Class restrictions

The last game i played, a hunter player stole lone wolf with an armor and played it. Despite of the narrative nonsense, i'm not against stealing things, even if cards that switch cards (dimension ripper) just rip off the hand without effective strategy.
But i'm strongly against letting a character being able to use an ability of another class. If you find this cool, create a card that allows to take an additional class and use this second class abilities, but this open stealing is just breaking a game.

For the example above, it is hard to resist to hunter bows with a wulven deck, if it can steal a key card like lone wolf and regenerate as good as the wulven, there's no chance left for the lupus... yes, i know, i can destroy the card, i've done it anyway, but the experience choked me. As an elemental deck steals a class ability and plays it. i would rather have cheaper ∕ easier stealing cards for classes that steal and apply a class restriction, because in Shadow Era, there isn't a card for everything, each class have its logic, its edges and its hindrances, i think the best is to keep this logic on the whole level. class abilities are like armors and weapons, they would be used only by characters of the selected class.

Thanks for reading,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intrigger

The last game i played, a hunter player stole lone wolf with an armor and played it. Despite of the narrative nonsense, i'm not against stealing things, even if cards that switch cards (dimension ripper) just rip off the hand without effective strategy.
But i'm strongly against letting a character being able to use an ability of another class. If you find this cool, create a card that allows to take an additional class and use this second class abilities, but this open stealing is just breaking a game.

For the example above, it is hard to resist to hunter bows with a wulven deck, if it can steal a key card like lone wolf and regenerate as good as the wulven, there's no chance left for the lupus... yes, i know, i can destroy the card, i've done it anyway, but the experience choked me. As an elemental deck steals a class ability and plays it. i would rather have cheaper ∕ easier stealing cards for classes that steal and apply a class restriction, because in Shadow Era, there isn't a card for everything, each class have its logic, its edges and its hindrances, i think the best is to keep this logic on the whole level. class abilities are like armors and weapons, they would be used only by characters of the selected class.

Thanks for reading,

---

Read the first part. Just thought I'd say, by not being able to use class restriction, you would completely cancel cards out like Transference, Night Prowler and Dimension Ripper. And any cards to come relating to this future.

I think it should not be changed, rather the wording of the rules should be changed to "You cannot build a deck with cards not following your restrictions."

Well then you'll be sad to hear there are at least 3 classes that can steal, likely with another on the way. :)

Cheers

Finally a kindred spirit. But my friend we're too few to be heard, and in a world where democracy rules, the minorities have little chance to make a change.
To answer to Fiend's claim that some cards would be cancelled, I have to answer that stealing a card would still be better than discarding, because you have a 25-30% chance to be able to play the card, you prevent the enemy from playing a card that could change the game, and in the worst case, you can sacrifice it for resource.

To Fiend I say that you are misinterpreting what he is saying, not that I agree with him. You are saying that total removal of class restrictions is a bad thing, which I disagree with. But more to the point, he is just saying that if a hero steals a card and it happens to not be from his class he shouldnt be allowed to play it. But that is how it is right now. And it WOULD make transference worthless because all the other player will get to do is resource it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sorter

To Fiend I say that you are misinterpreting what he is saying, not that I agree with him. You are saying that total removal of class restrictions is a bad thing, which I disagree with. But more to the point, he is just saying that if a hero steals a card and it happens to not be from his class he shouldnt be allowed to play it. But that is how it is right now. And it WOULD make transference worthless because all the other player will get to do is resource it.

---

That's my point. =|

And at Anurak, I really have no response. Guess I didn't think it through enough :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fiend

That's my point. =|

And at Anurak, I really have no response. Guess I didn't think it through enough :P

---

So to that, good sir, I say remove class restriction totally ^^.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fiend

And at Anurak, I really have no response. Guess I didn't think it through enough :P

---

Actually Anurak didn't think it through well enough. I can't be bothered to go in to all the implications of changing it and just how crappy it would make any steal cards, but maybe you can convince Sisyphos to elaborate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rumsey

Actually Anurak didn't think it through well enough. I can't be bothered to go in to all the implications of changing it and just how crappy it would make any steal cards, but maybe you can convince Sisyphos to elaborate.

---

Sisyphus hasent even posted in the thread. O,o

I do agree that with class restrictions, some stealing cards should be modified (as they have been modified before, because the elemental abilities were too... uber ?). With rogues coming, nightprowler and such stealing abilities will grow up, so before all people play rogues in 1.26 as all people played elemental in 1.24, we can think about it no ?

There was a lot of debate about the first strike logic of Shadow Era, maybe some global changes have to be made for a better future.

And if all prefer open stealing, i'm agreeing with Sorter : delete abillities restrictions (and weapons / armors / class allies).

But the current gameplay emphasises to play 4-card series based decks with no risk and no surprise. (ok they can steal my must-be-played cards, no worries, i have another issues coming).

If they want to keep card stealing as it is, they should make it more expensive. Night Prowler costs 5 and could be destroyed in the next turn. Research costs 2 to play and 2 more for each card you draw (without reducing opponent's cards). Transference costs 3 resources and gives you a card, while at the same time takes away one from your opponent. I find transference too cheap for what it does.

Transference costs you a card as well. It takes a slot in your deck and does nothing but replace itself with a different (only possibly useful) card. This is the first time I've ever heard it referred to as OP, I've heard lots if arguments its not worth running (I tend to agree here) .

Conversely, this is the first time I've heard of research being considered a poor investment for the cost. Research is a fantastic card and increasing your card advantage any time you have 2 spare CC shouldn't be underestimated.

Frankly the only card I feel might have balance issues is prowler, for various reasons. All Gwen has to do is assert board control completely once and then play it and she has every chance of never losing it until your hand is empty of all cards.

Edit : also, prowler I the only one that gives you a 2 card advantage every turn, your opponent loses one and you gain one. (3 card advantage with rapid fire)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rumsey

Transference costs you a card as well. It takes a slot in your deck and does nothing but replace itself with a different (only possibly useful) card. This is the first time I've ever heard it referred to as OP, I've heard lots if arguments its not worth running (I tend to agree here) .

Conversely, this is the first time I've heard of research being considered a poor investment for the cost. Research is a fantastic card and increasing your card advantage any time you have 2 spare CC shouldn't be underestimated.

---

The same applies to Research for the first time it is used. You pay 2 to play a card from your hand, and 2 more to draw a card. So 4 resources for no card advantage. The card advantage comes with the second draw. But then it's 6 paid resources for +1 card. Don't get me wrong, I love research and I think it's a very balanced card. Transeference on the other hand is 3 paid resources, -1 card from your hand, -1 card for you opponent, and +1 card to your hand. So you're at +1 card compared to your opponent, plus if you play it at 5-7 turn, you'll most likely end up taking a weapon/armor, or Aeon if the opponent is human.

However, this thread isn't about transference, it's about class restrictions and I support class restriction should apply to cards you steal. With the cards we already have, you'd still have ~30% chance to steal a card you can play (This will propably drop to ~25% when all cards are out). Of course the cost of the cards that allow stealing would have to be lower because the possibilty you'd draw a card you can't use is higher, but still it would count as a discard for your opponent.

EDIT: I think class restriction should apply to every card you play from your hand, and not apply to any (future) ability that says "Choose a card form your opponent's hand. You can play it without paying it's cost" or something like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intrigger

I do agree that with class restrictions, some stealing cards should be modified (as they have been modified before, because the elemental abilities were too... uber ?). With rogues coming, nightprowler and such stealing abilities will grow up, so before all people play rogues in 1.26 as all people played elemental in 1.24, we can think about it no ?

There was a lot of debate about the first strike logic of Shadow Era, maybe some global changes have to be made for a better future.

And if all prefer open stealing, i'm agreeing with Sorter : delete abillities restrictions (and weapons / armors / class allies).

But the current gameplay emphasises to play 4-card series based decks with no risk and no surprise. (ok they can steal my must-be-played cards, no worries, i have another issues coming).

---

First thanks for the vote of confidence, even though this will never happen. Stratification is so American. Please don't feel offended and just hear me out. Don't want to go all political but I guess it can't be helped. The idea here is that a master of one thing is better than a person who has worldly knowledge, making him master of none which I disagree. This is particularly true with elementals. Their partial strength is their ability to steal your stuff and use itcagainst you, thereby improving their deck. Same with hunters and future rogues.

All in all a deck that is allowed to use all cards in the pool is a hell of a lot better than this stratified bs. Sure you'll be a master of the way of the warrior but other classes have other stuff to somewhat counteract your strength. I am all for the removal of at most the class barrier, among other things to improve balance and gameplay.

And if we were to change stealing to usage of card soully to your class then prowler, digger and transference instantly become useless.

As for research, I believe it being the best card draw engine, next to the staff. First of all assuming you have 4 resources you already broke even. Second you can only activate it once, therefore it isn't 6 resources. 6 is your total investment in drawing, however your resources get renewed every turn so that doesn't matter. If you mean it takes you at least 1-2 turns to get advantage then sure but your resource example is moot.

I like the class division as it is, because it makes a more interesting game. If everyone has access to the same cards the top decks will become more similar, not less. I like games with diversity and the current class design helps promote that. I could be wrong about that, but I doubt it.

Any connection of this view to being "American" or some sort of national psychology is complete and utter bullshit, totally without merit, and a poor attempt to support an argument by characterizing one's opponents as being incapable of rational thought. Classic defense of ones ideas without having to consider the opinions of others.

edit: As far a stolen cards go, I support being able to use stolen cards regardless of class, regardless of whether they are stolen from the deck, graveyard, hand, or field of play. Again, because it makes for a more interesting game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ringel

I like the class division as it is, because it makes a more interesting game. If everyone has access to the same cards the top decks will become more similar, not less. I like games with diversity and the current class design helps promote that. I could be wrong about that, but I doubt it.

Any connection of this view to being "American" or some sort of national psychology is complete and utter bullshit, totally without merit, and a poor attempt to support an argument by characterizing one's opponents as being incapable of rational thought. Classic defense of ones ideas without having to consider the opinions of others.

edit: As far a stolen cards go, I support being able to use stolen cards regardless of class, regardless of whether they are stolen from the deck, graveyard, hand, or field of play. Again, because it makes for a more interesting game.

---

Ok because someone apparently got upset, and didn't read that I don't mean any offense, I apologize. I believe it was the Brits that actually invented this concept but Americans are the ones that perpetuate it. Anyway worry if I have offended you. My comment only wanted to get the point of "separation of labor" as it were is inefficient. No one can become a master of all, except God. With that said having a greater range of experience is better than just being, for example, a quantum physicist.

Of course if no one can use the stolen cards that would suck and as I said make a lot of cards useless.

As for making all decks similar if the card pool were open I believe you are right taking the current pool into consideration. As we get more and more cards not all will work with your hero/strategy and that will make all decks be different. Also, sorry to have to invoke MTG again. The current top decks are all different. There are those that run similar cards but one can see that all decks are comprised from all 5 colors.

There is no politics at work here. Remove that from your mind, as it is an absurd notion. I am a long time supporter of points based roleplaying games over class based role playing games. I take any offense that my nationality has some how limited my ability to think rationally and intentionally about a subject I'm knowledgeable about, such as games.

I don't take offense at your point of view about getting rid of class restrictions, mind you, I just disagree. MtG has a greater diversity of decks precisely because of how the color system works. If there were only generic mana with no color the diversity would immediately collapse. There may still be different decks but much fewer than there is today.

It is true that a larger card pool will, in time lead to diversity, but a larger card pool with class restrictions will lead to even greater diversity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ringel

There is no politics at work here. Remove that from your mind, as it is an absurd notion. I am a long time supporter of points based roleplaying games over class based role playing games. I take any offense that my nationality has some how limited my ability to think rationally and intentionally about a subject I'm knowledgeable about, such as games.

I don't take offense at your point of view about getting rid of class restrictions, mind you, I just disagree. MtG has a greater diversity of decks precisely because of how the color system works. If there were only generic mana with no color the diversity would immediately collapse. There may still be different decks but much fewer than there is today.

It is true that a larger card pool will, in time lead to diversity, but a larger card pool with class restrictions will lead to even greater diversity.

---

As I said I was only using it to get my point across, nothing more nothing less. And I never said nor had I the intention to imply that your nationality has limited your thought process about things. But based on Adam Smith this IS the idea that any individual is better if he were to concentrate on one thing and specialize rather than being knowledgeable about various different things.

"First, the improvement of the dexterity of the workman necessarily increases the quantity of the work he can perform; and the division of labor, by reducing every man's business to some one simple operation, and by making this operation the sole employment of his life, necessarily increases very much the dexterity of the workman."

"....Men are much more likely to discover easier and readier methods of attaining any object, when the whole attention of their minds is directed toward that; single object, than when it is dissipated among a great variety of things." - Adam Smith "The Wealth of Nations"

I don't agree with Adam Smith, I'm suspicious that that philosophy is as universally held as American an belief as you state as there are numerous competing memes, but I don't see how that is relevant. Despite my philosophy or lack there of, I still hold that classes make this card game better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ringel

I don't agree with Adam Smith, I'm suspicious that that philosophy is as universally held as American an belief as you state as there are numerous competing memes, but I don't see how that is relevant. Despite my philosophy or lack there of, I still hold that classes make this card game better.

---

I don't either, but every work place uses his model to get things done. My relevance is how in SE you are in a way forced to deal with the things your particular class is both good and bad at. Some classes have certain aspects, IMO most important ones, when others don't. To me any class that, for example, doesn't have a draw engine of one kind or another is plain worse than any other that does. Yes, that includes my preferred Hunters. We have Bazaars and bad Santa but so does EVERYONE else. The only Hunter specific card for drawing is Surprise attack which is trash. I don't want to make this out being about hunters, just want mentioning.

Having classes is a good thing to a point. If it cripples diversity, as IMO it is atm, it isn't a good thing. I see class importance as weapon choice (warriors get axes / swords, Hunters bows, Mages / Priests get staves, elementals some sort of energy source, Wolven claws, and rogues daggers / knives) and class specific abilities. Other than that any and all cards should be usable by all heroes, taking faction into consideration, which I find being the only valid segregation in this game.