Editing Talk:Prince
Warning: You are not logged in.
Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
I actually removed then re-added the bit about top card attacks on further reflection. [[User:Blaisepascal|Blaisepascal]] is correct in his analysis. However the article was talking about the difference between something like Prince of Goons vs Price of Schemes + Goons. In the case of the former, you would draw five cards plus have goons at the start of your turn. In the case of the latter you essentially have Goons, 4 cards, and +1 card + 1 action at the start of your turn. Because the 5th card is drawn from your deck, top deck attacks take effect 1 turn sooner than with Prince of Goons alone. It is not a deal breaker, but it is a difference. I actually like the wording of the 1 turn sooner vs outright vulnerability and will make that change to the wording. | I actually removed then re-added the bit about top card attacks on further reflection. [[User:Blaisepascal|Blaisepascal]] is correct in his analysis. However the article was talking about the difference between something like Prince of Goons vs Price of Schemes + Goons. In the case of the former, you would draw five cards plus have goons at the start of your turn. In the case of the latter you essentially have Goons, 4 cards, and +1 card + 1 action at the start of your turn. Because the 5th card is drawn from your deck, top deck attacks take effect 1 turn sooner than with Prince of Goons alone. It is not a deal breaker, but it is a difference. I actually like the wording of the 1 turn sooner vs outright vulnerability and will make that change to the wording. | ||
− | --[[User:Murphy|Murphy]] ([[User talk:Murphy|talk]]) 16:11, 29 August 2014 (EDT)--[[User:Murphy|User:Murphy]] ([[User | + | --[[User:Murphy|Murphy]] ([[User talk:Murphy|talk]]) 16:11, 29 August 2014 (EDT)--[[User:Murphy|User:Murphy]] ([[User User:Murphy|talk]]) |
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
-- | -- | ||
* Durations aren't lost track of; they are put into play, which is fine by Prince. The problem is that Durations aren't (usually) discarded at the end of turn, so Prince can't set them aside again, and thus can't play them again. The only exceptions are Tactician that didn't discard anything, and Haven and Gear that didn't set anything aside. The only one of those that can reliably not stay in play from being played at the start of turn is Gear, because of the wording "up to 2 cards" which means you can set aside 0 cards, as it says right there in the Official FAQ. [[User:Werothegreat|Werothegreat]] ([[User talk:Werothegreat|talk]]) 08:24, 12 June 2015 (EDT) | * Durations aren't lost track of; they are put into play, which is fine by Prince. The problem is that Durations aren't (usually) discarded at the end of turn, so Prince can't set them aside again, and thus can't play them again. The only exceptions are Tactician that didn't discard anything, and Haven and Gear that didn't set anything aside. The only one of those that can reliably not stay in play from being played at the start of turn is Gear, because of the wording "up to 2 cards" which means you can set aside 0 cards, as it says right there in the Official FAQ. [[User:Werothegreat|Werothegreat]] ([[User talk:Werothegreat|talk]]) 08:24, 12 June 2015 (EDT) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− |