The Pre-SoV Workshop

[Tiranx]

Originally Posted by Sir Heroscape

Oh sorry, I was thinking first assault. Hmmmm...Charging Assault is in line with his recklessness...though, I’m more inclined to make the change Kinseth offered in simply keeping the power but requiring him to end engaged rather than beginning unengaged. That fits better for what I’m going for.

This is a great solution that keeps the theme of the name working.

[wriggz]

Originally Posted by bmon

I also want to say, in general, for any custom creators listening, that I actually appreciate reused abilities. Not every custom needs slightly tweaked abilities to make them unique. This is from someone that plays with a lot of people less familiar with the game than we are, having reused abilities helps those folks be familiar with it.

Quoted for truth

[Scytale]

Originally Posted by Sir Heroscape

Oh sorry, I was thinking first assault. Hmmmm...Charging Assault is in line with his recklessness...though, I’m more inclined to make the change Kinseth offered in simply keeping the power but requiring him to end engaged rather than beginning unengaged. That fits better for what I’m going for.

I dislike this for two reasons:

1) It fails to address my original concern. In fact, it makes it worse. There is still a different abnormal movement to add to the other abnormal movements of the faction, and now it has another restriction that needs to be remembered.

2) Abilities such as "must end engaged" are almost a no-no. I say almost because Charging Assault already did it. As to why it's bad, take a look at the wording problems with Charging Assault. As long as we use that power we are ok because we can fall back on existing rulings, and it's ok to make powers that are similar enough Charging Assault that we can use its rulings (which this probably would be). But in general, powers that require a future event that may or may not happen are no-goes*. Variations on Charging Assault are all sorts of trouble for us C3V Editors.

* As an example, take Charging Assault. What if the Samurai dies from falling damage along the way? If he is unable to end his movement unengaged, then he should not have been able to use the power in the first place. But if he couldn't use the power, then he wouldn't have died from falling damage. So now what? The wording of Charging Assault does not try to address problems like this, and doing so would take a lot of text.

[Sir Heroscape]

Originally Posted by Scytale

I dislike this for two reasons:

1) It fails to address my original concern. In fact, it makes it worse. There is still a different abnormal movement to add to the other abnormal movements of the faction, and now it has another restriction that needs to be remembered.

2) Abilities such as "must end engaged" are almost a no-no. I say almost because Charging Assault already did it. As to why it's bad, take a look at the wording problems with Charging Assault. As long as we use that power we are ok because we can fall back on existing rulings, and it's ok to make powers that are similar enough Charging Assault that we can use its rulings (which this probably would be). But in general, powers that require a future event that may or may not happen are no-goes*. Variations on Charging Assault are all sorts of trouble for us C3V Editors.

* As an example, take Charging Assault. What if the Samurai dies from falling damage along the way? If he is unable to end his movement unengaged, then he should not have been able to use the power in the first place. But if he couldn't use the power, then he wouldn't have died from falling damage. So now what? The wording of Charging Assault does not try to address problems like this, and doing so would take a lot of text.

Very interesting. Thank you for spelling that out. I didn’t realize this could create such an issue. Glad I still posted here, surprised a little...but glad. So to be clear, this current power really is mechanically too much of an issue and needs revision (or replacement) then?

If so, then these are the summarized changes that need to happen it sounds like:
- Change class to Marauder
- MAYBE change name (I’d still like to hear a more definitive answer on whether or not a specific name is appropriate)
- Remove Reckless Battle Rush and replace with another power, probably Charging Assault ( as seen on the Kozuke’s card ).

[superfrog]

That would improve the unit. I think if you want to keep a specific name, just create some backstory about him leaving the Raptorians and rejecting their class system. That frees up his name and his class to be whatever.

[The Dewk]

Originally Posted by Sir Heroscape

If so, then these are the summarized changes that need to happen it sounds like:
- Change class to Marauder
- MAYBE change name (I’d still like to hear a more definitive answer on whether or not a specific name is appropriate)
- Remove Reckless Battle Rush and replace with another power, probably Charging Assault ( as seen on the Kozuke’s card ).

I just want to chime in and question why some people want the class change. Looking at classic 'scape, Fighter is used by Axegrinders and Tandros Kreel, while Marauder is used by the Fen Hydra (admittedly, I didn't check SoV/C3V figures). This guy is way closer to the dwarves and Tandros than he is to a Hydra.

And I think it's good that you're questioning the requested name change as well. Yeah, we've got Venoc Warlord, but we've also got Primadons and Marro from Marr that have specific names. I guess it could be argued at Quorik Warwitch set the precedent for Raptorians to be similar to the Venoc in that respect though. EDIT: I see that someone else said that earlier.

And Reckless Battle Rush is very cool, but I can see why it is argued that Charging Assault would be a better choice.

Overall, though, a very tight unit!

[Scytale]

Originally Posted by Sir Heroscape

- Remove Reckless Battle Rush and replace with another power, probably Charging Assault ( as seen on the Kozuke’s card ).

I wouldn't say it's necessary, per se. It's a suggestion that I think will smooth out what I suspect will end up feeling like an overbearing combination of movement abilities while still maintaining much of the mobility and aggressiveness you're aiming for.

[Dad_Scaper]

I really like the reuse of Charging Assault here, in order to get the theme you wanted.

[superfrog]

Originally Posted by The Dewk

I just want to chime in and question why some people want the class change. Looking at classic 'scape, Fighter is used by Axegrinders and Tandros Kreel, while Marauder is used by the Fen Hydra (admittedly, I didn't check SoV/C3V figures). This guy is way closer to the dwarves and Tandros than he is to a Hydra.

And I think it's good that you're questioning the requested name change as well. Yeah, we've got Venoc Warlord, but we've also got Primadons and Marro from Marr that have specific names. I guess it could be argued at Quorik Warwitch set the precedent for Raptorians to be similar to the Venoc in that respect though. EDIT: I see that someone else said that earlier.

And Reckless Battle Rush is very cool, but I can see why it is argued that Charging Assault would be a better choice.

Overall, though, a very tight unit!

The marro don't have given/random names. Each hero has a specific suffix based on gender and class.

Primadon heroes, a C3V release, don't have class-based names. I think that's a slight mistake, although they are self-consistent, which wouldn't be the case here.

In general, names ought to follow established patterns if they share thematic ties.

[BiggaBullfrog]

Originally Posted by superfrog

Primadon heroes, a C3V release, don't have class-based names. I think that's a slight mistake, although they are self-consistent, which wouldn't be the case here.

In general, names ought to follow established patterns if they share thematic ties.

*cough*Laglor*cough*

I'm thinking that it would probably be better for a Class-based name to be used here. It fits the precedent for the Raptorians and would feel more natural. If the name stays unique, then it would be best if that's also reflected in the card (and not just a bio). Maybe if the personality was changed to Rebellious.

It might be more than a theme change than you want, but maybe you could have his name reflect the slaver side of the Raptorians, which has been underrepresented in the faction so far, IMO.

[kolakoski]

Well met!

An aside . . .

What “established patterns” were in play when naming Gothlok?

[Sir Heroscape]

After a lot of thought, I'll make some changes:
- Class to Marauder
- Special ability change to Charging Assault. I was skeptical at first, but it still seems to fit the theme I'm going for in this unit and it should operate similarly enough anyway.
- Changing the name to fit a class system, BUT I need some help with that.....

I'm not sure where to go with it. As far as a class system goes, Beakface seems to be a title of a lesser unit so I don't think that would be a part of the name. Honestly, I don't know where Quorik came from for the Warwitch. But I'd be inclined to just name the unit along that similar vane since we don't have any other precendents for Unique raptorian heroes....so I'm thinking Quorik Marauder for the name. Thoughts?