The Book of Crossbones

[MrNobody]

Originally Posted by japes

I’d also like to at least start with dropping the no move part in trigger man. If we need to put it back that’s fine but I’d like to try to leave it off first.

Fair enough. I have the suspicion it’ll be needed, because the change to Human Shield will lead to an effective increase in power level according to the tests. However, Human Shield is also losing a big part of its hypothetical power ceiling (putting wounds on enemy figures) even if that never really panned out in testing.

[MrNobody]

So for clarity, here's what we'd be doing.

TRIGGER MAN
After attacking a non-adjacent figure with Crossbones's normal attack, if you did not reveal an Order Marker on Crossbones this turn, he may attack one additional time.

BRUTALITY 4
When attacking an adjacent figure with Crossbones, if the Attack number on the defending figure's card is 4 or less and the defending figure does not have the Super Strength special power, that figure rolls 1 fewer defense die.

HUMAN SHIELD
Anytime Crossbones rolls defense against an attack and would receive 1 or more wounds, you may choose 1 Terrorist or Mercenary figure you control adjacent to Crossbones. The chosen figure receives any wounds from the attack instead of Crossbones.

I'll leave the OP as is for a little while just to see if anyone has any thoughts.

[IAmBatman]

The reason I was arguing against the no movement change to Trigger Man is I'm in favor of fewer restrictions/inelegance on the powers. We have been getting a bit lost in clauseville. I feel that a solid design that's not overwrought by mechanics is more important than hitting an exact cost (and there are other dials that could be turned if necessary, like base stats).

I have some concerns about that change to Human Shield:

1. It loses the theme of him using enemy figures as a Human Shield, which I liked. Not a huge deal, but I like it. This is depowering, IMO, though, which is maybe good for your goals.

2. The restriction to Terrorists or Mercenaries doesn't make sense given the title. Why wouldn't he be able to use, say, a Civilian, as a Human Shield. Nothing about the title aligns with the idea of that class restriction.

I think if we're married to the Human Shield title and how it fits him, something like this might make more sense:

HUMAN SHIELD 16
Anytime Crossbones rolls defense against an attack and would receive 1 or more wounds, you may choose one adjacent figure other than the attacking figure and roll the 20-sided die. If you roll 16 or higher, Crossbones does not receive any damage and the chosen figure receives one wound.

You could even make it a "must" as that'd be on theme, and possibly help keep the cost down (this guy WILL kill your Hired Gun to save himself). The high roll prevents it from being too costly, but everything else means it should trigger a lot more often and give you the chance of making it pay off.

[MrNobody]

To me, being able to successfully plan around using your own units as shields is more important than the (admittedly cool) theme of using opponent’s figures. Having everything set up just right and failing the roll was one of my initial let-downs with the design. Anything with as high of a roll as 16 is a really hard sell in my eyes.

I can see why the Human Shield name doesn’t make sense for the suggested power though. That seems like a valid consideration.

[IAmBatman]

Treacherous Tactics might be your best bet, then.

Call me crazy, but I find things like Evasive Strike plenty fun and useful to play (I know that's 15+ not 16+ but minimal difference there). I only set it at 16+ because you were wanting to keep his cost down, though. You could also revert back to where you were getting massive bonuses based on using it on your own or a common figure.

[Yodaking]

What if Human Shield required you to use a Human figure? Would allow you to still use your own HYDRA troops, Hired Guns, and Bodyguards, but also Civilians, your opponents Beat Cops, SHIELD Agents, etc. If concerned about pushing his points up, then keep it limited to normal attacks as well.

[Lord Pyre]

I've been really lost with this conversation, but what's wrong with the current Human Shield? If it's because it's hard to activate, just nix the non-adjacent clause. I love the theme of him using opponent's figures, I really don't want to lose that.

So what am I missing?

[Yodaking]

Oh, I also liked the 'must' suggestion someone made. He seems like the type to throw his own teammate under the bus in order to survive the day. The small prospect of him taking out your own Hired Gun gives it that slight negative vibe that will help keep points in check.

[Yodaking]

HUMAN SHIELD
Anytime Crossbones would roll defense against a normal attack, if possible, you must choose a human figure adjacent to Crossbones that is not the attacking figure. Roll the 20-sided die, on a roll of X or higher, the chosen figure must roll defense dice for that attack and take any wounds received.

[IAmBatman]

Originally Posted by Lord Pyre

I've been really lost with this conversation, but what's wrong with the current Human Shield? If it's because it's hard to activate, just nix the non-adjacent clause. I love the theme of him using opponent's figures, I really don't want to lose that.

So what am I missing?

Not sure. That was my initial suggestion as well.

[MrNobody]

There seems to be a big desire to simplify and remove clauses, and if japes is happy with a direction I am too.

Yanking enemy figures is fun theme, but up against a competent player it’s not really happening that often. So if we’re trying to simplify I think it makes sense to snip.

[IAmBatman]

I do appreciate simplifying. Though it's always nice if we can do it with small changes rather than big ones this late in the process.

I won't belabor any arguments, though. My main disagreement with what you and japes liked for Human Shield is that it just doesn't hit the theme of the name. The answer to that could be as simple as 1) ignore Bats or 2) change the name.