HoME Brainstorming Thread

[White Knight]

Originally Posted by capsocrates

Sure, Taelord is a little more mobile, but that Strider has way more offensive punch and can get into position without OMs. For 40 points less. That makes him way better for any Army that can use his Melee attack boost.

Again, I repeat my question:
What melee army do you use Taelord in right now that would be obsolete because of Aragorn?

[Lazy Orang]

Originally Posted by White Knight

Again, I repeat my question:
What melee army do you use Taelord in right now that would be obsolete because of Aragorn?

My answer would be: none, because playing Taelord, especially in a melee army, is generally suicide anyway.

[caps]

LazyO, unfortunately Swordplay has a lot of tricky edge-cases and just plain weird interactions when moved over to a Classic interpretation of power-text. C3G wand-waves all that away but that won't work for us. I love it as a C3G power though.

--

Originally Posted by White Knight

Again, I repeat my question:
What melee army do you use Taelord in right now that would be obsolete because of Aragorn?

I don't typically use Taelord, but I could see him with Goblin Cutters, Warriors of Ashra, and Anubian Wolves off the top of my head. I see it as a moot point, though, as we're looking to address more of the Strider characteristics of the character.

[White Knight]

Originally Posted by capsocrates

I don't typically use Taelord, but I could see him with Goblin Cutters, Warriors of Ashra, and Anubian Wolves off the top of my head. I see it as a moot point, though, as we're looking to address more of the Strider characteristics of the character.

I looked through the tournament armies played thread for Taelord. Here are the 15 most recent armies that used the Kyrie:

Taelord, Atlaga, Cyprien, Sonya, Minionsx3
Omnicron Snipers X 2, Taelord, Warriors of Ashra X 2
Cyprien, Taelord, Raelin (RotV), Protectors of Ullar x4
Taelord, Nakitas, Laglor, Krav, Raelin, Isamu
Taelord, Atlaga, Minions of Utgar x 2, Johnny "Shoutgun" Sullivan
Rats x5, Taelord, Krav
2x Snipers, Taelord, Repulsors, Fen Hydra
Taelord, 4x Deathreavers, Zetacron, MW, Guilty
Taelord, 2x Snipers, Theracus, Guilty McCreech
3x Protectors of Ullar, Atlaga, Taelord
3x Omnicron Snipers, 3x Omnicron Repulsors, Taelord
Taelord, 4x Stingers, Zettian Guards, Isamu
Taelord, Rotv Raelin, Syvarris, Zetacron, Krav , Guilty
Taelord, 3 x Omnicron Snipers
5x 4th Mass, Raelin, Taelord

Of those 15 armies, only 2 armies were mostly melee--and they were made up of 4x and 5x Deathreavers. (By the way, both Taelord/Rats armies did REALLY well.)

So you seem to be worried that Aragorn will displace Taelord in a mostly Rats army, which turns out to be a tiny percentage of Taelord armies. Usually he is paired with ranged units.

I really don't like how you so quickly dismissed my suggested special ability with such a weak argument. Just say you don't like it--I can accept that. But don't try to back it up and make it sound like an official ruling by spouting that he'll displace Taelord when he really won't. When people do that it makes me upset.

[caps]

Originally Posted by White Knight

I really don't like how you so quickly dismissed my suggested special ability with such a weak argument. Just say you don't like it--I can accept that. But don't try to back it up and make it sound like an official ruling by spouting that he'll displace Taelord when he really won't. When people do that it makes me upset.

I did WK. I did say that I didn't like it for Strider:

Originally Posted by capsocrates

I don't think I like the ENHANCED ATTACK AURA. I don't think I like an Attack Enhancement for Strider in general

Then I followed it up with an additional, metagame reason:

Originally Posted by White Knight

I particularly don't like one that makes Taelord obsolete in melee armies.

And I still think this is true, regardless of what the last 15 melee armies featuring Taelord posted in the Armies played thread says about his use in Melee armies. The +1 Attack Aura is Taelord's space. It is his specialty, and I don't want to take it away from him. Period.

--

EDIT: And the use of rats with Taelord is not a point in your favor. Those armies both went 5-0 and were, I'm sure, very obnoxious to play against. A 140 Taelord for rats means they get an additional squad. Also consider the Axegrinders with that. They wouldn't even need a bonding hero. It just seems like a bad idea to me from top-to-bottom.

[White Knight]

Originally Posted by capsocrates

EDIT: And the use of rats with Taelord is not a point in your favor. Those armies both went 5-0 and were, I'm sure, very obnoxious to play against. A 140 Taelord for rats means they get an additional squad. Also consider the Axegrinders with that. They wouldn't even need a bonding hero. It just seems like a bad idea to me from top-to-bottom.

You're giving me handwaving and generics. I asked for specific melee armies where you've used Taelord. You're response leaves me to believe that it's zero.

As LazyO said:

My answer would be: none, because playing Taelord, especially in a melee army, is generally suicide anyway.

You mentioned Axegrinders--but show me one tournament army where Taelord showed up with the dwarves. I asked for concrete examples, you gave me theoryscaping. The truth is, adding an Aragorn with that power is NOT going to take away from Taelord's domain, because he HAS no domain for melee armies. Even in your own battles he won't be replacing Taelord because, as far as I can tell, you've never used Taelord with an all-melee army.

Not only that, but if it's a power issue in playtesting we can raise Aragorn's points. I wasn't locked into 140 points. Make his points 200 and now Taelord is a better bet in ranged armies and probably also in melee armies.

You don't want the power on Strider, fine. I didn't realize we were confining Strider to The Fellowship of the Ring and not including his role in the Two Towers. But since we are, I'll save that power for Aragorn the coming king.

[caps]

Originally Posted by White Knight

You're giving me handwaving and generics. I asked for specific melee armies where you've used Taelord. You're response leaves me to believe that it's zero.

I don't understand why it's such a big deal to you whether or not I have personally played Taelord in melee armies.

Originally Posted by White Knight

As LazyO said:

You mentioned Axegrinders--but show me one tournament army where Taelord showed up with the dwarves.

So there's no room for theoryscape in your design discussions? Ever? I think:
180 Taelord
80 Raelin
210 3xAxegrinders
+ filler (or Darrak)
would be a decent army to take to a tournament. or even:

180 Taelord
210 3xAxegrinders
110 Migol Ironwill

I don't know that it has been done, though it sounds interesting to try.

Originally Posted by White Knight

I asked for concrete examples, you gave me theoryscaping. The truth is, adding an Aragorn with that power is NOT going to take away from Taelord's domain, because he HAS no domain for melee armies.

No, he most certainly does. His price is prohibitive but if you want a +1 Attack Aura that doesn't require adjacency, Taelord is the guy you go to. Most people don't do it in a tournament because they decide they'd rather spend the points elsewhere, but the power you're proposing would remove Taelord from that potential almost completely.

Furthermore, if I wasn't clear enough before, Taelord's undefeated success both times he was used with a pile o' rats makes me 100% opposed to reusing that aura for melee figures on any hero that is either cheaper or more potent.

Originally Posted by White Knight

Even in your own battles he won't be replacing Taelord because, as far as I can tell, you've never used Taelord with an all-melee army.

Irrelevant. And for the record, Taelord was used with Hydras in an all-hero tournament on the East Coast. That army placed 3rd of 17.

Originally Posted by White Knight

You don't want the power on Strider, fine. I didn't realize we were confining Strider to The Fellowship of the Ring and not including his role in the Two Towers.

I wouldn't divide it up quite that way. I think we're shooting to captures Strider leading up to The Fellowship of the Ring and going all the way to his pursuit of the Uruk-Hai with Legolas and Gimli. Aragorn does more in The Two Towers than just fight in Helm's Deep.

Originally Posted by White Knight

But since we are, I'll save that power for Aragorn the coming king.

Why does it have to be a 4-space Aura? Why not an adjacent Aura like the Viking champs? There are lots of better, less dangerous ways to represent Aragorn leading people. But I guess we should save this discussion for later.

EDIT: More melee armies using Taelord:

bengi in Online Season 13 (active right now)
Zombie Hulk, Zombies of Morindan x4, Taelord the Kyrie Warrior, Brunak, Drow Chainfighter x2

Ixe in Online Season 11
Taelord the Kyrie Warrior, Raelin the Kyrie Warrior [SotM], Empress Kiova, Minions of Utgar x2, Atlaga the Kyrie Warrior, Einar Imperium x2, Marcu Esenwein (admittedly, this is an army where the Minions make an appearance)

MegaSilver in Classic League: Casualties of War
Marro Drones x8, Taelord, Marcu

Deroche in Online Season 9
Warriors of Ashra x4, Acolarh, Taelord the Kyrie Warrior, Otonashi
Skylord613 in Online Season 9
Raelin the Kyrie Warrior [RotV], Taelord the Kyrie Warrior, Zombies of Morindan x4

[Lazy Orang]

Originally Posted by capsocrates

LazyO, unfortunately Swordplay has a lot of tricky edge-cases and just plain weird interactions when moved over to a Classic interpretation of power-text. C3G wand-waves all that away but that won't work for us. I love it as a C3G power though.

Such as? I don't see them.

[caps]

Originally Posted by Lazy Orang

Such as? I don't see them.

Bats had some writeups in C3V using that power (or one like it). We attempted to move one of those writeups forward and our Editors / Rules Team killed it. This is what they had to say about it:

Originally Posted by Xotli

I'm actually more weirded out by the opposite situation: if _____ starts out attacking people from height, _____'s first attack is 4. If _____ continues to attack people lower than _____, then _____ is going to get what seems to me to be too many attacks. That is, the fourth attack is at -3. So _____'s base is 3, -3 == 0, +1 is 1. Except that once your base attack goes to zero, I don't think you should get to keep going.

It gets worse if _____ is on height standing next to Taelord. Should _____ now get a fifth attack? So now the penalty is -4, _____'s base attack is still 3, -4 == -1, +1 == 0, +1 == 1. So, there's still a die to attack with, but we got there via a negative number, depending on the order we apply the modifiers. Worse, what if someone makes the argument that attacks can't go lower than zero, so therefore 3 - 4 == 0 + 1 + 1 == 2 and _____ can attack with 2 dice forever? Sure, it's a very stupid argument, but there's also some logic to it, and why put ourselves in that position in the first place?

Originally Posted by Xotli

Here's another weird situation. _____ shoots someone higher than _____. So _____ attacks with 3. Now _____ shoots someone else higher. So _____ attacks with 2. Now _____ shoots someone else higher. So _____ attacks with 1. Now _____ wants to attack someone else higher, but _____'s down to zero, so _____ can't attack. But then _____ notices someone lower ... can _____ attack? Did _____ hit zero and _____'s turn ended first, or does _____ add the bonus before _____ even figures out whether _____ can attack or not, which would be super-insane?

I'm pretty sure that we Editors can just keep coming up with ever-more-increasingly-bizarre scenarios until the cows come home. It's not that it's not a cool idea ... but lots of cool ideas can become unworkable when you try to nail them down precisely. I fear this just might be one of those.

Originally Posted by Xotli

_____ is standing next to Taelord. Using Taelord's bonus, _____ shoots Taelord, who happens to be down to one life. So now Taelord is dead ... but somehow _____ continues to get his bonus? Again, how on earth do we word that?

This way lies madness, my friend. I get more and more frightened the more clearly you explain your vision for the power, unfortunately.

Originally Posted by Scytale

It fails to explain what happens with bonuses. If the first attack is same-level, and the second attack is lower, does _____ get height advantage? Is that somehow built into the attack? If so, what if the second target is a Microcorp Trooper? And what if _____ attacks a Skull Demon-like figure that reduces her attack?

I don't want to have to have a list of FAQs to explain how a supposedly simple power works.

C3G is a different animal from Classic Heroscape.

[Lazy Orang]

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

Originally Posted by Xotli

I'm actually more weirded out by the opposite situation: if _____ starts out attacking people from height, _____'s first attack is 4. If _____ continues to attack people lower than _____, then _____ is going to get what seems to me to be too many attacks. That is, the fourth attack is at -3. So _____'s base is 3, -3 == 0, +1 is 1. Except that once your base attack goes to zero, I don't think you should get to keep going.

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.

It gets worse if _____ is on height standing next to Taelord. Should _____ now get a fifth attack? So now the penalty is -4, _____'s base attack is still 3, -4 == -1, +1 == 0, +1 == 1. So, there's still a die to attack with, but we got there via a negative number, depending on the order we apply the modifiers. Worse, what if someone makes the argument that attacks can't go lower than zero, so therefore 3 - 4 == 0 + 1 + 1 == 2 and _____ can attack with 2 dice forever? Sure, it's a very stupid argument, but there's also some logic to it, and why put ourselves in that position in the first place?

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.

Originally Posted by Xotli

Here's another weird situation. _____ shoots someone higher than _____. So _____ attacks with 3. Now _____ shoots someone else higher. So _____ attacks with 2. Now _____ shoots someone else higher. So _____ attacks with 1. Now _____ wants to attack someone else higher, but _____'s down to zero, so _____ can't attack. But then _____ notices someone lower ... can _____ attack? Did _____ hit zero and _____'s turn ended first, or does _____ add the bonus before _____ even figures out whether _____ can attack or not, which would be super-insane?

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.

Originally Posted by Xotli

_____ is standing next to Taelord. Using Taelord's bonus, _____ shoots Taelord, who happens to be down to one life. So now Taelord is dead ... but somehow _____ continues to get his bonus? Again, how on earth do we word that?

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.

Originally Posted by Scytale

It fails to explain what happens with bonuses. If the first attack is same-level, and the second attack is lower, does _____ get height advantage? Is that somehow built into the attack? If so, what if the second target is a Microcorp Trooper? And what if _____ attacks a Skull Demon-like figure that reduces her attack?

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.

C3G is a different animal from Classic Heroscape.

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