Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[NoMoreFun]

Transmutes aren't people.

Even if they can't talk and their gender doesn't match their sex, a human being is a human being.

[jotheonah]

Transmutes aren't people.

Even if they can't talk and their gender doesn't match their sex, a human being is a human being.

That pun is bad and you should feel bad.

[engineer]

Transmutes aren't people.

Even if they can't talk and their gender doesn't match their sex, a human being is a human being.

That pun is awesome and you should feel awesome.

[engineer]

I think you guys are overestimating Sir Michael.  Remember how everybody hates Saboteur?  That's because Saboteur doesn't do anything for you -- it's just an attack, and a terminal at that.  I mean, the saboteur attack is at least as strong as the knight trashing attack, even with the consolation prize, because it guarantees a target and it has no upper limit.  It still ends being a trap most of the time.  If the saboteur gained a discard attack, sure, it would be stronger.  But would it be great?  I'm not sure about that.

Sir Bailey, on the other hand, is one of only two knights that is not a terminal.  The other one, with just +2 actions and no card draw, is also usually a trap, as we're all well aware.  But Sir Bailey is nonterminal and draws a card, so in my book, Sir Bailey stands tallest.

Think of it this way: how many cantrip attacks are there in Dominion?

[jotheonah]

But the advantage to cantrip attacks is they're spammable. So uniqueness kind of cancels that out.

[engineer]

But the advantage to cantrip attacks is they're spammable. So uniqueness kind of cancels that out.

I'll grant you that.  But with Sir Bailey, you'll never have a collision.  You'll never have to make that wrenching decision: do I play my knight, or do I play my chancellor?  ( Kidding about that last part obviously, but you get my point.) That means that Sir Bailey will be played more than any of the terminal knights, making his attack more powerful.

[Loschmidt]

I think you guys are overestimating Sir Michael.  Remember how everybody hates Saboteur?  That's because Saboteur doesn't do anything for you -- it's just an attack, and a terminal at that.

Yeah that is true. And I did consider that before voting for old Michael. But, while Michael doesn't do anything for your current turn it screws with your opponent on their next turn, and on their overall deck quality. Hurting your opponent in the short and long term is quite powerful.

[Rhombus]

After playing a few games with Knights, I think it can really be summed up to this:

Which knights are better really depends on the board.  Who got which knight didn't make any difference in the outcome of the game, honestly.  Though if one of them is underpowered, it's probably Sir Vander.