[Pod 2] Vlad III (Sorin) - Editing

[Skinderella]

With these markers I think we'd have to use the stars if we wanted a marker power. The red cubes would need to be wound markers, the small round marker would likely need to be the round number marker, and the swords and shield on the other markers match the dice, which would obviously be the combat dice.

Only units I can think of that would use them is either Vlad or maybe the elf with the staff if we wanted to take her the Morsbane's mum route and give her a similar power set to him. Personally I think it'll work better here, as we can track Vlad's impalements.

Some options for what to do with them though, here's a couple more ideas. Some might be a bit much for a master set where we want things simple, but no harm in throwing ideas out there.

DISPLAY OF CRUELTY
For every opponent's figure Vlad destroys, place a black Impaled Marker on this card. Before an opponent takes a turn with any figure they control within 4 clear sight spaces of Vlad, you may roll the 20-sided die. Add 1 to your roll for each Impaled Marker on this Army Card. If you roll 17 or higher, that figure cannot move this turn. A maximum of 3 Impaled Markers can be placed on this card.

This one has a figure crippled with fear at the sight of all of Vlad's cruel deeds.

GRUESOME VISAGE
Anytime Vlad destroys an opponent's figure, you may choose a figure within 6 clear sight spaces of Vlad and roll the 20-sided die. If you roll 11 or higher, the owner of the chosen figure must move the chosen figure 2 spaces, if possible. The chosen figure must move further away from Vlad than it's original placement. Figures moved by Gruesome Visage take any leaving engagement attacks that apply.

This one doesn't use the markers, but makes other figures retreat in fear.

CORPSE FOREST
For every opponent's figure Vlad destroys, place a black Impaled Marker on this card. When rolling for initiative, opponents must subtract 2 from their roll for each Impaled Marker on this card. A maximum of 3 Impaled Markers can be placed on this card.

An initiative debuff that some people liked the idea of.

An alternative could even just be to go with Bloodlust and reduce his attack a bit. This is fitting if we can't find anything else.

BLOODLUST
For every opponent's figure Vlad destroys, place a black Experience Marker on this card. When attacking with Vlad, roll one additional attack die for each Experience Marker on this card. A maximum of 3 Experience Markers can be placed on this card.

[NecroBlade]

Display of Cruelty is OK. Could maybe use a different name tied better to the fear that's keeping figures at bay. Kinda sucks that it's not super useful against Range.

For Gruesome Visage I'm pretty sure "farther away" isn't a defined 'scape term.

Corpse Forest is OK, but I like it better named Display of Cruelty.

Bloodlust is also OK, though not as interesting as something new here, IMO.

Bloodlust and/or Corpse Forest (renamed) would probably even work fine on a Warlord.

[Shiftrex]

I like the ability of Corpse Forest the best here I think. Gruesome visage is a close second place, they both are fun mechanically and reward the player.

[Captain Stupendous]

With his current stats and powers, I'm not sure corpse forest is going to be worth the trouble of getting kills with him without bonding? He's basically just Retiarius with less attack, better survivability, and an initiative power...

[Skinderella]

I don't think there's anything wrong with having a character similar to another one, especially if they fit into different armies. It's not like classic didn't do that.

There's always the option of making him a one power card, scrapping Impalement, and then buffing his attack, if Retiarius similarities were a concern.

I could see Corpse Forest being worth the investment in the long run, -6 initiative is a big chunk to knock off of someone. These numbers could tweak though. Outside of the master set maybe not, but it could more be a bonus to using him rather than an incentive to use him.

Originally Posted by NecroBlade

For Gruesome Visage I'm pretty sure "farther away" isn't a defined 'scape term.

I swear a card somewhere mentions at least something in a similar vein? I might be thinking of a C3G card though.

It's good to know what people are preferring in terms of what his abilities should do and how they affect other figures.

[Shiftrex]

hmm... Farther away does seem to be a foreign concept in scape terminology as far as I'm seeing from a look through HACCS. If we wanted to try and stress a concept such as "farther away" i think we would have to define it as a greater number of spaces between X and Y after movement is finished which could be... lengthy and troublesome. I'd have to give some special thinking to that, because even something like Z'Thoth (C3V Outsider) doesn't specify where the figure has to go.

Also, nothing wrong with allowing him to be a bonding target

[Astroking112]

I don't think that "further away" needs to be defined in order to have a character run away, if that's what the Pod wants. For example:

THAT IS NO MAN
Any time Vlad destroys an opponent's figure, you may roll the 20-sided die. If you roll an 11 or higher, move each adjacent opponent's figure up to 2 spaces, if possible. Figures moved by That Is No Man take any leaving engagement attacks that apply, and can only move if they do not end their movement engaged to Vlad III.

I think that direction would need tweaking in a couple of ways, but this is just an example that "running in fear" is perfectly achievable without needing to define new terminology here.

[Skinderella]

I think it could be neat, certainly an area not really touched before other than with Z'Thoth. Z'Thoth plays around the ideas of running away by making different players decide it, and it's a bit more chaotic.

Originally Posted by Astroking112

I like this but is there any oddities that could happen with Scatter or if you kill one of the figures leaving an engagement with him?

Brave Arrow has some weird wording that we could make use of if needed.

THAT IS NO MAN
Any time Vlad destroys an opponent's figure with a normal attack, you may choose up to 2 opponents' figures within 6 clear sight spaces of Vlad and roll the 20-sided die. If you roll an 11 or higher, count the minimum number of spaces between the chosen figures and Vlad. Move each opponent's figure up to 2 spaces, if possible. Figures take any leaving engagement attacks that apply, and can only move if they end this move on a space where the minimum number of spaces between the chosen figure and Vlad is higher than before moving.

VERY clunky but it's another possibility, and can affect non-adjacent figures too.

[Pumpkin_King]

I'm satisfied with where he is (turning his aura/buff into an exerpience marker mechanic of course) but I'm willing to entertain bigger reworks even if I don't think we need them at the moment.

[Astroking112]

Originally Posted by Skinderella

I think it could be neat, certainly an area not really touched before other than with Z'Thoth. Z'Thoth plays around the ideas of running away by making different players decide it, and it's a bit more chaotic.

I like this but is there any oddities that could happen with Scatter or if you kill one of the figures leaving an engagement with him?

Whoops, I had missed this earlier. Good catch. You could partially fix this issue by limiting the power to trigger when "Vlad destroys an opponent's figure with a normal attack."

Defensive movement powers like Scatter or Vanish are trickier, because some are immediate and some aren't (if they occur "at the same time," then it's a dice-off to see which triggers first). This will have to be resolved in any case if a forced movement power direction is decided upon.

FWIW, I don't like the idea of using Brave Arrow's "count the minimum number of spaces" here. I don't mind the idea in concept, but I think that it's a bit too clunky and weird for our purposes, especially since the counting would have to be featured twice. I'd rather define "further away" and "closer" in the rules than do that, but I'm sure that would meet a lot of resistance.

[Astroking112]

@flameslayer93 @Pumpkin_King

It's been a bit since there was discussion on this one. I think that Pod 2 should be good to move back to Design here--it's been almost two months of Public Feedback now.

[Pumpkin_King]

hah, sorry! We're back to design.

Do we want to talk more about design here? I know there's talk of a light redesign.