|
Post by gwek on Dec 31, 2009 8:34:44 GMT -5
There are two ways to do that. Get rid of Savage and reinstate that ability, or keep them Savage, but disable to second part. To be honest the easiest way to do it really seems to be just get rid of Savage and reinstate the first part. Really? I would think the other way is the easier way to go. Consider: 1) Keep Savage but negate movement requirement (this follows the main rules of the game, but adds an exception to know Savage works). 2) Remove Savage, but add on the no commander effect part (this is basically TWO exceptions, or rather, I suppose, an exception to an exception: the first is removing Savage, the second is bringing part of it back... but not following the original guidelines of the mechanic).
|
|
|
Post by xpraider on Dec 31, 2009 9:55:25 GMT -5
There are two ways to do that. Get rid of Savage and reinstate that ability, or keep them Savage, but disable to second part. To be honest the easiest way to do it really seems to be just get rid of Savage and reinstate the first part. Really? I would think the other way is the easier way to go. Consider: 1) Keep Savage but negate movement requirement (this follows the main rules of the game, but adds an exception to know Savage works). 2) Remove Savage, but add on the no commander effect part (this is basically TWO exceptions, or rather, I suppose, an exception to an exception: the first is removing Savage, the second is bringing part of it back... but not following the original guidelines of the mechanic). The reason I said #2 is easier is because it removes a rule and adds a rule, rather than modifying a rule. Plus, it dealt with the idea that we didn't want the Raks to be able to benefits from CEs, otherwise we might as well just give her Empathy or have her remove Savage from the Raks overall. If it's a matter of having to pay for the ability to benefit from CEs there's nothing that says we can't include that in her cost, especially since she's the most appropriate person to do it. If we want the Raks to be able to benefit from CEs, then she should just remove Savage from them, since we're trying to get rid of the movement part of Savage anyway. If we don't want them from benefiting from CEs, then we should remove Savage, but then place a CE restriction on them so something with Empathy doesn't remove that effect as well.
|
|
|
Post by Dendrite on Dec 31, 2009 11:39:06 GMT -5
I think if her subjects are going to lose Savage, then it can't be in the CE because of circular logic (that confusing post I made a few pages back) It would have to be part of the Muur Talisman ability or something.
|
|
|
Post by gwek on Dec 31, 2009 12:33:48 GMT -5
The reason I said #2 is easier is because it removes a rule and adds a rule, rather than modifying a rule. The vast majority of special abilities are, basically, exceptions to the rules: "under circumstances X, Y happens instead of the norm." From a game design viewpoint, easier (and more consistent) to modify the rules than CHANGE the rules. As I've said before, I think that Empathy is inappropriate because her control ability affects ONLY Raks. With respect to other commander effects, my feeling is that keeping Savage allows for broader squad design while staying within the criteria of what Celeste "feels like". We see that the Raks are clearly and completely under her control... but that doesn't necessarily mean that a character skilled at "empathy" might not be able to provide some influence (inasmuch as they would also do with, say, a nexu). Personally, I think it is most appropriate if, under normal circumstances, the Raks are subject only to Celeste's commander effect, but don't necessarily have an issue with Empathy opening up options because it's less limiting to squad design around Celeste and her Raks (and also, frankly, presents an interesting squad dynamic with the Jedi Exile). So, I think keeping (but modifying) Savage is the way to go because: 1) Works better with existing game design (and is simpler). 2) Does not conflict with the "real world" presentation of Celeste. 3) Is less limiting to squad design.
|
|
|
Post by xpraider on Dec 31, 2009 18:43:08 GMT -5
Yeah, but very few modify existing abilities. As in Ability X modifies part 1, but not part 2 or 3 of ability Y. The basic rules are often modified (which is really what special abilities, Force Powers, and CEs are doing), but very rarely are those rules themselves modified, i.e. something changing an aspect of Unique, or Melee Attack.
What you're proposing does. Most of the rules when other special abilities apply only take effect if those rules are already there. Special Ability X only applies if a character has Ability Y. But it doesn't change the definition of Ability Y.
That said, when Celeste was around she was the only one affecting what the Raks did. If she had complete control of them then no one else would be able to influence them, otherwise her control wouldn't be complete.
I agree with you on part 3 though. It does allow for more squad building options. But then again, so does just removing Savage and making sure to put that into her cost, rather than forcing the players to pay for 2 or 3 more figures.
Forcing the player to include a character with Empathy just makes her controlling ability with the Raks redundant.
But, a way of doing it.
Characters in your squad with Rakghoul Disease are not subject to the movement requirements of Savage.
|
|
|
Post by gwek on Jan 1, 2010 11:30:33 GMT -5
Why do I have a feeling that Celeste will be the last one in this set to be approved?
|
|
|
Post by xpraider on Jan 1, 2010 13:35:08 GMT -5
Nah. I think we're getting closer with her. Just have to work out some of the kinks.
|
|
|
Post by xpraider on Jan 2, 2010 11:12:12 GMT -5
I actually was thinking on my drive to work this morning of another concern regarding her changing the Raks.
Now while they may not (or may) be able to benefit from CEs, there is also the problem with CEs that they might have. I'd like to provide a provision that states they can't give or receive CEs. First off, it would be strange for a Rakghoul to give Celeste orders, but the other concern I have is if she manages to kill say Dodonna, or Wedge, or Rieekan, or any of the Thrawns. I could see that causing a bit of a problem. So that leaves two options, and a question of which is more balanced and which works better mechanically (and reads better).
#1) Rakghoul Master (Character's with Rakghoul Plague lose Savage, and may not give or receive Commander Effects.)
#2) Rakghoul Master (Character's with Rakghoul Plague are not subject to the movement restrictions and requirements of Savage, and may not give Commander Effects.)
|
|
|
Post by darthgrievous on Jan 3, 2010 20:15:24 GMT -5
Yuck, I am disliking her more and more, but perhaps we should really get down to the Talisman, I thought mine was quite good about a thousand pages back, but i think it got voted down. Can we get some sort of reprint on stats.
|
|
|
Post by xpraider on Jan 3, 2010 21:08:24 GMT -5
Here's an updated version of the most recently posted.
Celeste Morne Cost: HP: 90 Def: 18 Att: 10 Dam 20
Special Abilities Unique; Melee Attack; Double Attack; Stealth Muur Talisman (When this character defeats an enemy, that enemy is returned to play at 10 HPs, becomes part of this character's squad and gains Savage and Rakghoul Plague.)
Rakghoul Master (Character's with Rakghoul Plague are not subject to the movement restrictions and requirements of Savage, and may not give Commander Effects.)
A New Host (When this character is defeated, target the nearest Force User within 6 squares save 11; on a failure that character joins this character's squad and gains Rakghoul Master, Muur Talisman, and A New Host)
Force Powers Force 2, Renewal 1 Force Bubble Force Repulse 3 Force Lightning
|
|
|
Post by darthgrievous on Jan 4, 2010 8:48:45 GMT -5
OOh now I am starting to like her, I am still thinking 100 HP though
|
|
|
Post by xpraider on Jan 8, 2010 5:52:43 GMT -5
Other than HPs, any other thoughts on her or her abilities at this point, or are we drawing to a close at this point?
|
|
|
Post by gwek on Jan 8, 2010 9:53:35 GMT -5
I think there's still a little more fine-tuning that needs to be done (although I haven't had much time this week).
I'll try to take a closer look at her this weekend.
|
|
jhart
Jedi Padawan
Posts: 36
|
Post by jhart on Jan 8, 2010 23:02:30 GMT -5
In the legacy arc of the Vector story Celeste lost control of her Rakghouls when she was distracted. To me this means that disruptive should work against any bonus she gives to them.
So, instead of a Rakghoul Master SA, I recomend the following CE:
Characters with savage are subject to this effect: Allies with Rakghoul Plague gain +3 attack and defense and may end their move without being adjacent to an enemy.
|
|
jhart
Jedi Padawan
Posts: 36
|
Post by jhart on Jan 9, 2010 0:53:23 GMT -5
A new Host seems unbalanced to me. On one 50% roll you could take GMLS or Darth Bane from your opponent and use them against them. All other betrayal rolls are 5% with FPRR bringing it to .25% a 1/400 chance.
It also does not accurately represent what happens in story. Celeste controled the Muur talisman. Once free of her it would try to make it's new host a sith, not make them serve Celeste's allies. Also, there should be a chance that the new host could control the talisman like celeste did.
An ability to posses a host would be more appropriate on a Karness Muur, Sith spirit. It is him doing the possesion, not Celeste
|
|