PokiePrawn Posted March 27, 2013 Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 Speaking with a couple of people at the local game story, they said that a major change was coming in Malifaux in a new version 2.0 which effectivly scraps all the old character cards and simplifies the system. Described to me as, turning "Chess in Checkers". I won't go into the 2nd hand rumours now, but... can anyone confirm or deny these (I hope not true for Wyrd's sake) rumours? Anything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96p Posted March 27, 2013 Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 (edited) that sounds like bollocks edit: and would run against everything we have seen so far from wyrd Edited March 27, 2013 by 96p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokiePrawn Posted March 27, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 Yeah, what I heard would boil the blood in your viens, while your soul is chilled to it's very core. I am super glad it sounds like a hoax. But... some pretty specific details... they believed it to be true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clousseau Posted March 27, 2013 Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 ...and they probably believe we never went to the moon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omenbringer Posted March 27, 2013 Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 Though I doubt any eventual change will reduce the game from Chess to Checkers there have been complaints about the complexity of the game (especially as the encounter sizes are increasing) both recently and the past. The only real concern is that there has been a bit of a precedence for a dramatic change. Puppet Wars in particular recieved a pretty heavy face lift that caught a lot of us by surprise (and we are still not 100% sure what the final rule set will look like until the re-release). Though it didn't reduce the game from Chess to Checkers, it did reduce the games complexity substantially and change the feel. With that said a lot will depend upon the direction of the game. If they decide to move into "army" size encounters then reducing the complexity and interactions is a must (similar to what Privateer Press did with the change from Mk1 to Mk2). Staying a "Skirmish" level game though wont require quite so many changes (mainly just clarifications and perhaps rebalancing of older models). I do trust the company though and also trust that Malifaux 2.0 will be an improvement on the current system (not that I think much is really wrong with it as is). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Wall Posted March 27, 2013 Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 One of the biggest draws I've seen to Malifaux has been the complexity of the models and the use of a small crew. I have seen very little desire to move towards larger games, and would hate to see things simplified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jewomie Posted March 27, 2013 Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaggisMcMutton Posted March 27, 2013 Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 I'm willing to bet large sums of money that those rumours will not become reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymore65 Posted March 27, 2013 Report Share Posted March 27, 2013 I wouldn't know much about the inside of the company, but I don't forsee a Malifaux 2.0 coming anytime soon. I think the game is pretty complex and that can be a bad thing sometimes. For example, my friend lost multiple matches by messing up activation order with C. Hoffman, allowing me to beat him easily. The complexity, however, is mitigated by choosing easier masters/models, allowing you to slowly build up in difficulty. All in all, it isn't much more difficult than Warmahordes in my experience, just the small model count requires much more detail to be interesting. Unless they want to do some major changes to a non skirmish game, there isn't really much to fear. What might be cool is a second game for non-skirmish scale, but I think it would probably be unneccesary and the RPG is cooler in my opinion. What I could see, however, is a massive errata update coming eventually. Ideally, this would balance the game more. I'm not saying it is too unbalanced right now, but I could see some tweaks made to certain (especially older models) to either bring them up to the current post storm of shadows power-level or weaken particularly powerful models. We already saw this in the fantastic Hamelin update, making him both less complicated and more balanced while still keeping his flavor. I could see some models getting updated and some other balancing moves. Maybe some of the Neverborn models could be a little more expensive in SS, or they could buff up some old Guild models. Still, I don't forsee any big changes to the game, at least in the near future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunce002917 Posted March 29, 2013 Report Share Posted March 29, 2013 I think it is safe to say tat Wyrd would probably release a new set of character cards that reflect the errata. So far, I don't see a need for a MKII Malifaux update. If at all, Wyrd should focus on releasing aHoffman.. Lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stepfan Posted March 29, 2013 Report Share Posted March 29, 2013 It would make me sad. I'm a huge malifreak at this point and haven't seen a reason to change any of the core rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pixelante Posted March 29, 2013 Report Share Posted March 29, 2013 I can see several areas that could change, nothing so drastic as loosing the cards, but it could be simpler like folding the whole magic as a separate action into strikes. Also I think there are abilities that are pretty similar like Brutal and Critical Strike that as far as I can see, don't need to be different from each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euclid (#ScottishMeta) Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 I've heard that the malifaux child gains melee master and that everyone will be wanting one in their crews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierzasty Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 I hope that Malifaux stays a skirmish game. Otherwise I'd drop it before you finish saying "hey guys we're moving towards full-scale battles". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96p Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 full scale Battles wouldn't work with the Card Mechanic anyway... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sliver Chocobo Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 I think it is safe to say tat Wyrd would probably release a new set of character cards that reflect the errata. So far, I don't see a need for a MKII Malifaux update. If at all, Wyrd should focus on releasing aHoffman.. Lol AHoffman is a myth, you can't prove it was ever a real thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huang Da Wei Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 I hope that if Malifaux is changed they will consult me first. I am looking for a change that allows me to win a game once in a while Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntereoVivo Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 I'm with Huang Da Wei. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omenbringer Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 Also I think there are abilities that are pretty similar like Brutal and Critical Strike that as far as I can see, don't need to be different from each other. Except that they function on completely different Suits. Since the factions abilities/ Spells are also usually tied to a favored Suit these abilities allow for greater control over frequency of appereance. For example the Arcanists would get much more use out of Critical Strike than they would Brutal since it doesn't compete with the :tomes suit that a lot of their other spells like. Generalization isn't necessarily a bad thing but it can lead to a lot of unintended consequences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dracomax Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Except that they function on completely different Suits. Since the factions abilities/ Spells are also usually tied to a favored Suit these abilities allow for greater control over frequency of appereance. For example the Arcanists would get much more use out of Critical Strike than they would Brutal since it doesn't compete with the :tomes suit that a lot of their other spells like. Generalization isn't necessarily a bad thing but it can lead to a lot of unintended consequences. I get what you are saying, but I don't entirely agree. How much more difficult would it be to put in the rulebook: Critical hit! +1 damage per (triggering suit) in the duel total, with the triggering suit printed on the card? Especially given they already print the trigger suit on the card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boshea Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Brutal, Flay, and Critical Strike are essentially all the same ability outside of a few corner cases. The main differences is what they default to when not listed with a weapon. Generalizing it wouldn't really change all that much other than having to always list what weapons the trigger applies to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fastenhate Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 I really hope a dumbing down doesn't happen. To me and my group the complexity and character uniqueness are THE defining components that seperated and elevate Malifaux over its competition. This thread scares and saddens me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
micahwc Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 I don't necisarily want to dumb Malifaux down, but clarification of some rules and combining some similar rules into one rule would be a good thing. Brutal and Critical strike are the exact same thing with different suit requirements. Flay is really similar, and rot to a lesser extent is vaguely similar. I could easily see it just saying critical strike (weapon name, rams) or critical strike (weapon name, tomes). This doesn't dumb the game down any, but does reduce the sheer number of special rules a little. Some of the movement abilities could be placed together as well. For a long time there was very little practical difference between flight and float. As far as I can remember(my memory sucks) arachnid used to just let you ignore difficult terrain, just like flight, float, and diving attack did. There are other similar rules. While on this topic, what exactly is the practical difference between alluring, pitiful, and harmless? All of these require a wp duel to succeed before targeting the model with the ability, correct? Harmless gets removed if certain actions are taken and can sometimes be returned to a model. Some of the abilities which ignore these are different. Ruthless doesn't ignore alluring, but does ignore harmless. But these rules are all very similar, and Wyrd could probably simplify this process some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golden Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 The differences between Irresistable, Harmless, and Pitiful are kinda big, you might want to reread those rather than have me get into them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omenbringer Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 I get what you are saying, but I don't entirely agree. How much more difficult would it be to put in the rulebook: Critical hit! +1 damage per (triggering suit) in the duel total, with the triggering suit printed on the card? Especially given they already print the trigger suit on the card. At that point you haven't really generalized the ability at all just introduced another level to verify (since it will have to be defined for each weapon and also required Suit). For players that predominately play one crew or faction this may not be a huge issue (as they will more than likely share the same suit requirement) however when swaping crews/ factions there is a high likelyhood of confusion when switching between them (because the suits will also more than likely change). Brutal, Flay, and Critical Strike are essentially all the same ability outside of a few corner cases. The main differences is what they default to when not listed with a weapon. Generalizing it wouldn't really change all that much other than having to always list what weapons the trigger applies to. Critical Strike inflicts +1 damage per :rams in the strike duel total. (Lady Justice can get up to +3 Dg from this, generalizing to Flay would reduce this to +2) Brutal is similar though requires :tomes. (I really do prefer that it has a unique name/ suit identity from Critical Strike since it makes it easy to recognize the difference) Flay on the other hand just inflicts +2 Dg regardless of the amount of :masks in the strike duel total. (Lord Chompy Bits maxes out at +2 Dg with this though if it were generalized he could get up to +3 Dg, Nekima could give Terror Tots and Young Nephilim benefiting from Nephilim Heart an additional +1 Dg over what they can max out at now) Rot gives a flip on the damage, which doesn't necessarily increase the damage in and of itself but influences both the potential (of the damage) and the range of usable cards to succeed with the strike (since the cheatable range is increased). The differences between Irresistable, Harmless, and Pitiful are kinda big, you might want to reread those rather than have me get into them. Those are very good examples of why "generalizing" abilities is not such a great idea. Each of those (I would also include Terrifying as well) have vastly different effects that directly effect how a model is played. The same could be argued for things like Ranged Expert/ Master, Melee Expert/ Master, Casting Expert/ Master, Rapid Fire, Furious Casting, Flurry, Instinctual, Shapeless, Nimble or Fast. Generalizing these abilities without changing the limitations associated with each would be very difficult and not really worth the effort. There is a reason Fast is so much more universally useful than the others. Changing other similar but less "common" abilties would also introduce new problems. Take a Look at the difference between Seductive and Dark Beauty, how do you "generalize" those two abilties without changing the models that they reside on? Though both models (Rotten Belle and Lilitu) cast it at a base 8 :crows :masks plus initial card flip the Rotten Belle is less succeptible to Sameal's Arcane Hunter ability than the Liltiu due to the lower Ca value. All of these "Uniquely Identified" abilities allow a level of fine tuning that general rules don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.