The Pre-SoV Workshop

[awesomeunleashed]

Just throwing stuff out there because I like the idea...how does this sound?

CHANNEL MAGIC
When an Ullar's Eyes you control is targeted for an attack by a non-adjacent Wizard [+] you control, you may choose a figure within 6 clear sight spaces of that Ullar's Eyes. The chosen figure is now the target of that attack.

Works for normals as well, but easy enough to modify to only be specials if you wanted (all of their ranged normals are magic, though).

[betawolf36]

I like awesome's interpretation.

[Ixe]

I'll also back the idea from awesomeunleashed as a novel way to address this deceptively challenging problem. It may also need a clause about not requiring line of sight on the targeted figure.

As a whole, I still think the birds in whatever squad form will be inherently tricky to use. Moving them into position and actually using the attacks from the wizards will be at odds with each other, working against their purpose of making the wizards play smoother. Even if you could quickly move multiple birds into positions, they themselves are quite fragile and can easily be picked off in melee. I'd suspect that they'd perform a better roll just as a cheap flying squad to be early glyph takers or to provide some reach to the pod's attacks and try to assassinate high value targets chilling in the start zone of an opponent's army.

[caps]

Originally Posted by awesomeunleashed

Just throwing stuff out there because I like the idea...how does this sound?

CHANNEL MAGIC
When an Ullar's Eyes you control is targeted for an attack by a non-adjacent Wizard [+] you control, you may choose a figure within 6 clear sight spaces of that Ullar's Eyes. The chosen figure is now the target of that attack.

Works for normals as well, but easy enough to modify to only be specials if you wanted (all of their ranged normals are magic, though).

An elegant approach. I like it.

--

Ixe, should Viceron really have the "Knight" class instead of something more like the Death Knights? Oh well. The Phantom Knights are Knights.

[Ixe]

I want him to be a knight specifically. Despite the path he took, he was trained in chivalry all the same. I actually aspire for there to eventually be a Knight bonding squad at some point, but I suppose we'll see. I actually did quite a bit of testing with Viceron to future proof him as a bonding hero and make sure that he still worked out well.

[Kinseth]

I am close to re-submitting my Knights I worked on before. I feel I have the power levels/cost to where I want them to be.

I wanted to get some opinions on the names of the powers. One is "Oath of Fealty", someone pointed out that Oath of Fealty was usually to a Lord/King/God and not to another knight. I am looking for a name that signifies running into battle, inspired by a Knightly Hero. Your sword is sharper, reflexes faster, you cannot be stopped as you fight along side this great hero! I feel like Oath of Fealty is good, and fits well enough, but perhaps there is something better?

[Evar-Scarcarver]

Originally Posted by Kinseth

I wanted to get some opinions on the names of the powers. One is "Oath of Fealty", someone pointed out that Oath of Fealty was usually to a Lord/King/God and not to another knight. I am looking for a name that signifies running into battle, inspired by a Knightly Hero. Your sword is sharper, reflexes faster, you cannot be stopped as you fight along side this great hero! I feel like Oath of Fealty is good, and fits well enough, but perhaps there is something better?

Some I came up with:

Allegiance
Devotion
Loyalty (This one matches their personality)
Honor
Ardor (This one might be too obscure though.)

[Ixe]

I'm thrilled to see Knight bonding, and I don't mind if you squeak Paladin in there (although I don't think it's really necessary). I'd love to see them be part of a larger squad, but I think your strategic bonding nicely works around that downside. Call to Arms almost feels like you're trying too hard to combat that limitation and would ideally be better off with more figures (name of the game sometimes). All said I think they should work along very nicely with Sir Dupuis with those powers to keep him at critical mass of nearby knights.

The Oath of Fealty powers makes these guys a force to be reckoned with when their hero is around, perhaps worryingly so. I don't know about their points without testing, but I do wonder if its a tad low given all of their whistles and bells. I can agree with you that the name of the power could stand to be tweaked. Thematically, they would be inspired to live up to the ideals of chivalry and prowess exemplified by the hero in question. Chivalric Inspiration? Shared Oath? I think there are a few possibilities.

[caps]

Originally Posted by Evar-Scarcarver

Some I came up with:

Allegiance
Devotion
Loyalty (This one matches their personality)
Honor
Ardor (This one might be too obscure though.)

I like Ardor. I would probably go with LOYAL ARDOR. I think that might convey your theme a little better.

Originally Posted by Ixe

I'm thrilled to see Knight bonding, and I don't mind if you squeak Paladin in there (although I don't think it's really necessary). I'd love to see them be part of a larger squad, but I think your strategic bonding nicely works around that downside. Call to Arms almost feels like you're trying too hard to combat that limitation and would ideally be better off with more figures (name of the game sometimes). All said I think they should work along very nicely with Sir Dupuis with those powers to keep him at critical mass of nearby knights.

I have the opposite feeling. I feel wary of bonding creep in general and for Knights in particular. I have brainstormed ideas for Knight bonding in the past, but I've reached the conclusion that Knight synergy should be achieved through more powers like Dupuis'--powers that get a boost for having other Knights within so many feet without any straightforward bonding.

All that said, this does overall seem like a nice attempt at Knight bonding. Call To Arms feels a little tacked on. I would like it as a custom, but as I said, I feel wary of it from an SoV perspective.

[Ixe]

Originally Posted by capsocrates

I have the opposite feeling. I feel wary of bonding creep in general and for Knights in particular. I have brainstormed ideas for Knight bonding in the past, but I've reached the conclusion that Knight synergy should be achieved through more powers like Dupuis'--powers that get a boost for having other Knights within so many feet without any straightforward bonding.

"Bonding creep" is an interesting problem. Bonding is essentially an obvious and powerful tool that can be tempting to apply and patch over perceived holes for different units that can potentially lead to overuse. Sometimes, however, it is just the cleanest and most efficient way to answer the problem at hand where you can cripple yourself trying to work around it.

I personally feel that there is reasonable thematic justification for Knights to be able to bond, although I must admit that this has been muddied by the fact that many obvious thematic knights are instead classed as champions.

[superfrog]

I don't really like the two bonus activation powers on the card. I'd prefer just one.

[Lazy Orang]

Chivalric Ardour sounds good to me. Seeing how high their stats can go I think they need to be about 50 points at least, but I might be wrong. It's nice to see something help Dupuis and Rhogar. I really like them. Personally I liked them better as Aquilla, though - they seem thematically unnecessary for Jandar. I liked the idea someone came up with for making them Aquilla based on them being the remnants of Gothic knights - it'd be nice to see some more obscure historical references (as well as more obvious ones.