Fireside chat update: Vengeance

Happy new year and happy new fireside chats!

Let me know if you spot any typos or have any questions.

• G.I. Bunker - power now works until the start of your next turn.

Didn't it already work like that?

It used to say "Until start of your turn" and got updated to "until start of your next turn" which the difference is mostly that you could use the power at the start of your turn and not have it immediately expire now.  

Environment/hero effects that happen at the start of a villain turn happen at the start of every villain turn, and use the deck of the villain whose turn it is. For example, Time Flies plays the top card of Proletariat's deck at the start of Proletariat's turn; the top card of Ermine's deck at the start of Ermine's turn, etc.

Cards like “Slamara”, which play the top card of the villain and all hero decks, play the top card of ALL villain decks! Terrifying.

Out of curiosity, what is the ruling with Pillar of Hercules in a Vengeance game? (too afraid to try it out myself...)

I tried it a little while ago, and the video game let you choose which deck (so I kept picking the last deck, and just killed him before his turn came up)

Very interesting ruling on Natural Born Vigor... makes sense, but I'd never have thought of being able to heal by less then 4 (when an effect reduces HP recovery or Naturalist is near full HP) without the card being destroyed.

Still really do not understand the Slamara ruling.

Do you mean "Impossible Quandry" instead of "Impossible Question"?

"If you play Bestial Shift and use a power to switch to another form, you may to activate form abilities ..."

I'm guessing this should read "you may activate ..."

2 for 2 on the typo checks. I'll update those when I can get a chance, thanks!

I'm just glad that Entry Point was changed.

Looks loke some more wiki-work to do. Cool. 

Tachyon - power has a new wording and behavior.

That's really vague.  Can those of us who don't own the foil cards get a hint?  For all I know, she has a totally new, different power now.

Original wording 

>

Rapid Recon - You may look at the top card of your Hero Deck. You may discard that card

new wording

>

Rapid Recon - Reveal and Replace the top card of your deck. You may discard that card

You can go to the wiki page and see in the top section the original wording and then go to Variant Pack New Art on the same page to see the new wording http://sentinelswiki.com/index.php?title=Tachyon

Can someone explain what the difference in gameplay is? It seems to me that the outcome is the same.

The result is the same. I think it's more to keep it in line with phrasing used on other cards.  Only example I think of that it makes a difference with is Shinobi Assassin as you still get to reveal a card of your deck after the Shinobi comes out. 

The new wording is actually: "Reveal and replace the top card of your Hero deck. You may discard the top card of your deck."

Another notable difference is that this allows Tachyon to reshuffle with her power (if her deck is empty), which was not possible before.

Fancy!

I thought a reveal couldn't force a deck reshuffle?

No, but a discard can ;).

I was thinking it dealt with the reveal.  That makes more sense.  

What the heck is Christopher being benevolent/a jerk about here? How do hero cards get removed from the game in the Temple of Zhu Long except for incapacitated OblivAeon Ra removing himself?

Unforgiving Wasteland can remove some cards.

That's not in the Temple of Zhu Long, though. :P I think it was just in response to Setting Sun Ra.

I'll admit, the new behavior for Tachyon's power is kind of annoying in the video game. It used to just be "do you want to discard this card?" and now it's "Here's a card. Hope you remember what it was. Do you want to discard it?" I assume F5 Bunker's power is going to work rather the same way. I can't remember things good! D:

I bet something in OblivAeon will be able to remove hero cards from the game.

Makes me wonder how the resurrection works when you lose a hero and replace them with your backup hero, though.

Multiple environments are used at the same time in the OblivAeon event (as currently revealed).

I'll admit, the new behavior for Tachyon's power is kind of annoying in the video game. It used to just be "do you want to discard this card?" and now it's "Here's a card. Hope you remember what it was. Do you want to discard it?" I assume F5 Bunker's power is going to work rather the same way. I can't remember things good! D:

The discard decision shows you what the revealed card was, unless it's now unknown.

See also Captain Cosmic's (requital) incap.

Oh yeahhhh…

Oh noooooo D:

[/quote]

I hold down the tab button all times, so it just flashes by. D:

When I use her base power on the screen with the option for discarding it shows the card.   So I'm not sure how you are fast forwarding through that.  

… there’s a fast forward button!? Knew I should have paid more attention to the tutorial.

The only effect I have trouble with due to the game’s speed is Parse’s incapacitated ability to reveal and replace the top card of the villain deck.

With regard to Tachyon… the power definitely displays the releaved card when asking what you want to do with it.

This confirms my suspicions with how the Temple of Zhu Long makes Setting Sun Ra awesome.

Not sure it's that awesome. Sure you can repeatedly kill yourself but your multitarget attack is weaker after you're resurrected and you're costing your team a load of cards. To me Rites of Revival is a trap.

Sure, but in a lot of cases you don't want to be hitting the environment indiscriminately anyway, like the shinobis. Repeatedly playing a card that hits the lowest target may not always be optimal. Plus, only the revived hero is prevented from hitting the environment, so if you have someone on environment cleanup duty, or have something like Environmental Allies in play, it isn't that big of a problem. From my experience, it's much more beneficial to side with Zhu Long than to fight him, as it ends up being a constant struggle. Plus, you get free card draws/plays from Ceremonies.

That said, Ra's deck immolation has never seemed like much of a drawback to me.  He's going to kill himself long before he eats through his deck.

It's mostly just the pain of seeing "Oh no, there goes my second Staff of Ra!" whenever you use the power. I'd agree, though, he dies long before he's lost even half his deck, in my experience.

Since I just remembered this question and it's at least vaguely tangential to the subject: Why is it Another Reality's Debt will allow you to destroy no cards, but other cards that force a "discard, destroy (or something else)" choice won't?

I believe the option is to discard your hand or destroy all your cards?

If you have no cards in play, all equals zero, but it is still all, and you can fulfill the requirement.  The same as you can discard an empty hand to fulfill the "discard your hand" requirement.

If you are faced with an option like "discard two cards or destroy one card" and you have no cards in play, you do not have 1 card to destroy so you can't fulfill that requirement and are forced to discard instead.

But I could be wrong.

I am good at being wrong.

Oh, huh. When we played Miss Information a few months ago, that was the first card she flopped, and that's how we interpreted it, that you could destroy all your cards, when there's nothing out (mainly because nobody at the table wanted to nuke all our hands on the first turn of the game).

Makes sense to me, if you have zero cards in play/hand, destroy/discard all then means you destroy/discard zero.

But then why can't you destroy zero to avoid discarding two for, say, the Drum of Despair?

Because the requirement calls for destroying 1 card, which you cannot do if you have 0 cards in play.

I understood it that if something requires you to destroy or discard, you have to do one of those things, and that if you have no cards you can destroy, then you must take the discard option instead (and vice-versa). If you have to either, say, destroy all your cards or discard two and you only have one in hand, you would have to discard that one card.

If it specifies a number then you have to destroy/discard that number, if you can't meet the critera then you have to take the other option.  If it says discard or destroy all then 0 is a valid number if you don't have any of that type.

In the scenario you listed you'd need to destroy all your cards in play to meet the conditions, this can be as little as 0 because it says all.

It's like Maintenance Level -- you can shuffle your trash into your deck to destroy it even if you don't have anything in your trash.

Yes, but if you have no cards in play and two or more cards in hand, you, have to do the discard.

Incidental Contact:  does this mean if KNYFE hits them and then say Mr. Fixer redirects his shot to a villain that has already been hit then KNYFE can hit them a second time, a second time?

Yes

Caliginous Form:  Let's say Twist the Ether is on the bad guy, Shielding Winds is in play, as well as Atlantean Throne Room.

Villain attempts to deal 4 damage to Writhe, Whether or not Visionary reduces or increases the damage Shielding winds makes it 3, then throne room makes it 2, and Caliginous form makes it 0.

Would it still redirect, giving Visionary a chance to change the damage to 2 damage? (4+1-2-1=2)

If the damage reaches 0 and isn't part of an irreducible damage attack then nothing is redirected.  

Natural Born Vigor:  If Naturalist is down 3hp, he can use vigor to heal to full and it won't be destroyed???

Wow.

Not in the scenario you listed which was "Destroy all of your cards in play or discard 2 cards".

It used to be that way - if you have nothing to destroy then you have to discard. Having nothing in play is having nothing in play, whereas having a hand of zero cards is still having a hand (so you can "discard your hand" even if it's empty). I think it was probably a couple of years ago that this came up, though - stuff gets changed around every now and then so maybe this was one of the things, or it's just another change that's only specific to the computerised version.

If one of the Sentinels is removed from game, then the Sentinels are incapacitated, and then a Sentinel is revived, does the cards that were removed from game that are returned include the Sentinel that was removed?