The Pre-SoV Workshop

[orgsbane]

I really, really like this guy. I really wasn't a fan of the old card, but you've really done something special here (as far as my untrained eyes can see). Love the theme, really fits with the sculpt. No mercy is brutal, and I love it! I may run a game with this guy next time I play

[superfrog]

Originally Posted by Simval

Also, is it intented that he can "show No Mercy" even if he doesn't wound the figure first ? Because that allows some weird stuff, like auto-killing all Deathwalkers in the game! I think that's a little too much.

It only works on small/medium figures. So it doesn't kill all Deathwalkers. But yeah, it would auto-kill DW7K or all the wyrmlings and elementals.

[Dysole]

I like it a lot better. I think the d20 roll needs to be toned down and I think a "if he inflicts at least one wound" clause needs to be added to No Mercy (although that still makes Warden and Deathcommander kind of vulnerable among others). Otherwise, it's a solid custom.

~Dysole, et tu?

[Ixe]

Originally Posted by superfrog

It only works on small/medium figures. So it doesn't kill all Deathwalkers. But yeah, it would auto-kill DW7K or all the wyrmlings and elementals.

While we're correcting things, it also only works on Unique Heroes so the Common Heroes you listed would be fine. Otonashi would be in trouble, however.

[Sir Heroscape]

Sorry for not responding sooner. I really appreciate all the insights and feedback.

I think your suggestions @wriggz are right on, and I'll make sure to playtest with those build types.

As for his D20 ability...the most I think I'd need to tone it down would be 14 or higher. Simply because the no mercy ability I anticipate to activate rarely and his spiked gauntlet ability is what I believe makes him a little more costly. But I think for now I'll keep it 13 or higher and let playtesting show if it proves to be too OP.

As for the "if Brutus does a wound" clause for 'no mercy'...I've considered that already before and I'm still undecided if I want to change that yet. I'm not convinced that that should be necessary...but a compelling argument or reason might help me see why it might be necessary? But as it stands I feel okay with the current wording on it.

[All Your Pie]

Originally Posted by Sir Heroscape

Sorry for not responding sooner. I really appreciate all the insights and feedback.

I think your suggestions @wriggz are right on, and I'll make sure to playtest with those build types.

As for his D20 ability...the most I think I'd need to tone it down would be 14 or higher. Simply because the no mercy ability I anticipate to activate rarely and his spiked gauntlet ability is what I believe makes him a little more costly. But I think for now I'll keep it 13 or higher and let playtesting show if it proves to be too OP.

As for the "if Brutus does a wound" clause for 'no mercy'...I've considered that already before and I'm still undecided if I want to change that yet. I'm not convinced that that should be necessary...but a compelling argument or reason might help me see why it might be necessary? But as it stands I feel okay with the current wording on it.

I suppose it kind of depends on what it is, exactly, you want No Mercy to do. Do you want him to be able to consistently finish off figures that are on death's door, or do you want him to be able to push that extra damage if they just barely survive his attack? If you want the latter, I think requiring a wound from his attack is necessary. If you want the former, I think there is a more mechanically sound way to do it that doesn't venture into troubling autowound territory. If you want both... well, I'm not quite sure that's the best direction to push things. As it is, he may as well have Grimnak's chomp for heavily wounded heroes, which doesn't feel quite right coming from a human-sized figure. Grimnak's Chomp is automatic because medium or smaller squad figures are utterly helpless against his dinosaur; I don't see why Brutus should have a similar advantage even against wounded heroes, and I feel like you may run into some trouble with the submission process on that front.

If you want to make it so that he's particularly good at finishing off wounded heroes, I would recommend going for more of an attack boost, like an automatic skull against wounded figures with one life remaining. That's less troubling on all fronts than an auto-destroy power, while still being very powerful and making it very likely for him to finish them off. Plus, that version of the power would allow you to open it up to large and huge figures without the same kinds of weirdness as before. If the power comes from his ruthlessness and bloodlust at bringing down his target, then size isn't as relevant a distinction.

[Sir Heroscape]

Originally Posted by All Your Pie

I suppose it kind of depends on what it is, exactly, you want No Mercy to do. Do you want him to be able to consistently finish off figures that are on death's door, or do you want him to be able to push that extra damage if they just barely survive his attack? If you want the latter, I think requiring a wound from his attack is necessary. If you want the former, I think there is a more mechanically sound way to do it that doesn't venture into troubling autowound territory. If you want both... well, I'm not quite sure that's the best direction to push things.

I guess originally I wanted both...but the more I think about it, the more it makes sense that his 'no mercy' would come when he's wounding the individual. The only downside to that is that it adds another requirement for the activation of his special which is already pretty specific. So I'm not sure that it will activate often, but for the sake of theme I really like it and feel it fits much better. To be honest, that's why I feel his D20 ability is okay where its at. His finishing off heroes I don't anticipate actually being very strong (except maybe in the end game) but the majority of his points I'd imagine would come from his ability to help take out squad figures. BUT all in all, playtesting will tell. As for the "must do a wound clause" I can see that being a good addition to the ability.

[wriggz]

Originally Posted by Sir Heroscape

I guess originally I wanted both...but the more I think about it, the more it makes sense that his 'no mercy' would come when he's wounding the individual. The only downside to that is that it adds another requirement for the activation of his special which is already pretty specific. So I'm not sure that it will activate often, but for the sake of theme I really like it and feel it fits much better. To be honest, that's why I feel his D20 ability is okay where its at. His finishing off heroes I don't anticipate actually being very strong (except maybe in the end game) but the majority of his points I'd imagine would come from his ability to help take out squad figures. BUT all in all, playtesting will tell. As for the "must do a wound clause" I can see that being a good addition to the ability.

An auto wound on a hero figure that just incurred woulds, to ensure they are destroyed is nothing to sneeze at. Also it drips theme which is a huge bonus. I admit the first time i looked a the card I assumed there was a wounding clause. As it is, adding an auto wound just for attacking, even when the defense is successful (or worse negated by a special power) is just weird. For example imagine fighting Dashi and Brutus is destroyed by counter strike but Dashi is also destroyed by no mercy. Very strange.

[Ixe]

I'm not convinced it's that big of a deal for him to auto kill a 1 life hero when he has 5 attack in the first place, although there are a couple of oddities. I assume it wouldn't trigger if Isamu Vanished since he didn't have to roll defense at least. If you add the wound requirement you can probably break all the other restrictions on it. You don't have to worry about autokilling a Deathwalker if you dealt a wound to them in the first place.

I'd say you should test it out whichever way you're leaning and ask yourself what would happen had the power been the other way. I have trouble seeing it triggering that often in the first place so it's going to be a fringe area either way.

[bmon]

Originally Posted by Ixe

If you add the wound requirement you can probably break all the other restrictions on it. You don't have to worry about autokilling a Deathwalker if you dealt a wound to them in the first place.

I like this. If the theme is of him showing no mercy to a severely wounded hero, I can't imagine him changing his tune if the hero is large or huge. And with the additional wound clause, it should be mechanically sound. High defense, low life heroes will fear him, but it won't break the Deathwalkers.

I can't say I'm a huge fan of the name change. I really liked the name Tetraites. Though, I understand the historical inaccuracy issue.

[bmon]

Also, just throwing it out there, but what about naming the ability "Merciless Finish" rather than "No Mercy". Feels more descriptive of a finishing move and conjures up visions of Mortal Combat... "finish him!"

[Scytale]

I'll reiterate what most have said. Great changes in the works here, especially thematically.

I'm not a fan of Brutus for the name. Too well-known for a different person. It wouldn't make me vote against him, though.

I strongly recommend the "only if you wounded the figure" restriction for No Mercy. It just seems weird that he can whiff his attack or get completely blocked but still somehow kill the figure. Takes care of the Unique/Common thing implicitly too. I also like bmon's suggestion of calling it "Merciless Finish."

I warn against making the auto-wound roll too low, for multiple reasons, but I'm not against 13. I would prefer 14, but that's without any playtesting.