I very much agree with this one. There is far too many discarding-actions in the keyword to begin with.
I've had games with Loot Monger, where my starting hand was 4 severe cards and 2 moderates. And it was miserable since I couldn't summon anything now. Which feels really silly.
Also:
I get what you mean, but I just don’t see the fun in playing a crew built around a single model.
A friend of mine linked me the between The Danger Planet and the Malifaux Development Team – It is available on youtube, and I highly recommend giving it a listen. Really cool people having a nice chat. It did make me a bit worried about any future revisits to Som’er 1, however.
Now, English isn’t my first language, so I fully accept that there might be some misinterpretation going on. I got the impression that they would like to avoid continuously revisiting the same model and changing it over-and-over. Som’er1 has been reviewed twice now, and the quote “You got to get it right the 2nd time” makes me doubt they’ll give him a 3rd glance. They mentioned how multiple revisits to specific models is especially worrying for them, due to the community having different versions of the same model. I am personally not that worried about multiple versions existing in a play area, since it has been my experience that people stay very up to date on models that have been errata’ed.
They also mentioned how to want to have the game be enjoyable, and fun to play (with and against). Doesn’t necessarily mean it needs to be top tier. To me, this translates to “If it is fun, and enjoyable to play against, then we will most likely leave it at that”. Which also worries me, since Som’er1 hasn’t had his playstyle changed. He still summons, shoots, and bloats the board with semi-flexible models – He just does it so much worse than before.
So, we have a model (keyword?) being revisited multiple times, and hasn’t changed its playstyle on any fundamental level – So why should they go back to it now?
Again, please watch the video to form your own opinion before taking mine at face value.