Soldiers of Valhalla - nominations and discussion

[William099]

Did you see my custom Marshal? He does kind of what you are looking for.

[caps]

Originally Posted by Kinseth

I personally just do not like the themed idea for this Warforged figure. Warforged soldiers are tactical, methodical creatures. Any warforged leader I think would have to embody that. I also feel this leader would have to work with the warforged soldiers in someway.

Just something off the top of my head that I "could" envision of this leader.

Warforged Leadership
Before taking a turn with Warforged Leader, If there are three or more warforged soldiers within 5 spaces of Warforged Leader, you may take a turn with the Warforged soldiers. If you do not take a turn with warforged soldiers you may attack an extra time for each Warforged Soldier within 5 spaces of Warforged leader to a maximum of 2 additional times.

Anyways just a thought...

Um... he's not a leader... he's a D&D Barbarian...

[Scytale]

A leader for the warforged would be nice and all, but I have no issues with a non-leader one. Actually, neither of the two warforged heroes, Heirloom and Siege, are leaders or have special interactions with the Warforged Soldiers. So I see no need for Rampage to.

Before I vote, I have a question about the intent. Rage of Destruction says to attack again with "1 less Attack die." Do you really mean 1 less die, or do you mean to reduce Attack by 1? Yes, those are different things. For example, if Rampage attacks and kills a figure below him with 5 attack dice (4 + 1 for height), how many dice would he then throw at a figure on a higher level than him?

[Kinseth]

Originally Posted by capsocrates

Um... he's not a leader... he's a D&D Barbarian...

Nevermind, we are not on the same page.

[Soundwarp SG-1]

A crazy robot (more or less) named Rampage? Does he enjoy mindless television or blood feuds with manta rays?

Originally Posted by Scytale

Before I vote, I have a question about the intent. Rage of Destruction says to attack again with "1 less Attack die." Do you really mean 1 less die, or do you mean to reduce Attack by 1? Yes, those are different things. For example, if Rampage attacks and kills a figure below him with 5 attack dice (4 + 1 for height), how many dice would he then throw at a figure on a higher level than him?

I too would need to know the intent here before voting.

[William099]

Hmmm... that's an interesting question. Guess he didn't get tested enough cause that didn't come up... I would say it would have to be 5,3,2,1 provided he destroyed the figure on height. So I guess that's reducing attack by one?

[Lazy Orang]

Originally Posted by William099

Hmmm... that's an interesting question. Guess he didn't get tested enough cause that didn't come up... I would say it would have to be 5,3,2,1 provided he destroyed the figure on height. So I guess that's reducing attack by one?

That's what I'd have thought - it's the same way C3G's Swordplay power works. The guys at VC have brought up concerns about that mechanic, but, as I explain here, I believe those concerns to be ungrounded:

Originally Posted by Lazy Orang

These all seem to have fairly simple explanations - I'll do my best to explain them:

Assuming someone has an attack of 3 (which this seems to), if he attacks someone from height, his first attack will be 4, if not, 3. If his second attack attacks someone from height, the attack will be 3, if not, 2. Same pattern for the third attack. He could get a fourth attack assuming he attacks someone from height or gets a height bonus, something I have no problem with considering the way a sword is used - you could probably manage more slashes at someone below you.

Yes, he should get a fifth attack. It's quite simple - the power technically only tells you to stop attacking if no skull is rolled, not if you run out of attack dice. Now, when you run out of dice to attack with, you are certain not to roll a skull, but modifiers can alter the number of times you can attack if you keep rolling skulls - and so far I'm seeing nothing that applies to Classic more than C3G.
And yes, the attack with two forever argument is a stupid one, and the reason putting yourself in that position in the first place is not a bad idea is that it is a mechanic that has proven itself in C3G to be fun and useful, and it represents a master swordsman brilliantly - and it isn't as though official powers haven't had FAQ's, often fairly stupid ones.

Yes, as his attack phase never ends until you fail to roll a skull. If he sees someone lower to attempt to attack, he can attack - it would at this stage be the exact same as if he simply had an attack of 0. Or, to use an example that actually exists - a Deathreaver attacking a Skull Demon would normally subtract one from its attack, reducing it to 0, not allowing it to attack. However, if attacking from height, it then has the height bonus so it can attack. Same principal.

No, using the Swordplay power, he would no longer get Taelord's bonus, as Taelord would no longer be there providing it. So say he had an attack of 3, and hit Taelord with 4, killing him. His next attack would be without Taelord's boost, and so would be an attack of 2. Why you'd want to do this escapes me anyway, but the answer's quite clear.

Yes, it could get height advantage, the way every other normal attack can. If it attacks a Skull Demon, that would independently reduce that one attack - so let's say a Skull Demon was attacked by a figure with an attack of 3, that figure's attack would be reduced by one, so he'd attack with 2. But then, as the next attack is separate, he could attack a non Skull Demon with 2 for his next attack. Also, if this is kept to heroes, that is irrelevant anyway, as Frightening Presence only affects Commons. It has also been dealt with by C3g, based on the way this power interacts with figures like Darkseid. The Microcorp one is even simpler - the figure just wouldn't get the height bonus, same as any other figure. I'm not seeing the issues.

I don't see how any of these are different from the way it interacts in C3G.

[MegaSilver]

And having played with and against the Swordplay Special Power, L_O is correct.

[Scytale]

Whether or not the situations can be explained away is beside the point, and not a good argument when even rules-savvy players can disagree on the outcome. When common situations can have multiple interpretations, the power is not fully baked.

Originally Posted by William099

Hmmm... that's an interesting question. Guess he didn't get tested enough cause that didn't come up... I would say it would have to be 5,3,2,1 provided he destroyed the figure on height. So I guess that's reducing attack by one?

That's the interpretation I can agree with. Given that, I'll give a

to review Rampage

Though the concern that he seems similar to the Frost Giant is a valid one. Testing will determine if he plays differently.

[Lazy Orang]

Originally Posted by Scytale

Whether or not the situations can be explained away is beside the point, and not a good argument when even rules-savvy players can disagree on the outcome. When common situations can have multiple interpretations, the power is not fully baked.

That's the interpretation I can agree with. Given that, I'll give a

to review Rampage

Though the concern that he seems similar to the Frost Giant is a valid one. Testing will determine if he plays differently.

Wait a minute... you do realise you're agreeing to review pretty much the exact same mechanic as Swordplay, which you still seem to have a problem with, don't you? And the power is fully baked, because that is the way it is meant to be played - also these are situations that would be fairly common in Superscape too, no less so than in Classic, and I've never seen anyone struggle with its interpretation before now - I know I never did, and Megasilver's only seen it play that way.

[Scytale]

Originally Posted by Lazy Orang

Wait a minute... you do realise you're agreeing to review pretty much the exact same mechanic as Swordplay, which you still seem to have a problem with, don't you?

I don't know Swordplay so I really can't comment on how I feel about that.

If the Attack number is reduced by 1 each attack (as opposed to "attack with one less die"), then most of my issues go away. There is an odd issue involving allowing someone to attack repeatedly with zero dice, which I'll bring up with the C3V editing team and may kill the design. For example, player A's Rampage could repeatedly roll zero attack dice at Player B's Deathreaver so that Player B can swarm Player C's area with Deathreavers. If we can't prevent shenanigans like that, it won't get through Inner Sanctum review.

[caps]

Originally Posted by Scytale

I don't know Swordplay so I really can't comment on how I feel about that.

If the Attack number is reduced by 1 each attack (as opposed to "attack with one less die"), then most of my issues go away. There is an odd issue involving allowing someone to attack repeatedly with zero dice, which I'll bring up with the C3V editing team and may kill the design. For example, player A's Rampage could repeatedly roll zero attack dice at Player B's Deathreaver so that Player B can swarm Player C's area with Deathreavers. If we can't prevent shenanigans like that, it won't get through Inner Sanctum review.

I can imagine some clauses that could go on the end of the power to prevent said shenanigans without changing the power's mechanics.

--

Lazy O, SWORDPLAY allows a figure to get extra *attacks* for each extra attack die that they start with. It works that way because it subtracts attack dice rather than subtracting from the attack value. Rampage, on the other hand, subtracts from the attack value, so things like getting height do not increase his possible number of attacks. Although I suppose anything that modified his attack value might do that--like INDOMITABLE.