Justice League Design Thread (Heroes)

[Viegon]

Personally, if we're adding a class or personality for a single character, then I'd rather just leave it off and instead make second designs of those characters. For example, I think a League Member Oliver Queen would be pretty cool (maybe give him dual class of League Member and Archer so he can still synergize with Red Arrow, making Red Arrow a good option for the "choose any one unique hero" recruiter ).

[IAmBatman]

I think the "choose any one unique hero" recruiter idea is a non-starter, personally. If we do that, then we're really, really constraining what we can do in terms of synergy, because we're allowing that synergy to be used universally, significantly increasing the likelihood of an abusive combination forming.

For instance, if we restrict the list of classes a fair amount, we can probably get away with Martian Manhunter giving a solid D20 boost. If we don't, we can't. So the more open we are in terms of who gets this synergy, the less we're actually able to do with it while staying competitively balanced.

[Viegon]

Originally Posted by IAmBatman

I think the "choose any one unique hero" recruiter idea is a non-starter, personally. If we do that, then we're really, really constraining what we can do in terms of synergy, because we're allowing that synergy to be used universally, significantly increasing the likelihood of an abusive combination forming.

For instance, if we restrict the list of classes a fair amount, we can probably get away with Martian Manhunter giving a solid D20 boost. If we don't, we can't. So the more open we are in terms of who gets this synergy, the less we're actually able to do with it while staying competitively balanced.

If MM has the D20 boost and the "recruit any one unique hero" goes to a different figure (like Batman) I don't think it'll be that big of an issue compared to already having some good boost-able options via MM. You're talking about, what, 600+ points just for the two of them? For any figure not included in the synergy, you can just spend 190 points on Sage and get a solid +1/-1 ability.

Even just allowing a single "any one unique hero" option solves a couple of issues: want Hawkman and Hawkgirl in the same army? Let MM pick one and Batman gets the other. Is your favorite minor JLAer getting left out? Have Batman pick them.

Also, for the personality concept, I think it could be applied nicely to a new Superman. Having him turn all your Valiant figures into League Members would be pretty cool, then give him some sort of small inspirational boost. Also, by doing a League Member Superman, it makes it easy to include him and Wonder Woman in an army.

EDIT: To be clear, the "any one unique hero" thing isn't a sticking point for me; if we don't go with it I'll be fine. However, listing so many options is more of a sticking point for me. I'd really like it if we could get it down to about 5 at max.

[TrollBrute]

B for the same reasons as johnny and V. It just feels like it's trying too hard, and it quickly becomes a mess when you're already talking about 6+ classes in a single power.

[Yodaking]

The 'marker' system will let you grab anyone you want, the 'class' system is going to be more focused in on just the core line-up. When it is all said and done, if you prefer the 'marker' all inclusive system over the 'class' laser point focus system you can vote that way. With the difficulty required to just get approval of 3 JL related designs, any suggestion we make 10 new JL cards is dead on arrival. I'd like to see this completed before I turn 65.

[IAmBatman]

Agreed with Yodaking. Also, while the D20 synergy might not be a sticking point on its own, we're also working on putting synergy on the proposed Batman 3.0, so the same issue could easily arise there. It just seems like perilous ground, even if I do totally understand the intent and value of the suggestion were it not for the competitive concerns.

[japes]

Originally Posted by Yodaking

The 'marker' system will let you grab anyone you want, the 'class' system is going to be more focused in on just the core line-up. When it is all said and done, if you prefer the 'marker' all inclusive system over the 'class' laser point focus system you can vote that way. With the difficulty required to just get approval of 3 JL related designs, any suggestion we make 10 new JL cards is dead on arrival. I'd like to see this completed before I turn 65.

A "marker" system doesn't have to be open which I think was the issue. A combo Marker system where you can only put the markers on a set list of classes seems reasonable.

[dok]

Originally Posted by Yodaking

The 'marker' system will let you grab anyone you want, the 'class' system is going to be more focused in on just the core line-up.

I don't think either of those things need be true.

The former is not true because a Marker-based system doesn't need to preclude restrictions on where to place markers. Heck, you could have a marker-based system that starts out very similarly to the "class-based" system being discussed. "At the start of the game, you may place a black Justice League marker on up to one Unique Hero you control from each of the following Classes...", and there you have it. The systems are not mutually exclusive in the slightest.

The latter is not true because these class-based systems are not focused on the core-lineup, and certainly not "laser-point" focused. It's reasonable, and arguably optimal, to pair Manhunter 2, et al, with guys like Thor or Floronic Man or Scarlet Spider or Angel.

EDIT: I was doing other things midway through my reply, and japes pretty much ninja'ed my first point.

[Yodaking]

Now you guys are arguing just to argue, which is in no way helpful at all. The 'marker' system that we were initially going forward with did not reference any classes, it was open for anyone at all to join. A new 'marker' system in which you could only place the markers on figures of a certain class is just the class system with markers & marker synergy instead of a class change & class synergy. That is not a different system, it is the same system. Why don't the two of you put together the 'marker' system proposal instead of creating paper tigers.

[dok]

Originally Posted by Yodaking

Now you guys are arguing just to argue, which is in no way helpful at all.

I don't understand why people keep assuming bad faith in this discussion. It's not something I generally see around here.

No, I'm not arguing "just to argue", and it's not helpful to accuse others of that.

Originally Posted by Yodaking

The 'marker' system that we were initially going forward with did not reference any classes, it was open for anyone at all to join.

Sure, and we could give that a shot too. I think it's quite reasonable to discuss. My point was simply that there was a false choice being presented between "wide open" and "laser focused". You could choose a marker system that has a narrower scope, and moreover the class-based system is not as focused as was advertised.

It's worth noting that one of the three existing "team marker" systems, the Horsemen of the Apocalypse, only allows picking one species and changes the class of the figures with the markers. It's not like I'm making this out of whole cloth here.

Originally Posted by Yodaking

A new 'marker' system in which you could only place the markers on figures of a certain class is just the class system with markers & marker synergy instead of a class change & class synergy. That is not a different system, it is the same system.

Depending on how such a marker system is implemented, there are multiple differences. And that's setting aside the mechanical parallel of Justice League Markers to match the Avengers Markers. I see that as a feature.

Originally Posted by Yodaking

Why don't the two of you put together the 'marker' system proposal

Because I was told to back off and let the class system get hammered out?

[japes]

Originally Posted by Yodaking

Now you guys are arguing just to argue, which is in no way helpful at all. The 'marker' system that we were initially going forward with did not reference any classes, it was open for anyone at all to join. A new 'marker' system in which you could only place the markers on figures of a certain class is just the class system with markers & marker synergy instead of a class change & class synergy. That is not a different system, it is the same system. Why don't the two of you put together the 'marker' system proposal instead of creating paper tigers.

I'm not sure what you are getting at here. I'm not trying to argue at all. Quite the opposite. I was stating that all these ideas on the class are great work and that since we can't come to an agreement between Markers and Class why not combine them since the biggest argument against Markers was it being two open. If I wanted to argue and derail I'd have posted it in the Brainstorming thread however I posted it here since the Heroes seemed to be against the current track so I through it out there to see if they had any comments. As far as I am concerned the goal of the Heroes isn't clear yet and that is fine as perhaps they aren't sure what they want yet they just know that they haven't seen it yet. Every time we get a comment we learn something and it helps us.

[Arkham]

To be fair, they haven't expressed disapproval of what we have thus far. They voted against the idea of mixing Classes and Personalities on such a large scale. They've actually come off pretty supportive of what we're doing, they've just suggested little tweaks to get their own personal desired results. It's up to us to find the happy middle ground.

As for markers + class, I guess I just don't see the point. Why call out a bunch of classes, and place a marker, when you could just change the class? That way new units don't have to start with a marker on their card just to be a part of things. They do exactly the same thing when combined, as just class does when not combined. Except then you're using "has a Justice League marker on their card" instead of "League Member". It also requires markers, vs. not having to use markers. So I'm not exactly sure why you'd combine both.

Regardless, I'm breaking my own rule, but let's try to keep the discussion part in the Discussion thread for the most part, and keep this mainly for when the heroes need to see something etc.