Boot Camp of Valhalla: Kobolds of Idona Keep (Reworking)

[caps]

Missed the next page...

I like A, then C.

--

Making them Protectors is not unreasonable. Not sure if it's any better than making them Sentinels, though.

[Soundwarp SG-1]

Even if their warrior has no wounds, they are only a touch worse than the cutters, who cost 50 points.

They're not 'only a touch' worse than the cutters.
Not having Scurrry is a huge deal, since it is by far the Cutters most potent power.

EDIT- I prefer Sentinels over Protectors personally.

[Maklar the Silver Prince]

Originally Posted by Soundwarp SG-1

They're not 'only a touch' worse than the cutters.
Not having Scurrry is a huge deal, since it is by far the Cutters most potent power.

EDIT- I prefer Sentinels over Protectors personally.

I mention Scurry one moment, then forget it the next. Your right. They make up for it (only slightly, of course) by having 1 more defense. Still, facing melee, these guys are as good as the cutters cutters even if the warrior has no wounds. That one defense makes a lot more of a difference than you think. We have to point these guys according to their optimal circumstances, even if that circumstance doesn't always come up. The problem is, I don't know what that circumstance is. Help me out please.

[1moreheroscaper]

Originally Posted by Maklar the Silver Prince

I like A the best. Not a fan of C

What do these guys really do? With mob attack, I find it hard to see understand if they are hero killers, or an anti-squad unit, or whatever else they may be. Something I am slightly worried about, which may become unfounded and can be easily fixed, is that these guys don't really at anything new to Heroscape.

My

Any response to making them Protectors?

I believe the biggest drive is not to create something completely new for the game, instead it is to fill in the factions/generals. I will also argue that Warrior's Devotion is a nice new addition to classic fanscape, and the fact that they are a low cost common squad for Jandar is a nice addition, for players that like good/evil thematic games. Lastly, a common squad that can get a non-aura benefit from a kyrie also make them different.


As for the card image. I vote C, then A.

[Soundwarp SG-1]

Originally Posted by Maklar the Silver Prince

Still, facing melee, these guys are as good as the cutters cutters even if the warrior has no wounds. That one defense makes a lot more of a difference than you think.

Again, no they're not. Scurry is plenty good at denying melee attacks too.

[Lazy Orang]

Protector sounds more thematic, but I like how Sentinel makes Concan more useful - I'd go with that.

On that note, how about calling them Servants of Concan, or Servants of Concan's Castle? Kobolds were generally servants in mythology, and these guys seem pretty nicely tied to Concan.

I think it would be cool to have these guys come from Valhalla - make them a serving race to the kyrie or something. Enough fantasy stuff comes from Feylund, I think Valhalla sounds cooler for these guys.

[Maklar the Silver Prince]

Originally Posted by Soundwarp SG-1

Again, no they're not. Scurry is plenty good at denying melee attacks too.

Firstly, Scurry only allows 2 cutters to run away (per attack). This means there is a very good chance that you will lose at least a half squad of these guys a turn. The kobolds have a slightly better chance of defending theirselves, even though they have to stand there and take it. Secondly, I probably should have stated it better. What I mean is, cutters are worse than these guys against other swarms. The zombies of Moradin are a good example, as are gladiatrons, and even our kobolds. If the cutters are swamped, they have difficulty scurrying away, and thusly should fall quickly. Its the same for these guys, but their slightly increased defense might protect them better, and you can possibly get a higher number of retaliating attacks, being able to attack with your front lines and still bring up reinforcements.

Besides, what's the point of arguing about this now? All we need is a starting point and play testing will tell us more.

@1moreheroscaper: I thought the exact same thing, and I'm pretty sure that they are fine as is, but there is a dark recess of my brain that is telling me that these guys aren't. I'll tell that corner to shut up, but still, doesn't hurt to clarify things after many pages of discussion

[William099]

I like C.

[DanieLoche]

For now, if I count 2 points for your first choice, and 1 point for your second choice, here is the result for the choice of the image:

A: 8 points.
C: 14 points.

[DanieLoche]

I tried Maklar the Silver Prince's proposition, so here is the new proposal B :

(if you change your vote, edit your last post where you already voted)
A : "Blade for Left" :

Spoiler Alert!

B : "High Spear for Left" :

Spoiler Alert!

C : "Braced Spear for Left" :

Spoiler Alert!

More, I've reformulated Warrior's Devotion, with the exact wordings of "Loyalty to the Lezard King" and "Highland Fury".
If you want the code to add this power to your MSE keywords, here it is:

At the start of the game, choose a Unique Warrior Hero you control to be {uncTHIS()}{sqTHE()}{card.key_name_sing}'s Master. When taking a turn with {uncTHIS()}{sqTHE()}{card.key_name}, you may move and attack with 1 additionnal {card.key_name_sing} for each Wound Marker on the chosen Master's Army Card. There can be only one Master for {uncTHIS()}{sqvalue("all ")}{card.key_name}{sqvalue(" you control")}. {uncTHISC()}{card.key_name} cannot attack {HIS("plural")} chosen Master.

[Maklar the Silver Prince]

Looks good DanieLoche! I noticed that the Vie, Mouvement, Portée, Attaque, and Défense are all in French on A and C.

[ollie]

I've been reading occasionally but not following closely. This is a great project.

I've just seen the "Warrior's Devotion" power for the first time. How much discussion was there about using Warrior as the class? I would've thought that was an automatic no: it's the bland generic class to use when you don't want any synergy. Isn't it?