Specific Card Fixes

[Palatinus]

Not that I'm trying to defend this card. The worst part is when they give it to some one, then nerf it more! (see Catwoman).

That's a relief! 

This card ranks up/down(?) there with the level 4 AR specials we talked about earlier.  I mean they could have at least let it combine multiple power types! Not that 'that' would redeem it, but it would be slightly more useful, potentially, in part, sort of....
 

The remainder of the battle is a sucky part too because the card is worded as if you might try to do this trick more than once in the same hand.  Plus, you lose your turn for playing it so you might not ever get to use it if something happens on your opponent's turn like playing an AV or AX on the character.

maybe you could use it as a decoy/bait? 

Maybe.  I still feel like this was a poorly thought out card that does not work in practice the way it was intended.  I really like the idea of combining power cards to do things as a power though, so I'd like to see a good way to use that feature.

[Demacus]

Keep in mind that the defensive action on this card is a one-card defense. So, yes, an AG will avoid the whole thing. However, if you come at me with 1-4 and I'm holding a level 4 and a level 6 power card, I can't combine my power cards, so I'd have to choose which to use to "block in part". I could use my 6 and defeat your 2 & 4, which would allow the 1 & 3 to stick. I could use my 4 to defeat your 4, and the 1-3 would all stick.

I was under the impression that the statement "Can be blocked as a whole or in parts" implied that, yes, my AG can block ALL of the attacks as a single attack, if I didn't have a single defense card, I could block EACH part of the attack with powercards.  It doesn't say you can block "part," it says "parts" which I always took to mean, I could use multiple defensive maneuvers to block each of the incoming attack. 

I honestly think the best way to errata this card to make it playable is to remove the part that states "Can be blocked as a whole."  If I used 4 cards to attack, my opponent shouldn't be allowed to use 1 card to avoid the whole thing. 

It's the same principle as teamwork cards vs Confusion.  Before there was a ruling, my friends and I used to play Confusion AFTER the 3rd attack of the teamwork, and toss the whole lot.  The ruling prevents that kind of hand-advantage gain by forcing you to Confusion on the FIRST attack and negate the subsequent incomming attacks. 

BU's should have that kind of errata.  It wouldn't make the card top tier, but it's certainly better then a DTR ruling.  You shouldn't be able to draw new cards every time you opt to play a crappy card.  But if my opponent can't just AG away the entire attack, or AO it after the attack is on it's way, then it makes it more fair under the mechanics of the game, without giving YOU an unfair hand-advantage over your opponent.

Honestly, I like the BU specials, though I'm don't use them often, Rhino's has seen play in my past decks.  Similar to Shrapnel Bomb, it can be used to gain a venture advantage.  But just cause you are capable of a lvl 10 attack, doesn't mean that's the smartest way to play it.  2 lvl 5 attacks can be just as detrimental to your opponent, if they are close to death by 5 pts or just need that stat for a spectrum kill.  It can be a great way to pull tricks, especially if you begin the hand with an advantage due to duplicate discards and unusables from your opponents hand.  It's also a KILLER card to have in the Power Pack, even played as written.