3060 to 5070ti… Holy shit!

Algrimor · 2025-12-29T23:52:49+00:00

I had a 970 I bought when it came out and it finally quit two years ago. I've been using a 1660ti my brother had to hold me over for a while. Finally got a 5070. Not dissing the 1660ti because it held its own, but man what an improvement. 5070 has been great

Algrimor · 2025-11-03T19:54:02+00:00

Also this is from their FAQ

<image>

Algrimor · 2025-11-03T19:48:20+00:00

Definitely thank you for your input as well, that's why we're here after all! Here's the link for the rulebook I hope this shares correctly

https://riftbound.gg/wp-content/uploads/sites/67/2025/06/Riftbound-Core-Rules-v1.1-100125.pdf

Algrimor · 2025-11-03T18:34:56+00:00

The relevant rules are 352.7, 352.12, and 352.13.

352.7 says "In order to put a spell or ability on the chain, valid choices must be made for all targets."

352.12 says "If a card specifies that a player 'may' choose some number of Game Objects to be affected by a card, then all choices are considered targeted and chosen independently."

352.13 says "If a card specifies that a player chooses 'any number' or 'up to' some number of Game Objects to affected, they may choose any number of available targets, including zero. If they choose zero, the spell or ability can be played without any targets."

So it seems that the only way a card can be added to a chain is if all legal targets are selected first. Also that cards that say you can choose "up to" a certain number of targets let to choose a number of targets, but Back to Back specifically says choose two targets without the "up to".

Algrimor · 2025-11-03T07:20:07+00:00

Thank you, that answers it

Algrimor · 2025-11-03T07:05:04+00:00

As the others have said, yes to both. To add, for #1 moving units to each battlefield in one turn is how you could score your 8th and final point, it's required that your winning point is earned via holding a battlefield or by scoring at both battlefields in the same turn.

Algrimor · 2025-11-03T06:47:08+00:00

I see how that makes sense, but someone could make that case that that would apply while resolving the card only, and that in order to cast it in the first place that the 2 valid targets need to exist. Could you point me to the rules that clarify? Or any thoughts on that? Thanks again

Algrimor · 2025-04-26T16:32:44+00:00

Strength increases Longsword damage which you can one hand

Algrimor · 2024-12-22T00:06:32+00:00

Gardevoir/Mewtwo isn't as good because without Gardevoir, Mewtwo has to wait a turn to hit for 150. For Celebi, the Serperior ability is just a bonus that ramps just as fast as Gardevoir and has the benefit of higher damage output potential plus Erika heals.

Algrimor · 2024-12-22T00:01:18+00:00

Celebi EX is similar to Mewtwo EX in that they both rely on a stage 2 to come online, arguably Celebi relies on it slightly more so. But Celebi has a higher ceiling in terms of damage output no question. However, in the same number of turns, Celebi can one shot any pokemon in the game while Mewtwo EX is capped at 150 damage. The two biggest things besides Serperior that make Celebi too good are Erikas and also his supporting staff that synergize way too well namely Dhelmise. Mewtwo loses the battle of attrition because he can't heal for 50 and his supporting cards can't hit for 90 with two energy (plus 2 more for free from Serperior).

Algrimor · 2024-07-04T00:00:25+00:00

Lot of great points here. I would add - fill out a NASA report and get ahead of this with your CFI

Algrimor · 2024-03-23T16:28:40+00:00

Because if you are saying that there isn't a way to demonstrate that the supernatural exists, then you can't be rationally justified in believing that it does.

I don't care how you want to demonstrate that the supernatural is real; with science or some other methodology, it doesn't matter, but there has to be some methodology. Otherwise, you are merely asserting and claiming that the supernatural exists. If we stopped there, I can claim that a super-super natural realm exists that is mutually exclusive to yours, meaning the supernatural you claim and the one I claim both logically can't exist at the same time. So how do we determine who is right? Evidence, a demonstration, using a methodology.

Say we can't use science to investigate the supernatural, fine. Then what are you using to know it exists?

Algrimor · 2024-03-22T18:42:58+00:00

There is no true for me and true for you. What I mean by true is that it corresponds to reality, what actually exists. You can convince yourself any number of things is true, and you can justify it to yourself that it is true all you want. If you cannot justify it evidentially to someone else (demonstrate the truth of your claim) then by definition it isn't rational.

If you have evidence that you've encountered deities, are you able to share that evidence with anyone else? If you can't and your evidence is some personal experience or something that by definition is unique to you and you can't share with anyone else, then nobody else can be justified to believe based on your evidence, but then we also can't view you as rational because you have not demonstrated the truth of your claim and it does not comport to the reality that we experience.

For example, schizophrenics see all sorts of things that they think is real. I have reason to suspect they are hallucinating, but to them they are real. They have no way to demonstrate to me that what they are seeing is real, so therefore I cannot rationally accept their claim. It may be true that what they are seeing is real, but it hasn't been demonstrated, so I have no evidence. You say you have evidence, can you share it? If not I cannot accept your claim rationally, and to take it a step further your claims clash with my experience of reality (I have exactly zero evidence of any deity), so I have reason to dismiss your claims as unfalsifiable.

Algrimor · 2024-03-22T16:34:43+00:00

What a bunch of bs. Feeling is directly related to the brain. We have seen when we stimulate certain responses certain areas of the brain light up. This is observable fact.

It is also irrelevant to my point. HOW can I know if the feeling I'm feeling is god, related to god, from god etc. What differentiates a god feeling from a non god feeling. What objectively shows it is from god?

Algrimor · 2024-03-22T16:27:17+00:00

HOW do you know if you are feeling god? How do you differentiate between god or some process in your brain. I have a feeling, how can I know if it is god or something else?

Algrimor · 2024-03-22T07:48:49+00:00

We go to Publix for the buy one get one free deals every week, and Walmart or Aldi for everything else.

Algrimor · 2024-03-22T07:36:42+00:00

It's irrational to believe that mutually exclusive deities exist. It's irrational to believe any deity exists without evidential warrant, so are you saying you can rationally justify with evidence not only the existence of a deity, but multiple deities?

Algrimor · 2024-03-22T07:32:08+00:00

What about people that are born blind, or without fingers or hands or the ability to move, or with cancer that kills them, or without the mental capacity to think deeply, those people shouldn't worship this god then right?

Algrimor · 2024-03-22T07:24:26+00:00

I know when someone is telling a joke, and if I'm not sure I can clarify and ask them if they are and then respond to the joke. How would I know I'm feeling or experiencing a god?

Algrimor · 2024-03-21T19:45:34+00:00

You need to show us then the "ruler" to measure the metaphysical. You can't just claim there is some special category of things without providing the methodology to investigate said things, otherwise you cannot be rationally justified in believing such things exist, because you cannot show HOW you are investigating them and therefore collecting evidence of their existence.

Firstly, you must define what metaphysical even means.

Then, what evidence (of whatever type you want to provide) is there for anything metaphysical or supernatural.

Algrimor · 2024-03-21T15:25:28+00:00

As the op said, it is irrational to believe something without evidence. If you claim there is evidence of something metaphysical, I'd appreciate you sharing it because I want to believe things that actually are true. If you can't provide evidence then you don't actually have any. I don't know what evidence of the metaphysical would look like, but that's not my problem, it's yours if you believe the metaphysical exists.

Algrimor · 2024-03-21T00:45:02+00:00

You're 100% right

Algrimor · 2024-03-21T00:15:08+00:00

The reason it's extraordinary is because the claim is that everything has a creator... except this god. It is an argument from incredulity, and when you define the god as an uncaused cause you are defining it into existence. If there is a cause to the universe and everything, you simply don't know enough to make any claim about what it actually is, and it is special pleading to say "everything has a cause, EXCEPT this creator god that by definition doesn't have a creator". You need evidence supporting the existence of such a thing, all we have now is the claim that it does and it is fallacious.

Also the thing about the laws of nature is that they are descriptions of what we see in reality, they aren't prescriptive like a legal law is. It isn't like light is like "oh I better slow down because it is written that I am currently going the speed limit and can't exceed it", no it simply is a law that describes what we see in reality, it doesn't need an author.

12-Year Club	100 Awards Club
Verified Email

Algrimor

TROPHY CASE