Jump to content

What if Riders become duals?


Recommended Posts

I don't think they should become duel faction. 

But if I was going to make them be 2 factions, I would put Pale in Guild/Bayou, Masked in Neverborn/Ten thunders, Mechanical in Arcanist/Explorer and that leaves dead rider in Reserectionist/Outcast, and I've done that based on the suits that I thought fitted the factions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Adran said:

But if I was going to make them be 2 factions, I would put Pale in Guild/Bayou, Masked in Neverborn/Ten thunders, Mechanical in Arcanist/Explorer and that leaves dead rider in Reserectionist/Outcast, and I've done that based on the suits that I thought fitted the factions.

I was thinking:

Pale: Guild/Explorer, Masked: Bayou/Never, Mechanical: Arcanist/Outcast and Dead: Resser/10T.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic comes up periodically on the forums, and when it does I ask myself what the underlying rationale is.  Because while I think many people probably are against expanding the number or riders or increasing access to them, and I am too, I also am interested in what the motivation for the request is, and what we can learn about it.

From what I can tell, these are possible motivations (which are not mutually exclusive):

1.  All factions should have riders.

I don't know anything in the lore that would reinforce this idea.  Further, I believe most people would agree that it isn't desirable for all factions to be the same.  Eliminating differences between the factions needs to come with some upside.

2.  Riders are strong so it's not fair that some have them and others don't.

To me, this is a balance issue and, if true, the answer isn't to increase the number of or access to riders, but rather to balance riders by nerfing them and/or buffing other models.

3.  Riders serve specific role X, which can't be found in other factions (like ride with me and ruthless).

Again, to me this is a balance issue, but slightly different because what is being asserted is that riders offer a package deal that is unfairly withheld from others.  The solution here could be nerfing them and/or buffing others, or it could be that the factions which lack riders already have sufficient access to those abilities.

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, im_open_to_suggestions said:

Thunders and outcasts already have unofficial riders.  Yasinori and  the Donkey

The Donkey........?!

MealyImmaterialBluewhale-size_restricted.gif.a6a3a2a371ea8ac3e473bde457233ba9.gif

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget the gremlins have rooster riders!

Also remember that the riders have the horsemen keyword so in theory someone may be able to hire them at some point. That could potentially give another faction access to them (two if duel faction). Levi had that power in M2E and thus gave outcasts access to all 4 riders.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

They should just bite the bullet and make the donkey a real Rider, and give it an analogue to Ride With Me...

  • "Donkey Kick - target takes two damage and is pushed 4 inches away."

In fact, the Donkey actually push 3" Instead of 4", but also drops a Scheme marker instead doing 2 damage, so... 

 

Donkey Rider is Best Rider. 

 

Also, Gremlins has Georgy & Olaf, TT has Yasunori and ES has Patty and Ellie Ramone, so Riders for everyone. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Thatguy said:

I wouldn't want them to be dual faction. They were from a better, simpler time.

Preferably get rid of the entire concept of Versatiles. There's just too many samurai and Serenas walking the streets of Malifaux (not to mention Riders), when the emphasis on keywords is the best part of M3E.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Regelridderen said:

Preferably get rid of the entire concept of Versatiles. There's just too many samurai and Serenas walking the streets of Malifaux (not to mention Riders), when the emphasis on keywords is the best part of M3E.

Versatiles are not the issue i feel. its the hiring out of keyword becoming rife (looking at you pheona) 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, im_open_to_suggestions said:

Versatiles are not the issue i feel. its the hiring out of keyword becoming rife (looking at you pheona) 

Hiring a Versatile model is still, technically, hiring out of keyword - you just don't pay a tax on it.  You're not going to do anything about it as long as the "competitive" crowd who don't care about anything but winning at all costs dominates the community.

As to getting rid of Versatiles...meh?  Some models just don't really fit thematically anywhere, and trying to ham-handedly hammer them into one crew or another isn't the best idea from a storytelling perspective.

Now, to the thought experiment at hand, I think I like Adran's proposed set up, personally.  I think the proposed choices fit their new proposed factions thematically fairly well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like versatiles, but dislike OOK.

I do like that it provides some tech options, though, and the entire game is balanced around that.

I think the February tournament provides a neat option - no more than 15 stones of OOKs and versatiles can be hired.

I wouldn't mind if M3.5E changed it so there is a limit on how many OOKs you can hire (either stones or models). When I played Warhammer it had limits on things, and made for interesting armies.

Getting rid of OOKs entirely might get stale, though. Your crews would always be the same and you'd have no tech picks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I like versatiles, but dislike OOK.

I do like that it provides some tech options, though, and the entire game is balanced around that.

I think the February tournament provides a neat option - no more than 15 stones of OOKs and versatiles can be hired.

I wouldn't mind if M3.5E changed it so there is a limit on how many OOKs you can hire (either stones or models). When I played Warhammer it had limits on things, and made for interesting armies.

Getting rid of OOKs entirely might get stale, though. Your crews would always be the same and you'd have no tech picks.

i dont have a strong dislike for OOK models it just grates to see the "all star" lists where the only model that shares a keyword with the master is the totem.  I can see tournaments bringing in unofficial rules like the February one but i wouldnt hold breath for wyrd to make it an official thing

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, im_open_to_suggestions said:

i dont have a strong dislike for OOK models it just grates to see the "all star" lists where the only model that shares a keyword with the master is the totem.  I can see tournaments bringing in unofficial rules like the February one but i wouldnt hold breath for wyrd to make it an official thing

Well, it seems like they're already trying, right? The OOK tax was added this edition? I wouldn't be surprised if further limits were introduced next edition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to hijack this threat, but there's alot of options to limit OOK hiring. Stone limit is one but you can also increase the tax, for ex. : +1 for minions, +2 for enforcer and henchman; +3 for master (or do the same but for stone +1 for 1 to 6 as, +2 for 7 to 9, + 3 for 10 and up).

Wyrd could also add an other types let's call them in faction only for certain model that could not be hire out of faction. 

But before going for any kind of correlation, there must be a problem. Except maybe for guild, I don't see those super Elite crew dominating.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SEV said:

 

But before going for any kind of correlation, there must be a problem. Except maybe for guild, I don't see those super Elite crew dominating.

I imagine the biggest help would be to balance for game design.

It is hard to balance buffs/nerfs to a model when that model can be taken by the entire faction with essentially no penalty. See Archie's playability oscillating from garbage to oppressive to sometimes unplayed in his own keyword. Etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Oh, I didn't play M2E but I thought the OOK tax was way more restrictive. Wasn't mercenary tax for cross faction hires?

It is probably the same principle, mercenary tax wasn't for all cross faction hires, just those which were mercenary. 

If you remove non keyword hiring, are you just heading to removing Factions from the game?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information