?
Champion of Dwarven Thunderlashers
Knight of the Large Dire Chicken
Have/Want List
Trade References | |
|
Slade7170
Sneak
123 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 2:43 PM |
| I could imagine that (despite it being 138 out of 200 points), I could also imagine a half dozen commonplace current bands that would not let that happen or would just smack it to death with relative ease since 60 of your points only exist to move 78 more.
I understand that both time and cost were the banning factors. with the former more than the latter. Anyone doing Driders in the current metagame would know from the start it was a crapshoot.
GAS, Zak Raks, Justice Archons, Sword + Sacreds, Beholder Bands, CG bands with the 31 point Scalespell Sorcerer (and especially including Rikka). I just don't see it as the bane it was with "only" 259 other figs..(most of them being CE and/or evil) to now with 300 figs later and 48 more coming soon.
It might slow things down a little as it came back into the environment, but I believe it would quickly be metagamed out of primary contention. What else will we have to do while going through the long wait for the next set? Could be interesting to test out.
I am not saying do it now, I am saying do it after WotDQ. Give it a trial, re-examine it at least. As for flavor, I can somewhat agree, but it seems like a piece that is chaotic as hell in what it does to the environment it plays in.
Anyway, opinions obviously vary, though I see some commonality out there.
I ask this one thing, who has tried one recently in the current meta? Like I said before, "Drider is banned" has become habitual, for myself too.
I am thinking of posting on the Vassal boards and see if some people can test it....
Anyway, thanks for all the feedback. Food for thought and then some.
I do not want to slow the game back down. It can be very slow as is, though much better with the new rules. However, it just feels odd to teach new players and say "Yeah, you can use everything...except that one fig from a set 2 years ago that is getting harder and harder to come by."
Have a great day!
slade7170
quote:
Originally posted by robby
I don't think the current metagame has addressed what seemed to be the ultimate reason the Drider was banned - the time of play issue. Moves have been made (8 figures, maps, OOC rules) to speed up the game. Bringing back the Drider, IMO, is a step backwards from that.
Imagine a pair of Driders and an HGB, and the time that player would spend plotting and adjusting so that he could transpo the HGB up 12 squares, hit twice with him, then transpo him back. Yuck.
| |
| |
|
Slade7170
Sneak
123 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 2:50 PM |
| Interesting, though perhaps it would be simpler (as said above) to un-errata the existing text. So allied creatures would have to make the save roll and it would not work even half the time in most cases.
Original Text: baleful transposition (range 6; any two creatures switch position; DC 14)
Errata'd text: Add the following text after the save DC in baleful transposition -- "creatures may voluntarily fail this save."
A lot of people mention out of flavor or out of faction..... I think that every faction has a few pieces that at least somewhat fit that description.
Anyway, thanks again all. I definitely got my question aswered, though not necessarily to full satisfaction. (No real current evidence that it would impact the metagame more than any other slow build played by a slow or methodical player.)
Slade7170
quote:
Originally posted by Brimulk
I think if they changed the description of the spell, that they could un-ban it. Either of these two descriptions would significantly lower the time it takes to use the spell:
Baleful transposition - (range 6; swap closest ally and closest enemy creatures. If either creature would not fit in the swapped space, the spell fails. If the enemy succeeds at the DC save, the spell fails; DC14)
OR
Baleful transposition - (range 6; two closest enemies swap positions. If either of the enemy creatures succeed against the save, the spell fails; DC 14)
Basically, this takes the 'swapping allies' aspect out of the spell, which is what seemed to take so long. Also, it takes some of the selection out, as they have to be closest figures, rather than any figure in the range 6.
| |
| |
|
Slade7170
Sneak
123 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 2:57 PM |
| I am a big fan of the epic Drider card idea.
Slow games are a problem that will have to be addressed in the future, Drider or not.
I recall the Drider games, slow painful thigns to play with and against. I don't see current games with the much higher figure speeds, known environment (maps vs tiles) and far more choices that can effectively deal with them being the same way. There would be an adjustment period of course, but I am wondering if something like 2 HGB's isn't even more disruptive than adding a drider?
Ok, that's my .02 cents and then some. I'm done now, I will shut up. LOL
Slade7170
quote:
Originally posted by millygoat
Ayup, even in today's enviroment you still see games that get in only a couple of rounds. Adding a drider into that again could be icky.
I've always thought they should just release a Drider Epic Card so that people can still get some use out of the mini.
| |
| |
| DDM Constructed Champion 2006
derry
Warrior
268 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 3:07 PM |
| Actually, I think changing the rulings on baleful transposition would have a big impact.
baleful transposition: [][][] range 6; any two creatures switch position; DC 14
Current Rulings
1. Target any creature within 6, nearest not required target
2. Friendly creatures do not have to make saves (even though not on card.)
When playtestested and when the Drider was first out, the rulings were as follows.
1. Target any creature within 6 (same as above)
2. Friendly creatures have to make the save
The uncertainty of getting transposed made this not as powerful, but two lightnings and everything else for 30 points was still efficient.
A possible change would be to make Baleful Transposition require that at least one enemy be targeted (but make a friendly creature not require a save.) This would thematically put it in the same area as the Evermeet Wizard's spell. This change would also provide interesting options but not take huge amounts of time (the real problem with baleful transposition currently.)
Evermeet Wizard: benign transposition [][] (range 6; two allies switch positions) | |
Member of the Low Post Count but High Post Content Society | |
|
yack
Commander
3321 Posts
Gatineau Canada
| | 06/12/2006 7:53 PM |
| | Maybe just time for a new drider(Us DMs would love one) [:D] | |
Champion of the Peryton
Vindicated Champion : Pit Fiend, Devourer
DW: Duergar Priest
RPG Only!!!! The Drumming Drunkn' DM | |
|
md3
Sergeant
704 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 8:20 PM |
| | I agree that the Drider slowed play, but I think it is time we should bring it back. | |
"You are not the sum of your miniatures."
| |
|
True_Blue
Underboss
2386 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 8:29 PM |
| | I'd be up to see him being used again. Would love to see Blur available for CE. I also dont buy into the out of faction logic, because I can point out several peices in each faction that dont fit "what they are". It happens. I just would like to use it again. Change Baleful Transposition, and be done with it. | |
Champion of a Knight of Takhisis/Knight of Neraka | |
|
ruhk69
Warrior
205 Posts
| | 06/12/2006 8:53 PM |
| | They should issue a new sanctioned card taking the baleful transposition out and replacing it with some other spell. Creating another Drider piece would also be great. Wizards, please do both!! | |
The Waterboy. Proud member of Team Amish. | |
|
Can of the Cave Beer
Commander
2838 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 12:27 AM |
| A new statcard would face serious issues regarding distribution and would just otherwise be a huge pain to make sure that a player had Drider Sorcerer 1.5 instead of just the Drider Sorcerer.
No, I'm afraid that the ship has sailed on my favorite eight-legged Aberration. It's time to just say "bon voyage" and let it be.
WotC needs, IMO, to just make a new Drider and call it even. [^] | |
Champion of the Werewolf Lord, Knight of Anything Duergar, and Squire of Things Gnollish
List reset with the start of previews for each new set...got Chainmail®? | |
| Knight of the
Round Table
Thenameless
Warlord
12507 Posts
The Fortress of Solitude
| | 06/13/2006 4:24 AM |
| It should never have been banned, so I'm in favour of its return to official play. Of the three main reasons (though only one is really the official one) that it was banned, I only subscribe to one of them.
1) Time consumption. If this is a problem, then use chess clocks in tournament environments. While I agree that recent game changes have sped up play, and allowed more 1 hour games to finish, still not all tournament games are completed in an hour.
2) It's broken. It never was. At its peak, it was working with what were the broken pieces: Eyes of Gruumsh, Ogre Ravagers, Orc Champions, Orc Warriors. Nothing could compete with the fighting power of these heavy hitters at the time - even now they're still very good, save maybe the Ravager. The Drider was fantastic support for these broken pieces, but a warband of four or five Driders wasn't going to dominate any tournament.
3) Out of faction flavour. This one I agree with wholeheartedly. As a fan of the chaotic good faction, it was a sinking feeling to compare the Drider's stats to any CG spellcaster at the time. It was better than any spellcaster CG (supposedly the faction of magic) had, and would still be better than most of CG's current spellcasters. | |
Over 270 successful online DDM trades. | |
|
Dagni
Sergeant
870 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 7:23 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Thenameless
2) It's broken. It never was. At its peak, it was working with what were the broken pieces: Eyes of Gruumsh, Ogre Ravagers, Orc Champions, Orc Warriors. Nothing could compete with the fighting power of these heavy hitters at the time - even now they're still very good, save maybe the Ravager. The Drider was fantastic support for these broken pieces, but a warband of four or five Driders wasn't going to dominate any tournament.
Actually, that's exactly what a 4 or 5 drider band would do - dominate a tournament... unless there was Spell Resist or lightning resist/immunes, in which case it'd roll over and die. Too matchup risky to show up much at all at tournaments... and who had 4 or 5 driders to try it out anyway? Triple Drider had success at the first Championships, though the band's final record was only 3-3.
The Drider was the most powerful unit in the game when it was banned sometime during set, hmm, set 6, actually. Sure, the Drider has some very specific abilities, and relies on synergy with other creatures, so Drider bands might not be very good right now, were the Drider unbanned. However, while I may or may not ever again use any of an Eye, Orc Champ, Red Samurai or Ogre Ravager in a band again, I'm pretty sure that the Drider would still show up in very nearly every CE band I make, even now, 5 sets later. But, really, only 3 sets after it was first banned.
Minor sidenote, with the Wardrummer's countersong, a couple Driders could still put the lightning hurt on a Couatl band.
Secondly, I don't think I'm in favor of unbans. These threads are going to pop up every new set anyway, why encourage it further by setting such a dangerous precedent? As has been pointed out, there's 560 figures to choose from, well, 559, I guess. Why do we need one more? The current state of the Drider is no different than the current state of the Human Cleric of Bane. Heck, I just meant that both are unplayable, though for different reasons, but now that I think of it, the Human Cleric of Bane is even banned too, in it's format. (Human Cleric of Bane is generally banned along with all summoners in Reverse Constructed.)
- Dagni | |
Proud member of the GRUUMSH fan club! | |
|
Dagni
Sergeant
870 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 7:25 AM |
| | (double post) | |
Proud member of the GRUUMSH fan club! | |
|
Phantom
Skirmisher
2 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 9:07 AM |
| | How can time of play be an issue with pieces like Archmage flying about. That may have been a good excuse then to say it was not the power that caused the issue it was the time involved playing the piece. I was at a recent qualifier and an Archmage band versus a LE Beater band had time called on the second round.....SECOND ROUND. That is a piece that is slow but not overly powerful, if time is the true cause of the ban then ban the Archmage or unban the Drider Sorcerer to be as equally slow a piece, if power was the issue then keep the Drider Sorcerer banned and don't ban the Archmage. | |
| |
|
XAos
Underboss
2413 Posts
London
| | 06/13/2006 9:24 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Phantom
How can time of play be an issue with pieces like Archmage flying about. That may have been a good excuse then to say it was not the power that caused the issue it was the time involved playing the piece. I was at a recent qualifier and an Archmage band versus a LE Beater band had time called on the second round.....SECOND ROUND...
That looks like a good case for banning the archmage to me.
As for the drider. whatever got it banned before is probably worse now. If only because transposing a HGB is a greater threat than transposing an Orc Champ. | | | |
|
Slade7170
Sneak
123 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 12:28 PM |
| Wow, so much I disagree with. Crazy. sorry Dagni, gonna have to call you on this.
3 wins, 3 losses is considered "had success." That kind of "success" if it were unbanned would quickly relegate it to second tier don't you think? Marut/Couatl/Bodyguard.... or a variant just for instance would scholl it regularly.
In a lot of the big tournaments it looks like you have about a 1 in 4 chance of facing one (MCB) Tri-HH's, another good shot of facing them. In fact, I would say close to half the warbands being posted from qualifiers would give a Drider band fits. Doesn't sound like a ratio that would encourage multi Drider builds, it's fairly cheap but not that much.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Dagni
Actually, that's exactly what a 4 or 5 drider band would do - dominate a tournament... unless there was Spell Resist or lightning resist/immunes, in which case it'd roll over and die. Too matchup risky to show up much at all at tournaments... and who had 4 or 5 driders to try it out anyway? Triple Drider had success at the first Championships, though the band's final record was only 3-3.
It's debatable whether it was the most powerful by the time set 6 came out. It is however, not debatable that it was perhaps the most disruptive at the time especially when being used by a methodical player.
However, speed 2 and tiles were in use then. I just don't see the same issues still in play. I do agree with the "Drider bands might not be very good right now..." statement.
A few test games would tell a lot. Also, a new set is so close, and has at least one piece (spellscale sorcerer) that compeletly nerfs the Drider (and would be very effective against many other warbands as well, so it would see heavy play) that it compelled me to post this.
quote:
The Drider was the most powerful unit in the game when it was banned sometime during set, hmm, set 6, actually. Sure, the Drider has some very specific abilities, and relies on synergy with other creatures, so Drider bands might not be very good right now, were the Drider unbanned. However, while I may or may not ever again use any of an Eye, Orc Champ, Red Samurai or Ogre Ravager in a band again, I'm pretty sure that the Drider would still show up in very nearly every CE band I make, even now, 5 sets later. But, really, only 3 sets after it was first banned.
Honestly, I have rarely if ever seen the wardrummer use that ability. Putting him within 6 of combat, to be attacked, stunned, killed. Well, perhaps in the endgame, but normally his other 2 beats would be used 95+% of the time in my opinion. HH bands would be amused by it though I suppose, as they started basing and killing Driders. (A joke)
quote:
Minor sidenote, with the Wardrummer's countersong, a couple Driders could still put the lightning hurt on a Couatl band.
Did it pop up in the last set? I didn't see it but I suppose it could have. It is not a dangerous precedent to have all figures playable. In fact, just un-errata'ing the Drider would likely balance it to most everyones satisfaction (so allies have to make the save as well and cannot fail automatically..as written on the card).
We just plain don't need anything banned in this game anymore, IMO. The game design, warts and all, is just too good for it now.
quote:
Secondly, I don't think I'm in favor of unbans. These threads are going to pop up every new set anyway, why encourage it further by setting such a dangerous precedent? As has been pointed out, there's 560 figures to choose from, well, 559, I guess. Why do we need one more?
You cannot compare a "House Format" ban with a Floor Rule ban. They ar ejust not even remotely the same thing. Reverse constructed is a neat idea, but not official (unless I missed an update, just skimmed the floor rules just in case..did not see it).
It would be a safe easy guess to say that less than 5% of the players in the game have ever played that format. It clouds the waters of the discussion to bring it up, the only officially banned figure in any offical format is the Drider Sorcerer.
I see what you meant though, but the Human Cleric of Bane is far and away an inferior piece to not just the Drider, but tens to hundreds of others. 57 points for 30 hit points and summoned creatures that will go away when it inevitably dies or routes.
quote:
The current state of the Drider is no different than the current state of the Human Cleric of Bane. Heck, I just meant that both are unplayable, though for different reasons, but now that I think of it, the Human Cleric of Bane is even banned too, in it's format. (Human Cleric of Bane is generally banned along with all summoners in Reverse Constructed.)
- Dagni
Thanks Dagni, have a nice day. No offense intended in my response, I just heavily disagree with a lot of your debate points.
Slade7170 | |
| |
|
Slade7170
Sneak
123 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 12:32 PM |
| Well, speaking of Archmage, I would not mind seing King's Road forest rules fixed or the map banned...but that is another topic. LOL
Part of the discussion has also been about fixing baleful transposition. Either by unerrata'ing it, so the HGB has a 3 in 4 chance of making the save and not going anywhere..for instance, or changing it more drastically (as Derry wrote).
Slade7170
quote:
Originally posted by XAos
That looks like a good case for banning the archmage to me.
As for the drider. whatever got it banned before is probably worse now. If only because transposing a HGB is a greater threat than transposing an Orc Champ.
| |
| |
|
robby
Sergeant
918 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 2:53 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Slade7170
Well, speaking of Archmage, I would not mind seing King's Road forest rules fixed or the map banned...but that is another topic. LOL
That I would not disagree with. And if the rules about Tranpo were changed (nerfed), I don't think the piece would be as problematic and I wouldn't mind seeing it in play.
But as the Drider currently stands, I don't want to see it back. Although it would be fun (once or twice) to pilot a 2x Drider, 2x Eye, Zombie White band.
| |
To the list with you!
Email: robby.anderson@yahoo.com | H/W List | My Trade Interface | Reference Thread/Completed Trades
| |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 2:58 PM |
| On the topic of archmage slowing play, I think there's probably an argument to be made there, although I like the piece.
Didn't an archmage game at one of the qualifiers only go 2 rounds? That's a little excessive, but also way slower than what seems to be the average in archmage reports.
I guess the question is, what is now considered a reasonable length for a game? The old rule of thumb in the tile days was what, 4 or 5 rounds? Do we expect all games to end before time in the 8 activation/maps world? 8 rounds? 7?
Knowing how long games are now "supposed" to run would be a good indicator as to what pieces are problems in the Drider sense. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
SneakyJoeKDB
Sergeant
593 Posts
Utah
| | 06/13/2006 3:08 PM |
| Drider should still be banned for the timing issue; however, the Archmage and Kings Road should not be banned. I played AM at my first qualifier and averaged 8 rounds a game. That 2 round game we all read about at the qualifier is an outlier and quite ridiculous if you ask me.
Somebody should have called a judge over for slow play. | |
"Like a thief in the Night"
| |
|
GiliusThunderHead
Sneak
99 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 5:23 PM |
|
While the Drider sorcerer might not be un-balanced in today's fuller selection of creature's and abilities, I do believe that un-banning something would be a mistake and set a bad precedent. It would be even worse if the reasoning behind it were as you stated, that it wouldn't be that great anymore etc etc... These decisions should not be made based on the current metagame, but on the way a figure effects the game on a whole, and I believe that this piece was banned for reasons other than "it's too powerful".
Also, I really don't think that a grand total of 1 banned creature is confusing for a new player either.
I'll also comment that I don't like the "King's Road" map either, for the very reason that it changes too many of the fundamental rules of the game. Maps should have terrain that adds thought and variation to tactical movement and placement of creatures, in King's road, the terrain is EVERYTHING as far movement and placement of your creatures. The terrain is dominant throughout the map and changes so much that is "RULE" everwhere else in the game, ie what constitutes cover, difficult terrain, AoOs, threatening spellcasters, LOS....... all this from a terrain type.. not good... It's as if some map maker overstepped his bounds!
--GiliusThunderHead | |
| |
|
Tried
Sergeant
501 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 5:30 PM |
| I too think that drider needs to stay banned, only because of time. There are tears in my eyes as i write this, though.
And the fact that Gil dislikes the king's road map, which unbalances the game cuz it changes the rules? This from the master of anarchy?
The irony is.........delicious. | |
Let it be. | |
|
neilasaurus
Sneak
134 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 5:30 PM |
| | I am not sure what people mean by unbanning setting a bad precedent. There is only one banned figure. If it set a precedent that other figures could be unbanned, um, what other figures? | |
| |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 5:41 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by neilasaurus
I am not sure what people mean by unbanning setting a bad precedent. There is only one banned figure. If it set a precedent that other figures could be unbanned, um, what other figures?
I assume the argument is that it would mean future bannings would always be constantly questioned and we'd have to read 23 threads per week about all of them, should they happen.
I'm not sure that I agree with the argument, though; MtG has banned and unbanned cards. Maybe their forums are flooded with people who have an axe to grind about the particular card they want back, though, I don't know. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
GiliusThunderHead
Sneak
99 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 5:48 PM |
|
It creates a wishy-washy approach to these things. Now, the decision to ban a creature is only the last resort, and we see that it is rarely done. If the mentality was, well, if we can think of way to fix it later, or worse "it won't be all that powerful in a few years" they may take the decision more lightly and ban more creatures.
I like the "carefully consider, make a decision, and then stick with it" mentality. Not, "well, it's seems like a good idea now, so we'll go ahead and do it, if it turns out to not be so great an idea, we can always reverse ourselves later".
Tried, your motivations are so transparent! Yeah, lets make maps that are little mini-games in themselves and that HEAVILY favor one type of unit over another... that way, map init is the most important roll of the game, isn't that a great idea?! (See Archmage 101.. map init is the most important roll of the game, according to players who use said creature)
When it comes to maps, keep it simple. That doesn't mean that a map shouldn't have some cool features, but the majority of the map shouldn't be made up of game-altering terrain.
Also Mr. Tried, I am an enigma, not to be fathomed by the drones of academia!!!!!!
Love my irony, revel in it! That's right.. you love Daddy's irony....
hehe,
GiliusThunderHead
| |
| |
|
DrX
Sergeant
408 Posts
| | 06/13/2006 6:40 PM |
|
Hey, Gil, watch what you say about us academic drones!
As for the Drider: if there were better guidelines for round or phase timing, and judges enforced it better, I can't see how it would cause any more problems than some other pieces for which placement is crucial.
| |
HW List: http://www.maxminis.com/hwlist.asp?user=DrX
References: http://www.maxminis.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=12409
| |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 | You must be signed in to participate in the
games. |