Jump to content

L3gion

Members
  • Posts

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

L3gion's Achievements

Apprentice

Apprentice (3/14)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Conversation Starter
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later

Recent Badges

17

Reputation

  1. I like mini-stories and poems in the bios. I don't think there should be a lot of them, but a couple throughout the book really add variety to the book's structure and flavour to the fluff. What a model does is described in the stat card; bios is for what a character is. i miss vignettes and pop-outs describing aspects of the everyday life in Malifaux. In general, I really like that Malifaux books are not just dry rules with bits of fluff here and there - they are, in fact, quite the opposite, they put the lore and the mood first. That's what grabbed me about the game, and pop-outs, vignettes, songs, tiny bits of storytelling really bring the setting to life.
  2. Well, I love Lovecraftian stuff, and the "Dead of Winter" story about Tara sort of reminded me of "The Dark Tower" series - a lone cowboy (cowgirl?) in a strange, surreal world; the overall weirdness of the situation and the chilling loneliness of a hero, who's still determined to see his/her journey to the end... And after that story, neither Tara nor Obliteration give too much of a crap about anything - she's dead, he's mostly helpless, and they both are so beaten down by life that they don't care about much now. Tara knows about the nothingness beyond our world and the futility of all mortal efforts, but she remains friendly to everyone who deserves it... She's just so fascinating! To me, she feels like a great person to hang out with) I don't know: I like a lot of different stuff, and, to me, much of it came together in the lore for Tara. Just personal preferences) Yeah, that's what I hope for with Tara=\) I often feel like I'm too stupid to play her crew properly (well, I'm too stupid for any kind of a strategy/tactics game, so there's that)... But it boils down to how much you prioritise the thematic aspects of the game over its mechanics and competitiveness. Even when I get destroyed by my opponents, I still have fun, because I've just played with a crew I can relate to. (And the gameplay is cool, which also helps). Who cares about the results, if I get to play with the toys I like?) I know it's not a mindset that is common or necessarily good, but it's still a thing to keep in mind.
  3. Parker Barrows' crew, definitely. And Sue. Personally, I went with the "Browncoats"/"Dead West meets Cthulhu" themes, so for the core of my band I picked the Tara crew with Dead Authopsies, Death Marshals, Forgotten Marshal, Scion of the Void and some other models that either marginally fit the themes above or just play well (like Hayreddin and Bete Noire). I know that it may not be the best crew gameplay-wise, but it's thematic, and that's all that matters to me. And I'm currently eyeing Dead Outlaws and Sue for the Outcasts' side of the crew. By the way. Dear Wyrd! Tara needs more eldritch abominations and/or dead cowboys! Tallos is kinda cool mechanically, but doesn't fit the theme at all:(
  4. It does, but it doesn't invalidate @edopersichetti 's feelings about the subject. I was OK with the coffee machine, because I thought it was a cute real-life reference (and it didn't seem out of place, because progress keeps going, even... well, especially in Malifaux), and I know nothing about the hidden meaning of bagels for Americans. The OP's point about "feeling something's off" still stands. Fiction, especially based on alternative history, is a strange beast. The author tries to get some message, factual or emotional, to the readers, using certain facts about the described world and the author's mastery of language. The thing is, the reader is not obligated to perceive that message in the exact way the author intended it, and he or she doesn't have to agree with it. Google "Fahrenheit 451" by Bradbury: he stated on numerous occasions that his book was specifically about the effect TV has on people, and he got furious once when the readers tried to convince him that his book was actually about censorship. Neither party is wrong: the author did his best to convey a meaning, and the audience took another meaning from his creation. Fiction that has references to the established world-view of the reader, be it historical novels, alternative history, fantasy, sci-fi or whatever, is quite challenging in this respect. It's not enough just to have facts supporting the stuff you write - you need to convince the reader to believe in the world you create. Some of them - you will, some of them - you won't. The facts may support your point, but, just because you're right, you can't expect the reader to instantly get the exact subjective impression that you want. And that's OK. Malifaux fluff generally has pretty good writing - the "Crossroads" book is still my favourite, to the point of wanting a printed version to put on a shelf next to my favourites. You can't blame an objectively good writer that he's not good enough, and you can't blame the reader for not liking the stuff he writes. To each his/her own. It is nice to get historical insights from the writers and the people in forums, who, I'm sure, have a wide range of interests and facts to support them. The "coffee and bagels" discussion remained civil to the end, with neither party shouting "well, I feel this way, so you're wrong!" or "well, I know that, so your feels are wrong!". @edopersichetti provided his/her feedback on the book, was given feedback on that feedback, accepted it for further contemplation, and for now remained with his/her opinion unchanged. And now desperately tries to escape this conversation, I think...:) Yeah, the discussion of facts (or whatever is seen as facts in a fictional world) is now over; the discussion of personal feelings, I think, is not really what this forum is supposed to be about... Sooo... yeah. New topic?) Tl;dr: it's okay for a consumer of media to have gut feelings about is. Justified or not, and if not - what to do about it, is up to the consumer. You can't be wrong for feeling something. P.S.: is it just me, or the forum automatically logs people off for waiting too long before posting? I start typing a post, and by the time I'm done (yeah, I'm slow) I'm no longer signed in. I have to log in again, hoping that the post is not lost. It might just be my crappy PC at work, but it is really annoying-__-
  5. Thank you all for the responses. I guess I need to do some research before writing angry posts on the Internet... Also, fantasy and alternative history are quite different - we really don't know how the existence of magic affected the development of different nations. I lack the sufficient historical insight to continue this discussion, and whether or not I "feel" something is wrong is really irrelevant, soo... whatever. And now for something completely different. Do you think Malifaux will eventually completely move on from its western aesthetics? The timeline keeps advancing, the tone is gradually changing (thanks, Marlow), and a number of The Other Side models look more dieselpunky than steampunky already. Do you think that, some releases in, Malifaux will completely shift from dusters and cowboy hats to trenchcoats and fedoras? Will adopt some sort of fantasy WWI and Call of Cthulhu style? How do you feel about that idea?
  6. First thing first: I'm not totally okay with discrimination=\\) Just putting this out there. As for the rest of your post... Hm. You do raise valid points. Apparently I don't remember the lore as well as I thought. And I probably did not correlate the word "slaves" with racism in my mind when reading Toni's description. Again, there are characters of all kinds of nationalities in the fluff, and racial issue does not come up there. I mean, look at Neil Henry's story in the Chronicles - there's plenty of material for this kind of stuff there, but there was none. I can get political and cultural differences and conflicts based on them, because they come up far more often and because they are expected in a melting pot of the frontier. I pretty much expect right proper English gentlemen to be asses to French people, or pompous "progressive" members of the Guild to be dismissive of, say, Indians (hi, Sandeep). And, in my mind, this is a different kind of discrimination from racial hatred. I may very well be wrong here, and I am well aware that no kind of discrimination is more acceptable than the other - that's just my subjective perception. So, the Arcanist story sort of caught me off guard here: Toni makes a pretty damn significant decision, one that can affect hundreds of people, one that goes against her principles, based on something I didn't even remember about her. It felt forced when I read it, and it still feels forced now (though a bit less so now that you brought up the examples from fluff). Again: black people are badasses here! They have killer robots and stuff! How the hell are there black slaves?! Abyssinia aside, there was magic on Earth - I think even various "barbaric" tribes had something to teach to the "civilized" countries, and something to put against their military. Someone like Neil Henry works like a slave not because of skin color, but because that's how his life turned - the Guild screws workers indiscriminately... And so... I could get the justification of racism being "his people have weird customs", "they worship different deities" and such. I could get more pragmatic stuff, like "he has something we want" or "he acted sorta bad toward us, let's punish him". Bad people are bad, and in Malifaux (and Earthside as well) bad things happen. But the justification for the murder of Toni's father was that he simply was black. That's it - just because he's black. Just... can't... buy it. Sorry. The point is not what I want or don't want - a lot of times I don't know what I want. I do not demand anything from Wyrd. I only know that some stuff I consume I like, and some stuff I don't, and I try to analyze it and find out why, to various degrees of effect. Maybe I am not clear when I try to describe it; sorry about that... This story I did not like. I liked the quiet inclusion of all sorts of characters in the lore, and I didn't like it when Wyrd decided it still needs to show that those characters really were different. But they totally aren't. But they kind of are, hence the issue in question. But... So many but's. I don't like stuff forced into something where I feel it doesn't belong, that's all, I guess. And I also don't like real life stuff in my fantasy (see a ton of crappy fantasy, where characters talk and act exactly like people in the real world), but I'm OK with its adaptation for worldbuilding purposes (see wizard fascism and "racism against purple people" - @Malkirk, I am so using this phrase in all future discussions on similar subjects:) ). Again: personal preferences that I apparently struggle to describe properly... And a strong enough dislike to justify writing about it on this forum.
  7. Okay then. Thank you for understanding. Just to clarify: I have nothing against raising heavy subjects in supposedly entertainment-type media, be it board games, videogames, comics or whatever. Just need them to be justified within the world. So, "racism against purple people" (or green people, aka Gremlins) actually sits better with me. (Not sure right now how I would feel about the Gremlins example, but that would depend on the specific story.) As for dancing around... In my opinion, it is better just to include a variety of characters without pointing fingers at the fact of inclusion, which Malifaux has been doing for quite a while now. This also works for me. I'm not saying that pointing fingers was necessarily the intention, but that's how it seemed to me. I guess I will have to wait for more fluff and see how things work out. And read the rest of the book in the meantime) P.S.: just happened to stumble onto the word "fascism" somewhere on Twitter and thought that I owe another apology, for grammatical errors=\ Not my first language, not the words I use often.
  8. Thank you for answering, and sorry if I was too negative - didn't want to insult anyone working on the fluff, I'm just frustrated at inconsistencies that, to me, subjectively, seem contrived and jarring. Regarding NDAs - totally cool. I still think there would be mentions of racism in the fluff if it was an issue. I cannot imagine people simply forgetting about their beliefs and prejudices, just because they are in another world now. Somewhere, somehow, stuff like this would still show up. But no - no mentions of it before this particular story. I can get a lot of potential conflicts in the world of Malifaux, on both sides of the breach: nationalistic ("You dirty French frog-eaters/Eastern barbarians/etc."), social ("You dirty moneybags/filthy plebeans/etc."), political ("We, the Guild, are strong, and you, native Americans/Indians/whatever, are not, and also your traditions are weird, so screw you"), downright Nitzschean ("We, the Resurrectionists/the Arcanists/whatever, shall rule over the lesser men!") and so on. Racism based on looks - sorry, I just can't. The cognitive dissonance is too strong. And, in my personal taste, it's better to dance around certain issues or adapt them for the purposes of your story (see wizard fascism in "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows") than putting them in the middle of the existing storyline out of nowhere. Just a personal preference. I could get behind the story, if the motivation was different. For example: Toni's father had a valuable piece of land/a beautiful wife/whatever, that someone powerful in the town wanted. Or he insulted someone rich, because he was always an honest man and sometimes let his tongue get the better of him. After that, the father was framed and murdered. And the Governor-General offered Toni, say, a decree about a death sentence for corruption within all of the Guild's eschelons, or something like that. Still game-changing for society, and does not require hamfisting into the existing lore. Again, sorry for being harsh in my original post. Just... you know. Had to let it out.
  9. _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ... Saying it now: the following is a personal opinion on the book, and nothing else. Sorry, not buying the Arcanist story at all. Malifaux, Through the Breach and Chronicles had characters of color for a good while now, and I don't recall any racial hate toward them in the fluff. I actually thought that was the point - a way to get more representation in the character pool while carefully dancing around real life issues (kind of like with religion - there are some mentions of it, and room for thought and imagination, but no specifics. Another thing this reminds me of is the Taelor story in the third book: "You want to work in the mine? Sure, whatever. Don't care if you're a woman: if you can handle the work - do it"). I liked it that way. And the reveal of the Abyssinian faction for The Other Side only deepened my beliefs - it is an African nation that is highly advanced and obviously influencial (they have giant killing machines, they have to be). And their advancement could not have happened in the last, like, twenty years - it definitely took centuries. BUT now you are telling me that racism against black people is totally an issue, that lynching is a thing and so on. And why? Just to have a plot twist of Toni betraying Ramos. Sorry, but this is stupid. Maybe there was slavery of, say, native Australians or inhabitants of some islands, but, with Abyssinia being a thing and the general tone of the other fluff, I still don't buy racism in the Malifaux world (racism as in "you look different, therefore you are inferior"). To me, this story was a way for writers to say "hey, look how politically sensitive and respectful we are! ...all of a sudden..." Please, don't. I would really appreciate it if you kept politics out of my escapism. Also, did Zoraida hit her head on her hut's ceiling or something? I did not really imagine her being this incompetent. I'm interested to see where the Neverborn storyline goes, but the story itself I didn't really like. Especially the big reveal, which had ZERO hints at prior - it just comes out of nowhere. "The great and powerful Zoraida has been deceived! The witch who literally weaves fate has been played like a small child! How???!" - "Dunno, magic an' stuff." Wooow. Deus ex machina much. Also, it is hard for me to believe that various Outcasts, who are used to not trusting people and being independent, simply agree to stick together from now on. Some of them - sure, why not: Von Schill, Parker, maybe Tara... Maybe Viks. But all of them? Without any harsh words, and arguments, and egotistical reasonings? I find it hard to believe. But whatever - I can suspend my disbelief on this. The above points - not so much. Overall... I kind of liked the Guild story, I really enjoyed the Ressers story. The other ones I have not read yet... I do not like where Marlow takes Malifaux - from the age of heroes to the age of civilization. But that is inevitable, I guess, - the dialogue between Perdita and Kitchener in the third book was quite an illustration to this (great story, by the way). I liked some of the new models, but not nearly enough to be excited about the new wave. In general, I think that "Broken Promises" is a viable name for this book=\ And that makes me really sad. I got into Malifaux because of its setting and stories, and now I see the things I liked about them gradually fall apart:( I really hope the next releases will do better for me.
  10. I believe in the northern regions of the real world people are allowed (and encouraged) to have guns, maybe not with them at all times, but at home - definitely. Because bears. Same thing in Malifaux: because Neverborn, and zombies, and bandits, and whatever. I still don't think it is a good idea for some random guy to flash a shotgun or a bomb in the more civilized parts of Malifaux City, but closer to the outskirts, or in mining towns, - why not? Same with westerns: guns are pretty much a neccessity, but a gatling gun under the bar stand is a bit of a stretch. Like I said, Malifaux is full of contrasts, thin lines and delicate balances, and that's the beauty of it. So many possible conflicts, so many possible stories... So much potential for both players and FMs. As for soulstones for personal "peaceful" use, I would suggest attaching a crapton of paperwork to soulstones sold by the Guild: permits to buy, permits to carry, to keep, to use, etc., with specific mentions of their intended use (e.g. healing). Maybe a tad smaller crapton for soulstone dust. And some bureaucratic procedure to recharge/replace them. I think it should work nicely for characters who need the stones - after all, they are free to choose not to follow the requirements of those documents. Thank you for starting this discussion! It is an important one to have, I believe, given how different TTB is from the usual heroic fantasy. I think this RPG will go well with people who enjoy playing, or just the concept of, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (Dark Heresy will not do - characters there are still too over-the-top) and storytelling games. That's what this system is best for - telling stories.
  11. Regarding the prices and economics. Somewhere in the fluff it was stated that the Guild invites workers to Malifaux offering them a 3-years contract, but by the time the contract expires, the workers are caught Breach-side in the web of debts and obligations. That is the Guild's instrument of keeping people in the mines - debts, taxes, loans etc. So yes, you could work for a week or two and buy a nice, shiny soulstone - that is, if you don't want to pay off your debts and are ready to face the consequences. And, again, regarding "Wyrd not wanting us to use magic". Real world doesn't want us to use guns, most of the time; doesn't mean you can't, it's just going to be difficult. If you want something, find a way to get it or to do it, and be ready for the consequences. If you want to use magic in Malifaux, either submit to the Guild and have yourself a pretty collar of a sanctioned mage, or be discreet about it, or throw fireballs left, right and center and get ready for troubles. Wyrd wants you to be creative, they want you to live in the world they created, with its freedoms and obligations; they don't want you to own that world (in various meanings of the word "own" that are not welcome in a civil discussion).
  12. I think you are relying too much on the idea of "fun". Now, I know that's what games are supposed to be - fun, but the world they are set in is really not. First of, let's not forget that Malifaux is a frontier world. In the real-life frontier, sure there was a lot of gold - it was literally under people's boots, and a lucky guy could easily find it and wear it. It would attract a lot of unwanted attention, but it was possible. Now, imagine that gold could kill people - like, had gunpowder properties, creating explosions and such. That would change the situation dramatically, wouldn't it? Now, if you wear a golden necklace, not only you are getting the attention of various outlaws and just folks who really need money - you are now a walking threat, and you will be treated as such by the authorities. Sure, maybe you are wearing that necklace because it looks pretty, but good luck explaining it to every single law enforcer you meet. And, speaking of law enforcement: the Guild are not the good guys - they are the strongest guys. Never forget that the Guild treats the Malifaux world as their property, soulstones - as their most valuable asset, and it will not tolerate anyone who might potentially be a threat to it. That is basically the logic of the setting, and that is the logic that the Fate Master has to follow. I can understand the frustration. Most RPGs allow players to look, act and feel as badass and as Mary Sue-ish as they wish: it is entirely OK in something like DnD for a warrior to wear the helmet made of the skull of a dragon he has slain, for mages to have levitating gems floating around them, and so on. I get it: it's cool to have a soulstone in a walking cane, or on a ring, or whatever (same as, for a school-boy, it feels cool to have a pocket-knife with him). But the Malifaux world is gritty and cynical. Here, such a character will not be cool - he will be stupid, and will get punished for his stupidity very quickly. Taking Warhammer as an example: imagine someone walking around a city with a warpstone around his neck. It is stupid, and so is showing off soulstones in Malifaux. And, personally, I don't see it as a restriction - I see it as another beautiful aspect of the setting. Malifaux is a complex world with a lot of contrasts and various aspects. Exploring those aspects is quite a pleasure, and that's what TTB allows FMs and players to do. Returning to the cane example. If I ran a game, and a player wanted to have such an artifact for the awesomeness purposes, I would warn him about the implications of possessing such a thing, and then I would allow it. And have his character run away from Guild patrols, witch hunters, outlaws, Arcanists, beggars with knives - the whole goddamn world, until that player either learns his lesson of how brutal the world can be and gets rid of the thing, or manages to overcome all obstacles and earn the right to be awesome. Because at that point, he is awesome. Malifaux is a world that allows nearly everyone to achieve greatness. But you have to earn it, and it will be REALLY hard. And painful. Also:
  13. You are absolutely right about the push effect; removed the redundant collision rule. I do like your wording on the Kick It! action better, simply because it is shorter) And also phrased in a more intuitive way. I don't really see a lot of scoring happening within 5-6 turns - the pitch is quite big, models can prevent other models from moving... It would make killing enemies a more viable strategy, and I don't really want that - it is still football, after all, the ball is there for a reason) I think a bunch of short turns will work better, but it remains to be tested. I did add the Blocking/Impassable rule for the markers. I don't think it matters for the Goal Markers, since you can still put the ball in base contact with them, even if large models are covering them; but I listed this rule for those markers as well simply to avoid confusing situations. I am not sure about the condition part. It would make a nice risk-reward system to let your opponent throw conditions at you just so you could lead the ball. Also, it gives players another way to control the ball. I left it unchanged for now; if this mechanic is proven to be bad, I will change it. Thank you for the suggestions!
  14. LordZombie, awesome! Please, let me know how it goes) Meanwhile, I gave it some thought and decided to implement a couple of changes based on Myyrä's suggestions (thanks again!), including the VP scoring rate (it should shift the focus of the game further away from senseless murder and provide a nice catch-up mechanic). I also changed some of the wording, added the model cap and changed the name to something a bit less cringy (other suggestions are welcome). The way I see it, this is now basically a Hardcore Henchmen variant (Hardcore Hooligans?) focused on mobility. I still have no idea how long the games can last, and I don't know when I will be able to test it, hence the 25 SS limit (feel free to toy around with this); the optional rule should also deal with potential game length issues. The original post remains in place for now, just to give possible players more options to consider. So, here it is:
  15. Your wording for Kick It! certainly sounds better) And it is shorter, which is also a plus. The rules for collision with terrain and table edge can be put in the general rules section, that is for sure. I didn't really want to use a TN for this action (it's just kicking the ball, after all), but your variant is still very viable. A couple of things though: - I went with the Projectile mark specifically to prevent the use of this action while engaged; - I added the Black Joker part to replace not meeting the TN, as a chance to fumble the kick. And I like the idea of killing weakened enemy models with a mighty kick of a Red Joker-powered ball in the teeth) Just seems fun to me. To summarize: it might be a good idea to move the terrain/table edge rule out of the condition description and remove the Black Joker rule (or modify it for not meeting the TN). But I would keep the Projectile mark and the Red Joker rule: the first is kind of important, and the second provides players with another tactical trick. As for VP scoring, I basically went with the Guild Ball system. However, there's also the lack of Turns limitation: I don't want the game to drag on too long, with Turn after Turn of no VP for any of the players. For this very reason, I would recommend using small crews, 20-35 SS each, lead by henchmen. Thanks for the suggestion! I will wait for other comments (if any), read through the OP and your wording again and then either edit the OP accordingly or provide explanation for not changing it. I tried to base my wording on a specific order of events and effects resolution, to avoid confusing situations. If changing this action does not affect this order, I don't see any other reason not to change it.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information