by Koz1120
Saan wrote:
runim wrote:
It definitely seems that way initially, but at some point you have to start building your own momentum instead of countering theirs. It's all about your playstyle really - Part of the beauty of the game! =)
The best way to think about this:
Say your opponent puts out a lash of hellfire. If playing reactionary, you might equip a shatter to get rid of it.
If playing to win, you would summon a flaming hellion(or other fire resistant baddie) or an elemental cloak - something that reduces the usefulness of his wand, but also puts you closer to winning.
Another example: He puts out a mage wand with Dispel. Do you shatter it, or just go for the throat and dont cast any more enchantments, thus limiting the use of his wand?
I agree. Initially people see this game and immediately try forcing it into how they understand other games to function. I've had indepth conversastions regarding the "counter spell" aspect of this game. Some people in my group were concerned that this would turn into a denial type game where one person was just countering everything the other was doing. The problem with that thinking is that this isn't Magic. You don't have unlimited actions like you do in Magic to just sit there and counter everything (limited only by mana). You have two actions a turn (not counting creatures or spawnpoints), and if you spend one or two of them to blunt your opponents offense, you are also blunting your own offense by the same amount. Are you better off dispelling your opponents Bear Strength, or hitting them with an attack of some sort? I'd argue that attacking is better since it moves you closer to winning the game than the Dispel does.
My opinion is that you should only destroy the equipment and dispel the enchantments that are a real problem for your strategy (like getting rid of a Dragonscale Hauberk when you are focused on fire damage) or are really powerful(Lash of Hellfire, Suppression Cloak, Ghoul Rot, etc). If you spend one action a turn casting a counter spell, you are cutting your offense in half.
That being said, I can see possible situations where this might be viable. A Wand strategy that involves always having a Nullify or Reverse Magic on you so you can use the Wand every turn might be worthwhile. But maybe not. I'd need to see it in action first.