Ok, we all know everyone's reasons for wanting or not wanting to Ban/Errata Firelord. We don't need to go into that here. This thread is simply if, and I mean if, WK ever gets sick of all the complaining and decides to make a change. I just want everyyone's opinion on whether this is a good compromise (pardon if this has already been suggested).
I thought they could simply errata FL status as a R/E/V and declare him a Unique in whichever point value you choose to play him. This isn't perfect, but it eliminates overall rule changes that may affect many others (Taxi rules, Clones, RCE, etc) , it doesn't prevent you from using him by banning, and they don't have to "artificially" change his point cost.
Well, what are people's thoughts? Remember, I am not a proponent of change, I just wanted to see what everyone thought of this idea.
It's creative, I'll give you that...but I don't want any change on Firelord...he is what he is...a ranged combat master but he can be beat. That is one of the better solutions I've heard though for those who want change.
Good idea. A lot simpler than banning all dupes, which would cause chaos among dupe lovers. They won't do anything though, as the sets come out he becomes more obsolete. The tourney's that i used to attend were dominated by the flamer and now they do "teams" or" Xplosion only" and other theme games.
I still feel that the tournament scene should be constantly adjusted by the economic (not money) cost on the dial. A good is always a good deal (pts/value) and a bad deal is always a bad deal. If someone is being over used you can make small adjustments to keep the flavor and still not get stuck with a trend of only improving new sets. If new sets are the only source of improved gameplay change then the old figures that were less economically valuable become less and less played.
The big point I make here though is that Firelord should not be singled out. Also the changes should not be made just one way. Some characters like Hobgoblin that see little or no play should be cheaper in sanctioned tourneys. Nor should a point adjustment be final. It should be an evolutionary process Demand/Supply = (Use in sanctioned tourneys/Players playing)
Sounds too complicated, but it really isn't. Takes one spread sheet and is available as easy an FAQ (which holds legitimacy and effects the rules with an equal gravity).
"A Jester unemployed is nobody's fool." - The Court Jester "And so he says, I don't like the cut of your jib, and I go, I says it's the only jib I got, baby!
My solution only works on trying to minimize the impact on pieces considered "underpriced" so they can't be abused with cloning. For "overcosted" pieces, not a whole lot you can do except what you wrote, maybe someone has other ideas on this.