|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Mar 1, 2018 15:26:37 GMT
I believe jisidro's point is that it's an unnecessarily-wordy workaround for a rule that people are already familiar with that is going to cause confusion. Say you're in a tournament setting, on the clock, and your opponent uses the cloud and tells you "It's basically Stealth", which is a pretty reasonable way to explain it when you're trying to do it quickly while thinking about tactics. You either have to stop your train of thought and spend time asking to read the card/have it explained in detail or just take them on their word. Then halfway through your assassination run you try to shoot him with Gun Mages or something and he says "Oh it's not actually Stealth so they don't ignore it". Alternatively new players are just gonna get stuck trying to figure out if it is any different from Stealth, stopping games and asking on forums why it's Stealth but not Stealth and if they are missing some key wording that makes it different from Stealth other than it not being called Stealth. If they want it to be "Better Stealth" they could achieve the same thing in less words by saying "While this model is completely in the AOE it gains Stealth [icon]. Abilities that ignore Stealth[icon] do not ignore Stealth when targeting this model." Same effect, no duplication of wording, less confusion. That said, those two scenarios aren't necessarily going to be super common and we've had these kinds of rules before. I don't think it's the end of the world either way but it definitely could be written cleaner. In a game where the Coven exists, explaining this rule to newer players will be a walk in the park  |
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Mar 1, 2018 15:33:06 GMT
If Syvestro is shown to be too strong in CID, I would expect PP to alter something other than his alchemical effects first, I have a feeling that PP see them as integral to his character and play style.
|
|
|
|
Post by HubertJFarnsworth on Mar 1, 2018 15:43:02 GMT
It's not about it being hard to explain on the surface, it's that it's hard/annoying to explain why it isn't just Stealth. When I first read it my natural instinct was "Oh, I must have misread it because it sounds exactly like Stealth, better re-read it. No way PP wrote a rule that's exactly like an existing rule!"
It doesn't matter that the rule itself is simple, the confusion comes from the precedent that PP has set of all models sharing common rules and now this is a rule that is in every way one of those common rules but isn't called that.
It creates a mental hiccup where the first reaction is that it should either work exactly the same and be countered by the same things, or that it must be very different to cause them to create a new rule rather than use Stealth.
Again, not the end of the world. But it is an odd little hangup that seems a tad unnecessary. Fortunately such rules have a history of getting streamlined in CID (remember the original Dread Rot rules anyone?)
|
|
Haight
Junior Strategist
Posts: 396 
|
Post by Haight on Mar 1, 2018 15:48:53 GMT
I agree with you as it is a direct quote from the Stealth rule without calling it out. Primal pg 17 - Stealth – Ranged and magic attacks targeting this model from a point of origin (p. 40) greater than 5˝ away automatically miss. This model is not an intervening model (p. 36) when determining line of sight from a model more than 5˝ away.CG spoiler: "Impenetrable Haze- ... While this model is completely in the AOE, ranged and magic attacks targeting this model from a point of origin greater than 5˝ away automatically miss. This model is not an intervening model when determining line of sight from a model more than 5˝ away." It's the stealth rule without calling it out. It's poorly done. It works though if the aim is to have the benefit of Stealth without the counters, which I assume is the intention Why does a caster need that though ? 15/15 is not a bad statline, and i don't think any caster needs on tap access to "Nope" to 2/3 cardinal attack vectors with a 14" control range... how many anti-cloud effects are there in the game ? I think if the cloud grants him stealth you can achieve much the same effect without it being over the top. Then anti stealth works AND anti cloud. C'mon man, you're better than Tu Quoque or Whataboutism lines of logic.  The morass that is perfect conjunction should not be the bar we set. |
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Mar 1, 2018 16:03:19 GMT
Haight I just think it's good for casters to have unique and powerful abilities in this game, and if it can be balanced against the rest of his kit then I don't have an issue. The fact that he has to give up a free spell or plus 2 speed for his jacks to do it indicates that PP are aware of the fact it is very powerful, so they have built in some drawbacks to using it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Mar 1, 2018 16:19:12 GMT
Because there is no counter play short of walking up to it. At least stealth has some options for removal or being ignored. Sorry, I mean I don't understand why it is apparently a badly worded rule in any way, I understand why people don't like what it does, but that is different to what I thought myself and Jisidro are discussing It's not so much about the effect but about a weapon race starting with what is effectively Stealth(2) vs True Sight(1)... It's unwieldy and lends itself to confusion on a game that already has a bunch of similar rules to start having rules without names... It's clunky and ugly. If they want him not to be hit make him not be targetted. It's a buff against aoe that need something to target and a nerf against spray who can manage to get a target to target and hit him. Or just type that true sight and eyeless sight have no effect on models completely within the cloud... something... just use the existing framework. |
|
Juris
Junior Strategist
Posts: 578
|
Post by Juris on Mar 1, 2018 16:59:13 GMT
Haight I just think it's good for casters to have unique and powerful abilities in this game, and if it can be balanced against the rest of his kit then I don't have an issue. The fact that he has to give up a free spell or plus 2 speed for his jacks to do it indicates that PP are aware of the fact it is very powerful, so they have built in some drawbacks to using it. You realize that he also puts down a 5" AOE cloud that blocks line of sight. I think there will be many games where that will be his primary motivation for using the cloud... The alchemical abilities don't create a drawback for using his cloud, they give him tactical flexibility, which is always a bonus. He can be virtually immune to ranged assassination when he needs to be. That is huge. Giving up a free spell or +2 speed for warjacks is not a drawback in this situation; it's not even a balancing factor, really. Think about it; if your opponent does not have cloud removal, does not have a reliable magic assassination (like, no arc node situation), and can't get to you in melee, you can spend all of your focus and sit there naked. Alternatively, if you used the free spell ability, you are probably still camping focus if your opponent has guns. |
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Mar 1, 2018 17:07:39 GMT
Haight I just think it's good for casters to have unique and powerful abilities in this game, and if it can be balanced against the rest of his kit then I don't have an issue. The fact that he has to give up a free spell or plus 2 speed for his jacks to do it indicates that PP are aware of the fact it is very powerful, so they have built in some drawbacks to using it. You realize that he also puts down a 5" AOE cloud that blocks line of sight. I think there will be many games where that will be his primary motivation for using the cloud... The alchemical abilities don't create a drawback for using his cloud, they give him tactical flexibility, which is always a bonus. He can be virtually immune to ranged assassination when he needs to be. That is huge. Giving up a free spell or +2 speed for warjacks is not a drawback in this situation; it's not even a balancing factor, really. Think about it; if your opponent does not have cloud removal, does not have a reliable magic assassination (like, no arc node situation), and can't get to you in melee, you can spend all of your focus and sit there naked. Alternatively, if you used the free spell ability, you are probably still camping focus if your opponent has guns. 4" cloud, I agree he has a very deep toolkit, and maybe he could lose a spell or two, but I don't have an inherent problem with his haze |
|
Haight
Junior Strategist
Posts: 396
|
Post by Haight on Mar 1, 2018 17:11:40 GMT
Juris - 4", but the rest of the point stands, and i 100% agree. I just dont think a 15/15 caster with those abilities and spells should be immune to at range assassination, and not to mention mitigate a good bit of threat range by dropping the cloud "at any time" and then walking out of it to block LOS. If the opposing side doesn't have cloud mitigation, not only are you likely not range assassinating that target, but whatever can't "see" through the cloud will not be charging either. That using this ability is a "trade off" with two other incredible abilities (near-battlegroup-wide +2 Speed on tap ? 2-4 focus worth of free effects? - amazing!) isn't indicative that there's balance in the Super-Stealth-Cloud, but rather more evidence that its a bit over the top. Give Sylvestro Prowl, keep the cloud 4", or make the cloud grant Sylvestro Stealth while he's in it. One ability should not be able to say "I kill two cardinal threat vectors, and curtail the threat range of a third any time i want to or need to if you don't have eyeless sight or one of the handful of models that have anti cloud measures". At least turning it to stealth gives opposing factions their typical anti stealth options as counters. To be honest i'd rather Haze come into balance than lose a spell. His spell list to me is probably one of the more interesting aspects and none of it is crazy OP. Haze, by contrast, is a recognizable defense mechanism in new format that strips all counters for that defense mechanism away. So which one is the issue here ? The varied and useful spell, or the mechanic that turns the dial up on stealth and tears it off ? My money is on the latter.
|
|
Xintas
Junior Strategist
Posts: 824
|
Post by Xintas on Mar 1, 2018 17:12:17 GMT
Just for argument's sake, lets not look at him in a vaccuum.
The weapons are a grenade (useless) and a stick (useless). The spell list is very nice, but mostly flexible/situational. He's not spell slinging questions that have to be answered. He's answering questions that you are asked. His feat is...solid. It doesn't win games you had lost, it doesn't give you a huge tempo advantage, it doesn't shut down armies. It is barely distinguishable from a turn in which you rolled really well.
This paints the portrait of a caster who isn't how you win the game, which I think is AMAZING. I'm tired of lists where you win on feat turn or you win on buffing your caster and letting him demolish everything or you sling spells and assassinate. This caster is designed to supplement an existing army. He's not getting it done, but he's giving you every opportunity to win with the other models on the table.
That being the case, 1 of his 3 special abilities should absolutely be "If I'm not gonna win you the game, I shouldn't lose it for you either".
Theory/big picture aside, "Stealth while in the cloud" is dramatically worse than Stealth. Slams, pushes or tks from within 5", stealth negation, and now fog dispersal all would nullify this ability. It adds an extra avenue to ignore it, rather than remove it if it is not better than stealth. I think it should be left as is in for the most part, but I would change it to "Has stealth this turn. While within the fog, effects that ignore stealth do not ignore stealth on this model". That way, its still better but he just has stealth; the fog is what is adding the extra benefit and it can be handled separately.
|
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Mar 1, 2018 17:15:51 GMT
Juris - 4", but the rest of the point stands, and i 100% agree. I just dont think a 15/15 caster with those abilities and spells should be immune to at range assassination, and not to mention mitigate a good bit of threat range by dropping the cloud "at any time" and then walking out of it to block LOS. If the opposing side doesn't have cloud mitigation, not only are you likely not range assassinating that target, but whatever can't "see" through the cloud will not be charging either. That using this ability is a "trade off" with two other incredible abilities (near-battlegroup-wide +2 Speed on tap ? 2-4 focus worth of free effects? - amazing!) isn't indicative that there's balance in the Super-Stealth-Cloud, but rather more evidence that its a bit over the top. Give Sylvestro Prowl, keep the cloud 4", or make the cloud grant Sylvestro Stealth while he's in it. One ability should not be able to say "I kill two cardinal threat vectors, and curtail the threat range of a third any time i want to or need to if you don't have eyeless sight or one of the handful of models that have anti cloud measures". At least turning it to stealth gives opposing factions their typical anti stealth options as counters. I will concede that they should make it 'after normal movement' so that he cannot run behind it.
If it were just a cloud and he had Prowl, do you think it would be an attractive choice over the other two alchemical abilities?
|
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Mar 1, 2018 17:19:48 GMT
Anyway, CID starts next week, let's not tire ourselves out before then, we can go over all this again! |
|
Haight
Junior Strategist
Posts: 396
|
Post by Haight on Mar 1, 2018 17:21:33 GMT
Sure, TK is a possible issue, but you can't slam your own stuff. Keep junk 6"+ away from the front of sylvestro, and as long as there aren't goats, bashers, or one of the, what, 4 other models with +slam distance (collosals notwithstanding), you should be okay. Note slams and clouds and positioning isn't a weakness of sylvestro, its a weakness of positioning one's models, which is a weakness of the player so to speak. TK would need to get within 5" to hit or it will also miss offensively.
Again, for a support oriented model - buff / debuff spell, anti upkeep, Speed Buff, anti-charge (admonition), accuracy and damage doling / taking fixer in the feat .... why does this model need to be able to shut down ranged and magic?
I mean, yes, sure, sylvestro is not going to be killing anyone himself alone i get that. But he's a really good support caster, he's not supposed to be an assassination caster. 15/15 is fairly good for defensive stats, and he can self generate a cloud for those instances he wants to be 17 with concealment. Why should this cloud be able to be dropped, walked out of, and if you're not legion or have an anti-cloud mechanism/spell, essentially untargetable, and even if you walk into combat, with admonition, he can say "neener, nope!"
Even if he stays in the cloud, you shut down ranged and magic if they can't make it within 5". Even if they can, you have a def 15-17 to contend with, and a relatively decent armor stat on a caster with that defense, and a high focus count to help him camp.
He seems a bit too much of the personal defense and support package total package. He can mitigate low def, or high def. He can help mitigate high PS or low PS (both of these examples as buff or debuff - and can be cycled - perhaps even 1 time for free!). He can mitigate melee threat range (admonition), upkeeps (purify) ranged and magic assassination (Haze), battlegroup speed, he can fix accuracy and damage and repair damage with the feat.
I just think for such a superb support caster you can tone down the personal defense aspect a scootch, and you still have a high quality caster. If you tone down his support i actually think you tone down what makes him good.
|
|
Haight
Junior Strategist
Posts: 396
|
Post by Haight on Mar 1, 2018 17:24:12 GMT
Juris - 4", but the rest of the point stands, and i 100% agree. I just dont think a 15/15 caster with those abilities and spells should be immune to at range assassination, and not to mention mitigate a good bit of threat range by dropping the cloud "at any time" and then walking out of it to block LOS. If the opposing side doesn't have cloud mitigation, not only are you likely not range assassinating that target, but whatever can't "see" through the cloud will not be charging either. That using this ability is a "trade off" with two other incredible abilities (near-battlegroup-wide +2 Speed on tap ? 2-4 focus worth of free effects? - amazing!) isn't indicative that there's balance in the Super-Stealth-Cloud, but rather more evidence that its a bit over the top. Give Sylvestro Prowl, keep the cloud 4", or make the cloud grant Sylvestro Stealth while he's in it. One ability should not be able to say "I kill two cardinal threat vectors, and curtail the threat range of a third any time i want to or need to if you don't have eyeless sight or one of the handful of models that have anti cloud measures". At least turning it to stealth gives opposing factions their typical anti stealth options as counters. I will concede that they should make it 'after normal movement' so that he cannot run behind it.
If it were just a cloud and he had Prowl, do you think it would be an attractive choice over the other two alchemical abilities?
Situationally, yes. It's still a big ass 4" cloud, and he would still have stealth while in it. For all the points i raised, he doesn't need to be able to shut down 2 vectors of attack de facto. His support is what makes him good ; he doesn't need a golden parachute insurance policy against assassination. Watering down his support will make the caster less overall effective. As someone mentoined, he won't win the game by himself ; he needs all those support things to help his list win the game. Other casters are designed like this, and they don't get to ignore 2 of the 3 main attack types in the game on tap. If he were a 5 focus caster, i'd have a different opinion, but with a 14" control range, you can easily make it so its basically no practical to get threats within 5" for the vast majority of opponent types. I know what you're driving at (that the three should be an "even" trade off), but i don't agree with that. It's perfectly fine to have things like battle plan have 1 or 2 that are more often useful than another of them as long as there are situations where the less used one is very useful. Stealth is just that. With it being this way i could see turn one using speed bump, turn 2, speed bump again or free spell, then turn 3 its almost always going to Cloud maybe very occasionally free spell. This allows you to play him recklessly and strips your opponent the ability of getting around most situational mistakes. The caster essentially pilots on easy mode ; if i'm essentially immune to ranged and magic in most situations due to my control area and Haze cloud dropable on command, why woudn't i use that once i no longer need the speed to outmanuever my opponent unless i absolutely MUST get that free spell? Haze will be the de-facto condition unless you need the spell turn 3 onwards if it stands how it is now. Unless you MUST cast that free spell, you'd be a fool not to protect your caster after reading the table and then for insurance dropping Haze - even if there are no anti cloud items on table. If the cloud granted Sylvestro stealth, or he had prowl, it woudl be more like Turn 1 speed bump, turn 2 either speed bump or free spell. From turn 3, it would be more likely "am i under threat or going to be under threat? - okay , maybe cloud" if not free spell. Are there stealth ignoring models on the table ? Is one of the five anti cloud models on the table ? Do i just want to drop the cloud and then waltz out of it instead. More choice, and there's a greater depth of effect on those choices. Let's not forget too that the creation of "super" abilities adds another run in the complexity ladder. While this was already in the game (MacBain to some extend i believe), its a really bad precedent to keep encouraging. What's next, super concealment ? Super Anti-Stealth that ignores Super Stealth, until Super Duper Stealth comes out which is immune to Super Anti-Stealth, but not immune to the new model with Super Duper Anti-Stealth ? Bleck, no thanks. Exception based design as a road is paved by the "Good Intentions Company". |
|
Choco
Junior Strategist
Gorten, best feet in the game.
Posts: 571
|
Post by Choco on Mar 1, 2018 18:03:35 GMT
Protectorate are already in immense rage... look at those medium-base infantry! Then look at Cinerators and Bastions... I’m hoping CID keeps Power Creep in check, but I have less faith. They'll give us a salty-exemplar unit, with saltshields and salt-dispensers, and a new continuous effect: "salty". This sounds like something Mohsar would be all over. |
|
The morass that is perfect conjunction should not be the bar we set. 
