point of origin (Legendary Voodoo)

[Most Lee Harmless]

I'm thinking we are getting into a pointless discussion here (re: semantics) : regardless of what may be printed on the card, if, currently, it is anonymous due to the fact its caster cannot be traced, then we should ask what is the overall effect of making them traceable via this new card and is it a desirable outcome?

Should established cards have their common use compromised in this way? It does open up a can of worms because we must then ask if devaluing those cards in that way makes sense for overall game-play.

Do we want it so that no attack upon a nation via their ports should be hidden? If that should now apply to nations, why should it not also apply to players, and so on.

This kinda jars somewhat with other proposals to create even more powerful anonymous cards : you cant have the logic of such cards applying both ways whenever it suits.

[Maha]

when the card states anonymous that should be respected.
that current gameplay does not allow that certain info is revealed does not mean that it should always stay that way. the whole purpose of a new card is to add something new to the game, not to do the same in a different way.

i appreciate discussion on possible effects of this card. certainly when they negative! but fear of getting on a sliding slope is not constructive imo.

[DezNutz]

I'm thinking we are getting into a pointless discussion here (re: semantics) : regardless of what may be printed on the card, if, currently, it is anonymous due to the fact its caster cannot be traced, then we should ask what is the overall effect of making them traceable via this new card and is it a desirable outcome?

Should established cards have their common use compromised in this way? It does open up a can of worms because we must then ask if devaluing those cards in that way makes sense for overall game-play.

Do we want it so that no attack upon a nation via their ports should be hidden? If that should now apply to nations, why should it not also apply to players, and so on.

This kinda jars somewhat with other proposals to create even more powerful anonymous cards : you cant have the logic of such cards applying both ways whenever it suits.

I agree (to an extent), a worthy discussion is what is needed and where I was trying to get to. Arguing that because this is the way it currently is does nothing. Look past the semantics, and see what the pros and cons of this card. Just because you can't see or do it now is not a valid reason for rejecting an idea.

[DezNutz]

Port voodoo is currently anonymous. That anonymity is important when fighting over ports. Everything that makes port battles less likely, is a bad idea, in my opinion.

Also, trying to find out who is behind certain attacks on a port is an interesting job. There will be suspicions in several directions, and using this, and trying to find who's actually behind it, it's very fun, I believe.

Removing this anonymity would probably make more players hire us to harm ports, but I still think it's a bad idea.

I disagree. The reason of well it isn't currently visible so it shouldn't be isn't a valid reason. You are also forgetting this is legendary voodoo, this isn't something that will be abundantly available like common and uncommon cards.

[Most Lee Harmless]

I'm thinking we are getting into a pointless discussion here (re: semantics) : regardless of what may be printed on the card, if, currently, it is anonymous due to the fact its caster cannot be traced, then we should ask what is the overall effect of making them traceable via this new card and is it a desirable outcome?

Should established cards have their common use compromised in this way? It does open up a can of worms because we must then ask if devaluing those cards in that way makes sense for overall game-play.

Do we want it so that no attack upon a nation via their ports should be hidden? If that should now apply to nations, why should it not also apply to players, and so on.

This kinda jars somewhat with other proposals to create even more powerful anonymous cards : you cant have the logic of such cards applying both ways whenever it suits.

I agree (to an extent), a worthy discussion is what is needed and where I was trying to get to. Arguing that because this is the way it currently is does nothing. Look past the semantics, and see what the pros and cons of this card. Just because you can't see or do it now is not a valid reason for rejecting an idea.

Nor is it a valid reason for accepting the idea : This will not just add a card : it will devalue several more existing cards, cards which have had a use since introduced based on existing game rules : so, its not so simple. Its not just about adding a card, its about changing a long-standing philosophical basis for port action cards : that is, you cant see who did it.

BTW, there is another proposal for a similar type of card : the same argument is happening in both threads : could the OP's get together and perhaps merge their ideas so we only need to do this once : it will save on time and effort.

[Maha]

Nor is it a valid reason for accepting the idea : This will not just add a card : it will devalue several more existing cards, cards which have had a use since introduced based on existing game rules : so, its not so simple. Its not just about adding a card, its about changing a long-standing philosophical basis for port action cards : that is, you cant see who did it.

what cards will get devalued or otherwise influenced. Mugiwara made a list of cards that are cast on ports.
the party cards will not devalue, but knowing who cast them on a certain port has operational value
the Ruby will not devalue, knowing who uses them has little value imo.
[b]coastals[/b] and pacifism will not devalue, knowing who uses them has little value imo.
oLoD, conspiracy, propaganda & charity are cast on players or nations thus not included!

that leave us with 2 card TI and BD these 2 cards will feel the implementation of this legendary voodoo. it would be strange that a legendary voodoo card had no effect on the game! for a price (someone has to add this card in his repertoire, foregoing other options and it has to be made at a cost) the origin of sudden drops or increases of the population can now be known. will that devalue these cards much? they still will be used for running missions and in open warfare where the enemy is known. it only influences the secret casts that seem to be without purpose, or out of malice. acting out of malice will continue and being able to find who acts out of malice brings more action.

so, at the moment only 2 cards feel the bite of this new card, however other cards are in the making. with the developments around ports and nations we can expect more port related voodoo. that's why it is prudent to have this discussion now when only 2 cards are influenced.

the real question is whether all - future- port related voodoo should forever stay undercover or that most (or some) should be able to be uncovered. Ask yourself how the game would be if all coodoo would be undercover; would that create more action or less? why should this be different for ports?

[Most Lee Harmless]

Why do you exclude Conspiracy from the list of cards affected?

[Haron]

Danik is right. There are three cards that target ports: TI, BD and Conspiracy.

In my opinion, party cards, pacifism and such really target the caster, it just affects him in a specific port. Party cards are artifacts, so it's gonna be hard to test, but pacifism is not, so it should be blocked by a mindbar on the target, I believe. It even states "Player" as it's target. The party cards DO state "port" as it's target, but I believe that is not correct. I see that as cards targeting a player, affecting him in one specific port. Similar to propaganda. Unfortunately it can't be tested, since the cards are artifacts. I believe they SHOULD be considered as targetting the caster, though.

Anyway. Not very important. The question is, of course: Is it a good idea to give people the ability to see who are behind attacks on ports? That is to say, in practice, who have used BD and conspiracy? In my opinion, that is a bad idea. Battling for ports are already more than hard enough, and also exploiting the fact that these cards cannot be tracked back to the caster with certainty opens several interesting strategies. Also, the search for the actual culprits can also lead to an interesting investigation. So I say no to this card.

[Maha]

Why do you exclude Conspiracy from the list of cards affected?

the card is focused on a nation, the port is secondary.
i separate voodoo that targets players first, nation first and port first. point of origin explicitly focus on port focused voodoo.

this card is not a 'reveal all' card. player based voodoo is hidden to all but the caster, some to caster and victim and other again to caster and guild of victim. this is sufficiently worked out and don't need extra voodoo to expose it more imo. Port and Nation voodoo will develop more when these game elements develop. several legendary voodoo cards that target ports are proposed. Should these all be undercover because the present ones are? should e.g. the governor of the port receive automated messages (second inbox for the port, same for kings in relation to nation messages)? this card puts a price on the knowledge. for those who want to know it is available, but at a cost.

[Grimrock Litless]

Don't forget about the legendary voodoo that can target port that people made.

Eg. Pirate's bay

Can this work on them too? If both is ever added.