May 14, 2024, 03:45:59 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - LumberjackJim

Pages: [1] 2
1
Strategy and Tactics / Re: A Few Beastmaster Openers
« on: February 12, 2013, 11:34:40 AM »
I would hate to admit to being outmaneuvered, but I will say two things: 1) Lady Luck was indeed unkind for the first 5 rounds or so.  2) I did expend too great an effort trying to make the bear tank "work".  Should have tried to get something else going while he distracted her.

Things I learned:

1) If you do go this route, let the bear take care of himself.  No need to get greedy and cast Bear's Strength or Battle Fury or other similar spells on him.  He's big enough as is, so focus on something else.

2) Do NOT go solo big creature against a Priestess.  She has way too much crowd control, and you will spend most of that creatures actions rolling against dazes or removing stuns.  Against the Priestess, I'd take quantity over quality.

3) Try to avoid getting down below 5 mana if you don't have a spawnpoint out.  After I got my Bear out, I realized I would be very mana limited for a while, especially if I tried to cast two spells a round.  As a result, it took me far too long to get a spawnpoint out, and I just couldn't catch up to my opponent in terms of creature strength.

Perhaps one of you better, more experienced players will try this and make it work, but I'm going to stay away from the Super Grizzly opener for a while.

2
Strategy and Tactics / Re: A Few Beastmaster Openers
« on: February 10, 2013, 10:44:20 AM »
So I finally had a chance to play again, and I tried the round 2 super grizzly strategy, and I have to say, I would not recommend it.  The grizzly didn't get force held or put to sleep, and I was able to run him right up to the priestess and start wailing on her.

Except she had Deflection Bracers, so I kept missing.  And she used Pillar of Light and managed to stun my bear after I played a Battle Fury on him.  It took her several rounds to deal with the grizzly, but she spent those rounds summoning creatures from her Temple, while I spent those turns trying to actually hit her with the grizzly.  I ended up with no spawnpoint and a significant mana deficit.  She ended up with a Unicorn, Brogan Bloodstone, a Royal Archer, and two Clerics.  When my bear finally bit the dust I was sitting two zones away with only Fellela to protect me.  

The lesson to take away from this is don't start the game by bringing yourself down to zero mana.  It puts you in a bad spot.

3
League / Tournament Play / Re: Orlando/Melbourne area super happy fun time
« on: February 07, 2013, 12:33:45 PM »
Hey!  I'll be in Palm Bay this weekend.  If you have some free time and want to get together and play some Mage Wars, let me know!

4
General Discussion / Re: Upcoming Release: Forcemaster Vs. Warlord!!!
« on: February 06, 2013, 10:51:17 PM »
Congrats, Pixel!

Also, yay expansions!  Though knowing when it will be available doesn't make me as happy as waiting two more weeks makes me sad.  Oh well, birthday is on the 28th, so perhaps I'll get mine for free!

5
Spells / Re: Forcemaster vs Warlord ****SPOILERS****
« on: February 03, 2013, 10:16:33 AM »
Both of the new mages are looking like so much fun, I don't know who I want to play more!

6
General Questions / Re: Tanglevine spell
« on: February 02, 2013, 08:32:15 PM »
@Gewar

There's an errata?  Where might a curious individual locate this mystical text?

Edit: Are you just referring to the rules section of this forum?

7
Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Labirynth of Minotaur
« on: January 29, 2013, 02:22:02 PM »
Sounds like it could make an interesting scenario-style game.  Start with the labyrinth already set up with a couple of trap and monsters out.  Give the Wizard a half-value spellbook, and have an opposing mage with a normal spellbook try to get through and kill the Wizard.  Yeah, I'm definitely going to try that.  Thanks for the idea!

8
General Questions / Re: Basilisk Animal?
« on: January 29, 2013, 12:57:07 PM »
Then why is a Unicorn an animal?

9
General Questions / Re: Basilisk Animal?
« on: January 28, 2013, 05:13:21 PM »
Personally, I don't feel like the Basilisk should be considered an animal since basilisks aren't really animals.  However, I don't like that they classified him as Reptile, Lizard as opposed to Animal, Lizard because lizards are reptiles and reptiles are animals.  I think that's a bit silly.  I also think it's a little inconsistent that the Highland Unicorn is considered an animal and not the Basilisk.  But perhaps it has to do with their world lore and we just don't know it yet.

10
Custom Cards / Re: Living spell
« on: January 28, 2013, 04:21:27 PM »
That Thoughtspore looks great!  Sit four of them in a corner with various attack spells, maybe throw Battle Fury or the new Power Strike card on one, then have the Forcemaster charge into the fray.  Makes me wonder what kind of spawnpoint the Forcemaster will have.

I also like your idea of a living spell as a creature separate from the Thoughtspore, though I think you would have to make it so that casting the spell costs something.  Perhaps don't give it channeling, and require a full action to cast the spell regardless of what it is, but make the spell cost half its normal mana cost?

11
General Discussion / Re: 4 player expansion
« on: January 28, 2013, 04:15:16 PM »
Now for a more on-topic reply:
Will the 4-player expansion be coming with more Mage status boards and cubes?  From what I've seen, it looks like it's just the action markers(one again, going by the sell sheets.  Don't know if those are outdated...).  I also think more damage and mana counters would would be really nice in a 4-player expansion.  I personally play with just one core set (GASP!), so we tend to run low on mana counters near the end of the game.  I guess the same could go for all the punch-out tokens that come in the core set, especially if the idea is "buy this expansion and you and three people can play with just this and the core set".

12
General Discussion / Re: 4 player expansion
« on: January 28, 2013, 04:07:36 PM »
Quote from: "Thessial" post=6780
The Forcemaster Vs Warlord Expansion that should be out this quarter


This quarter? But the sell sheet says late January! I don't know if I can wait any longer!

Bu seriously, how much longer should I expect to wait, because I am itching for some Jedi action.

13
General Discussion / Re: Some More Love on the Main Site
« on: January 22, 2013, 09:19:22 PM »
I definitely agree with the original post.  I now only check the news page on this site because it comes before the forum.  And it's upsetting every time.  I think that the main reason more of the spoilers come out on Facebook is it just hits a broader audience, and it probably always will regardless of the player base.  It just makes sense to get as many people excited about the expansion as possible.

On the other hand, I definitely agree about the Forum-exclusive spoilers.  I think that giving the more serious, involved players a little bonus would be a great thing, and it might draw more people into the conversation.

I also would really like to see more articles from the Mage Wars team.  When I saw the Strategy section of the website the first time I came here, I was really excited.  But nothing has been added to it since then, so now I just think about what I wish it would be.  I would love to read the designers thoughts on the game, and the different cards and weird uses for cards they have come up with, things like that.

14
Strategy and Tactics / Re: A Few Beastmaster Openers
« on: January 22, 2013, 08:37:08 PM »
Quote from: "BR3AKR" post=6631
Jim, what has been your experience with opening a turn 2 grizzly? What kind of responses have you seen from your opponent? I feel like there are some really strong spells for relatively cheap that quickly stop single-badasses like the Grizzly? Not being critical, just curious.


The turn 2 grizzly has worked out pretty well for me.  Unfortunately, I can't claim that as an indication of a sound strategy, as most of my games have been fairly casual, with me either teaching someone new the game, or trying to avoid overwhelming my opponent with the rules (most of the people that I play with aren't really into this sort of game, unfortunately).  The closest I've come to a competitive game was against my roommate.  He was playing as the Warlock and tried to counter my big scary bear first with a Dark Pact Slayer Blood Reaper, then with Adramelech, the Fire Lord.  I Tanglevined his Blood Reaper and then Force Held the Fire Lord.  That made me feel pretty good :) I then proceeded to wail on his Warlock a few more turns while I saved up to bring out Tarok and put Eagle Wings on my bear.  Then once he teleported away from my bear, I let the Fire Lord free, and then tore him apart.  In conclusion, I obviously don't have a lot of different games that I can draw from for backing this strategy up, I just feel that as long as I have sufficient counters to my opponents counters, bringing out the grizzly early is a great way to put the opponent on the defensive and allow me to control the pace of the game.  In theory.

15
Rules Discussion / Re: Attaching and Spellbinding
« on: January 22, 2013, 02:35:16 PM »
Quote from: "baronzaltor" post=6617
So in the case of Steal Equipment, would it "reset" the binding on the new attachment or can he opt to keep the current spell since one is present?


It seems to me that the attached spell should be destroyed and the caster of Steal Equipment should bind their own spell to the wand.  My reasoning is kind of hard to explain, but I'll do my best to make it comprehensible.

1) Stealing the equipment should give you the abilities of that equipment.  The ability of a wand is to allow you to cast a spell you know, and have thoroughly studied, multiple times, instead of just once.  So to have a wand that now lets you cast an unfamiliar spell seems wrong to me from a flavor standpoint.

2) The implications of stealing the spell seem weird to me.  A wand lets you change the bound spell for 3 mana, returning the previously bound spell to your spellbook.  So, would you then get your opponents spell in your spellbook because you took his wand?  Just another thing that seems a little illogical.

Obviously, there's not a lot of rules support in those arguments, as there is no precedence for this issue, hence the discussion.  That's just how I would rule it if it came up in a game and there was no official ruling.

Pages: [1] 2