Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion

[caps]

[vegietarian18]

I agree with Soundwarp; there is no gameplay confusion that can result from the two same-named markers. Even if it were potentially troubling, it seems like a small Editing issue rather than a reason to not review the figure. to review.

[awesomeunleashed]

Nilrend and Morsbane are the only things that share a marker, I'm pretty sure. Don't know what Soundwarp is referring to, if not that.

[Ixe]

How would it be best to proceed on the matter of marker name? It is a non-functional name change and both cards readily exist and can be exchanged at a moment's notice. Should we take a more rigid approach where I put one card forward and all decisions should be based off it in its entirety, or should we approach this more flexibly and kick the decision further down the road?

Personally, while I see the merits of the other side of the argument, I am leaning towards using Soul Markers for this. I agree with Soundwarp SG-1 that having to use synonyms for every similarly themed power that uses the resource in a slightly different way is cumbersome. While I'm not sure to what precedent he is referring, the best example I can provide would be Wound Markers. Wound Markers are all acquired in the same way and, in addition to fulfilling a certain game function, different units can use them differently.

Spoiler Alert!

Krug can use them to linearly increase his attack strength while Sir Dupuis can use them as a threshold mechanic to increase his defense. Evar Scarcarver gets a different and Order Marker dependent linear increase to his stats for them and the Fen Hydra gets a number of attacks reduction. The MacDirk Warriors get a linear benefit when these markers are on another particular unit.

We can stretch it a little more and talk about powers like Sujoahs and Deathwalker 8000's and say that the act of placing wound markers for them allows them to continually attempt their power or an aspect of it. Also, Tul-Bak-Ra can teleport other units to him upon acquiring them.

I would say that any same-named marker must carry a similar theme and be acquired in the same way, but otherwise I would argue that they do not necessarily have to perform an identical function if being used.

[Dad_Scaper]

That is *not* an Editing issue! Even if it was, *please* insist that cards be their very best before approving them! Grrr.

Ixe, what is supposed to happen is votes. What is happening, I can't say.

[superfrog]

I will not consider changing my vote unless the markers have a different name. Other judges may feel differently. Present a card and we'll vote on it. Don't ask us what to put on the card, use our votes and reasoning to craft the best possible card. It's up to you to decide what that is for this unit, and up to us to vote on it.

[Ixe]

Very well, I am sticking with Soul Markers specifically and will let it stand on that. Judges and the rest of C3V are free to vote accordingly.

[Son of Arathorn]

I very much like the mechanics and stats the Elgos Knights present. Everything else needs to be touched up. Soul Markers don't work for me (though markers in and of themselves are better than destroyed figures), and the name just doesn't strike me as the moniker of Undead Knights. More like Holy Champions, really.
So I'm leaning nay on counts of both design components and thematic implementation. The fact that the designer can only scare up 60 of Dread Guard as opposed to 100+ for each of the other miniatures doesn't help. I'd rather not have folks unable to complete their squad of Elgos Knights when everything's said and done.

to review Elgos Knights

[Ixe]

The Dread Guard availability is definitely a concern for me. It is frustrating when there was much greater availability only a few months ago, but that can be the nature of the beast for the miniature markets sometimes. I am currently waiting for Paizo to respond to me on how many they have available to hopefully address that issue and will post here as soon as I have an answer back.

Their name sounding like they are more like Holy Champions fits their theme as being corrupted knights who now use souls to protect themselves rather than defend those souls in the first place. That is not to say you have to like the theme at all, but it is the intent.

I will stick to my "wound marker" argument that like markers acquired in the same way can be used by individual cards differently. I take no offense to judges disagreeing and voting accordingly.

[Scytale]

Originally Posted by Dad_Scaper

That is *not* an Editing issue! Even if it was, *please* insist that cards be their very best before approving them! Grrr.

Ixe, what is supposed to happen is votes. What is happening, I can't say.

I respectfully disagree. While not simply an Editing issue, the name of a marker and specifically the reuse of a name is a very minor issue (with no gameplay effect) that can and should be debated by all of VC, not decided by just the Judges here. Or at least, given how the creator is open to changing if need be would could have handled it internally.

But it looks like we're already down the other path. So we will vote based on the Soul Marker version.

Unless I can be convinced otherwise (Soundwarp?), markers will different effects should not have the same name. I agree there is a certain elegance to having markers gained in the same way keeping the same name, but I wouldn't want them same-named any more than I would want two different powers to have the same name.

I do think the overall design is solid. I have trouble picturing how they can make up their high price tag, but that's a question for playtesting. The Soul Marker thing is a killer though.

[Ixe]

By my count, there are 5 Classic units that use markers. All of them are different, used differently, and themed differently. As mentioned before, The Glyph of Nilrend and Morsbane both use the same marker, but bother powers work the same way.

Spoiler Alert!

Airborne Elite with their one "Grenade Marker," acquired at the start of the game and used once for their special attack.
Morsbane with the 3 aforementioned brown "Negation Markers," acquired at the start of the game and placed on up to three figures for the power.
Tagawa Samurai with 3 purple "Experience Markers," acquired throughout the game to give a linear attack increase. This is the basis for the power in question.
Werewolf Lord with 3 green "Lycanthropy Markers," acquired at the start of the game and placed on figures it wounds.
Mezzodemon Warmongers with 1 copper "Exoskeleton Marker" per figure, acquired at the start of the game and optionally removed when they are wounded by normal attacks.

VC, if I'm not mistaken, adds 3 units that use markers of this type. All of these markers are different from the previously mentioned classic markers and each other, used differently, and themed differently.

Spoiler Alert!

Vulcanmech Incendiborgs with 3 Redundant Systems Markers, acquired at the start of the game and optionally removed when one receives one or more wounds.
Brimstone with up 4 Growing Heat Markers, acquired throughout the game as it takes turns and spent with its special attack.
Akumaken with up to 2 Soul Markers, acquired throughout the game and spent to temporarily boost his attack. This is the contentious power

From what I can see, I really don't know where @Soundwarp SG-1 was coming from with saying it has been done before. I have no direct argument based on precedents to these specific markers and only say that just because something hasn't been done before doesn't mean that it cannot. I do not believe that these units sharing markers that are themed the same, acquired the same, and used differently would necessarily be confusing.

My argument for why markers in general can be used in different ways in a straightforward manner is again based around wound markers. As I had mentioned before, wound markers are acquired the same way by all heroes but only certain heroes (and one squad) use them for their powers. Many of these powers carry a similar theme but still use these markers in drastically different ways.

Why would it be not confusing that Krug gets an attack increase from his wound markers and the Fen Hydra loses attacks for its, but the fact that Akumaken and the Elgos Knights use their Soul Markers differently is something that cannot be done? I will admit that it is a little different in that not every unit is capable of acquiring Soul Markers like heroes for wound markers, but I nevertheless believe the point stands that this is no more confusing over how different heroes use wound markers differently.
@Scytale , their price tag is on the higher side basically because it needs to be. This would ultimately be decided in testing (if it ever makes it there), but my experience playtesting them showed that they, like the Tagawa Samurai, can sometimes get enough momentum going that they become nigh unstoppable and can take out point totals that greatly exceed their own. Otherwise, they face the same struggles of any 3 figure unique melee squad. On that basis, I would not expect them to be overly competitive but that is not to say that they are without merit.

[dok]

Originally Posted by Scytale

Unless I can be convinced otherwise (Soundwarp?), markers will different effects should not have the same name. I agree there is a certain elegance to having markers gained in the same way keeping the same name, but I wouldn't want them same-named any more than I would want two different powers to have the same name.

Counter Strike.

But I mainly want to point out that this is pretty purely an aesthetic preference. If you don't want two different powers on two different cards to have the same name, or two different powers on two different cards to use markers with the same name, that's fine, but there's no rules corner case whatsoever that is created by having a power share the name of another power.

Personally, I fall on SSG1's side of the fence; pick an appropriate name and don't worry about trying to work around every name out there.

And yes Scytale, I'm sure you could come up with some combination of powers where the effect would be weird if different powers could share names... but all that demonstrates in my mind is that we should avoid those powers, as opposed to avoiding duplicate names. And sometimes those odd effects can be a feature not a bug, for that matter. One of the first customs I made had a power that copied the language of frenzy exactly, but was called "unleashed fury" so that the card got synergy from Khosumet instead of Mittens. Again, no corner cases generated.