The Book of Mister Sinister

[Scapemage]

C, scrap it. Although it's a nice theme, we have been avoiding specific figure powers since nearly Joker I. Plus, using surname is complicated to some of our audience and a weird, unused mechanic.

[quozl]

D. Scrap it and drop his Life.

[johnny139]

I've never actual seen/read anything with Mr. Sinister. My gut says scrap it but if it's as important to the character as Spidey says, I dunno. My research hasn't really pushed me in either direction.

Formally abstain I suppose.

[IAmBatman]

Thanks, David! Enhancing Hulk's range number could end up being powerful, but that will be part of the consideration in his cost. Thematically it matches up with his ability to give superpowers to those he genetically alters.

The Genetic Weakness is meant to to indicate that he is significantly weakened against a certain family line due to their DNA. It seems the theme isn't coming across, though, which is another reason to consider scrapping the power, IMO.

Cheers,
Bats

Originally Posted by davidlhsl

Mister Sinister

S-S-S-S
A-A-A-A
F-F-F-F
E-E-E-E
T-T-T-T
Y-Y-Y-Y
Safety Dance!

A-hem, moving along…

Genetic Manipulation 18
Needs space in unalteredMove.

Theme check: This will give range to melee units such as Hulk.

I assume Echo would Mimic the revised number instead of the original number due to the wording “replacing the chosen number on that card.”

“unaltered” = Suppose Mister Sinister A changes Hulk’s Defense to 3. Would Mister Sinister B be able to change it to a 5 (assuming it’s his lowest available number), since the number has been altered? I’m thinking it wouldn’t.

It’ll be interesting to see how many of these markers Mister Sinister will be able to distribute.

Note: If you remove Range from the number that can be altered, don't forget to change the requirement on taking control of the figure!

Genetic Weakness
That would be Cable and Cyclops.

This is a very situational ability that will most likely arise when you actually set up such a battle, because you can’t control what your opponent drafts in other cases. Because of this, you really can’t cost the unit on such a matchup given the huge number of released figures.

You usually create incentives for drafting specific designs through more generic reference rather than calling out the specific figure. For example, Cloak references Sensory Assault rather than calling out Dazzler by name.

Let me see if this helps: This Genetic Weakness translates, “Mister Sinister is vulnerable to Cable and Cyclops because of their surname” instead of something like “Mister Sinister is vulnerable to someone who smells of licorice.” The latter provides an explanation of the effect that produces the weakness that the former doesn’t.

Healing Factor
Vetted!

Final Thoughts
Love the Genetic Manipulation, though I’ve failed in recalling whether there’s another case where a melee figure can get range. Being out of practice in playing Heroscape is starting to be a liability for me.

My own take on calling out a specific design in Genetic Weakness: You have to do it with cases such as Jean Grey/Phoenix/Dark Phoenix, because the specific units explain what is taking place in the ability. But that doesn’t seem to apply here.

[IAmBatman]

Great notes! He's genetically manipulated folks into having ranged attacks before (i.e. Angel becoming Archangel and shooting razor feathers) but it's a spot folks seem to be questioning thematically. It might be worth taking the requirement down to three and dropping the Range to avoid that and make the power more usable.

As always, much obliged!

Cheers,
Bats

Originally Posted by dok

On Genetic Weakness, mechanically, obviously referring to Surnames is new, but there's nothing problematic about it. It feels a little forced to me - I suppose Joker's "It's not the same" is similar, but that relationship feels more fundamental to Joker than this one does to Mr. Sinister.

Genetic Manipulation is a doozie, for sure. The requirement to use the lowest numbers first is a major nerf - otherwise you would just jack up your allies from the start. Given that major restriction, I don't think it's a big problem from a game balance perspective. However, it seems pretty weird thematically to give, say, Sabretooth or Colossus a ranged attack. If you limited it to the other three stat lines I wouldn't struggle with it as much thematically.

Also, note that GM can currently affect androids, constructs, and undead. Maybe you guys need a "living figure" ruling, so you don't have to list out those three all the time? So "living" = "not an android, construct, or undead"? Just a thought.

[SirGalahad]

I can be on board with not altering range.

[IAmBatman]

I don't have to rush to make any changes since Roamers are up for an initial first, but as of now I'm leaning towards the following (supported by votes and ERB comments):

1. Scrapping range from the stats that can be altered and letting him take over a figure after altering three stats
2. Scrapping Genetic Weakness
3. Adding a line about Genetic Manipulation not working on Androids, Undead, or Constructs.

[TrollBrute]

All sound like good changes to me.

[A3n]

I am of 2 minds with GM not affecting the range. 1 for the reasons mentioned by Davidlhsl I am for it not affecting. 2 some figures the range is part of their super power & should be able to be altered like Jean Grey & Hawkeye (to state 2 different but both relevant cases).

If we could only alter range when it's 3 or above then it would be perfect.

[IAmBatman]

I think that'd be pretty messy in terms of language for an already pretty complex power. I'd much prefer to go all in or not for range.

[johnny139]

I like range. Might be a bit messy but we've never shied away from messy before if it's fun enough. I personally like the idea of Hulk being genetically modified to have stretchy arms or something.

[IAmBatman]

My concern was less about messiness and more that folks didn't seem to be getting the theme. I can be convinced to keep it, though, if that's the strong opinion.