Holding the Black Joker in your Hand

[ukrocky]

Its extremely good fortune to draw it at the beginning of your turn, so much so that we houseruled it so that you have to discard it without replacing it immediately.

Well that takes a nice tactical element out of the game... o.O

[Ace of Apes]

Depends on the crew for me.

Som'er: Pretty much never hold it.

Zoraida: Usually only hold if I take Jack Daw.

Pandora: Rarely hold it.

Lilith: Hold it before the big turn of murder, like ukrocky said.

Dreamer & Collette: Always, always hold. Too much that can go too wrong in too painful ways.

[Jonas Albrecht]

Well that takes a nice tactical element out of the game... o.O

...and replaces it with a much more satisfying threat.

[PlasticBoy]

i usually hold on to the black joker when i draw it. Playing with Collodi and doll crew I will go through my whole deck several turns in a row. Knowing that I can go through my deck I feel better knowing that a possible failed duel is out of the way. I also use it and other low cards to discard for Flurry. At that point its not in my deck until guaranteed the next turn, and I can safely go through my deck with attacks this turn.

[Adran]

I have had several very bad experiences with the black joker on a critical duel, so I'm likely to try and hold it for a couple of turns, but as Rocky said, if I think this is going to be a big turn getting rid of it for the extra card is also good.

Turns when I expect to go through my deck it migth be worth holding on to.

Its another risk/reward choice.

[Q'iq'el]

...and replaces it with a much more satisfying threat.

It's a classical example of over-doing house rules. You are supposed to be able to keep Black Joker in your hand - some models are designed around it and you've just deprived their owners large part of their utility.

Not to mention, it's completely legitimate to cheat duels down, when you want to lose them, and there's no reason whatsoever to deprive player a card allowing him to do so.

Edited June 1, 2011 by Q'iq'el

[Jonas Albrecht]

It's a classical example of over-doing house rules. You are supposed to be able to keep Black Joker in your hand - some models are designed around it and you've just deprived their owners large part of their utility.

Not to mention, it's completely legitimate to cheat duels down, when you want to lose them, and there's no reason whatsoever to deprive player a card allowing him to do so.

Is there a model other than Rasputina this effects? (EDIT: Yes, the Librarian too!).

And honestly, I cannot find the context in which this is overdoing it. We have a houserule. One that gets discarded anytime our playcircle expands, or someone just plain doesn't want to use it.

Edited June 1, 2011 by Jonas Albrecht

[(TV)]

I always hold it simply because a lot of my playstyle in all wargames involves lessening randomness as much as possible :wallbash:

Regards,

TV

[Buhallin]

Is there a model other than Rasputina this effects? (EDIT: Yes, the Librarian too!).

And honestly, I cannot find the context in which this is overdoing it. We have a houserule. One that gets discarded anytime our playcircle expands, or someone just plain doesn't want to use it.

It's also a pretty big slam to Jack Daw, since it removes the option to hold the card for safety.

His point on overdoing it is that it seems like an odd rule without much purpose. Drawing the red joker in your opening hand is pretty lucky too, do you make people discard it as well? You're certainly welcome to adjust rules as your group sees fit, but I think the general response is surprise that you think it was something that needed changed in the first place.

[Q'iq'el]

Is there a model other than Rasputina this effects? (EDIT: Yes, the Librarian too!).

And honestly, I cannot find the context in which this is overdoing it. We have a houserule. One that gets discarded anytime our playcircle expands, or someone just plain doesn't want to use it.

Well, for one you cut the relatively low chance for Flesh Construct to become Fast to zero, because nobody's going to spend a Red Joker on that and the option is practically designed for Black Joker.

Then you disadvantage all the models that would discard cards as spell/ability cost. They are supposed to have 6 cards and you cut them down to 5 arbitrarily. Colette's ability to create Soulstones is one example.

Then there are abilities like Slit Jugular which drain cards very quickly and again, you arbitrarily decide somebody should have less cards to defend himself with against such attacks.

Last but not least, there are abilities which replenish your hand - all sorts of triggers, spells like Reanimate etc. If somebody draws a Black Joker, his ability to draw a card and replenish his Control Hand in effect fizzles, even though it is not supposed to do that at all?

It's one thing to change kill/kill/kill Hazardous terrain to Impassable, because people don't like to see their minis die pushed to a bottomless pit or a lava river, it's completely different stuff to change a core mechanic in such a significant area. It simply ripples through game and alters the balance in unpredictable ways.

Edited June 1, 2011 by Q'iq'el

[Jonas Albrecht]

Well' date=' for one you cut the relatively low chance for Flesh Construct to become [b']Fast to zero, because nobody's going to spend a Red Joker on that and the option is practically designed for Black Joker.

Then you disadvantage all the models that would discard cards as spell/ability cost. They are supposed to have 6 cards and you cut them down to 5 arbitrarily. Colette's ability to create Soulstones is one example.

Then there are abilities like Slit Jugular which drain cards very quickly and again, you arbitrarily decide somebody should have less cards to defend himself with against such attacks.

Last but not least, there are abilities which replenish your hand - all sorts of triggers, spells like Reanimate etc. If somebody draws a Black Joker, his ability to draw a card and replenish his Control Hand in effect fizzles, even though it is not supposed to do that at all?

It's one thing to change kill/kill/kill Hazardous terrain to Impassable, because people don't like to see their minis die pushed to a bottomless pit or a lava river, it's completely different stuff to change a core mechanic in such a significant area. It simply ripples through game and alters the balance in unpredictable ways.

So, between your post and Buhallin's...

One model. One model (Colette) might get effected in our games. Assuming she was going to make a soulstone that turn.

This is not overdoing it. But it doesn't even matter. If we were to sit down at a table together, guess what? We wouldn't be using this rule. Its almost certain I wouldn't even bring it up. This seems so out of character for you, Qi. Passing rather harsh judgment with so little information.

Buhallin. The Red Joker is supposed to be a boon to the player. Drawing it is indeed lucky, as the card is supposed to be about empowerment. It's not meant to be a nullifying threat lurking in your deck. That's how I see the Black Joker, and have modified the rules in my games only to reflect this.

it's completely different stuff to change a core mechanic in such a significant area. It simply ripples through game and alters the balance in unpredictable ways.

This is absolute nonsense. Being able to hold onto the Black Joker is not a core mechanic, nor does being forced to discard it effect each and every model in the game. It has not had anything resembling an unpredictable effect on our games.

Edited June 1, 2011 by Jonas Albrecht

[ghostwalker]

On the removing the Black joker, would it not then balance to remove the red. Remove the threat of a card that surpasses all others. The red/black joker balance each other in the deck. Like with the original idea of holding the black, the same goes for the red. Sometimes you want to keep it to make that all important damage flip.

To a balanced scene it would appear more balanced to remove both not just one. Yes is just my opinion but i find taking out one half of the 2 most powerfull cards because its 'unlucky' to be strange without removing the 'lucky' one too.

As to models who would keep the black for reasons, i play ortegas and would discard the black if i needed to, to gain rapid fire on santiago, flurry or francisco, as a discard card against my partners slit jugular trigger. There are many reasons to keep it just incase.

[Fetid Strumpet]

It's a house rule however guys. I don't agree with it in anyway, shape, or form, but it's his own play groups rules. In his group's specific case they find it fun to make that the rule when they play. I think trying to convince him that its a bad rule is just going to create bad feelings.

[Buhallin]

Despite the defensiveness, nobody's suggested otherwise. He's welcome to do whatever he wants with the Jokers to fit his vision of what they should be. He said he changed a rule. Several of us don't think it's a necessary change or a good one, and were trying to discuss that. There shouldn't be anything wrong with that - nobody's told him we're going to show up and melt down his models for playing wrong.

Please, stop treating it like some sort of witch hunt. It's not.

Now, if I dare approach the topic again for reasoned discussion...

The Red Joker is supposed to be a boon to the player. Drawing it is indeed lucky, as the card is supposed to be about empowerment. It's not meant to be a nullifying threat lurking in your deck. That's how I see the Black Joker, and have modified the rules

This parallels why I hate Rules As "Intended" arguments. If the Black Joker were meant to be a nullifying threat lurking in your deck, it would have been easy for them to make it such, whether by your "must discard it now" rule to "Must discard it at the end of your turn" or even "If you draw the Black Joker you must reveal it, draw another card to replace it, and then shuffle it back into your deck".

But none of that that made it into the game. In fact, when we consider that Rasputina's December's Pawn ability specifically mentions playing the Black Joker (in addition to simply flipping it) it strongly suggests that the ability to have the Joker in your hand is quite intentional, and that would include holding it.

Again, let me stress just to make sure we're clear on this - you can play the game however you're inclined. But your view of what the Black Joker is meant to be is simply not correct.

[Drake]

Also, to add my thoughts,simply knowing the black joker is in the deck adds a dynamic to the game.

e.g. simply knowing it is there makes me think carefully about how I utilise my Colette....if I let her take damage that would kill here, the chance of pulling the Black Joker is very scary!Makes me rethink putting her in situations that might lead to that ever important Slow to Die Healing Flip....

[Odin1981]

I personally like to hold it but I don't have any type of crew that isn't a elite crew models costing 5-9 point range. Maybe if I had a zerg style crew I might be indifferent to it then.

But in all reality assuming you are playing a scrap after you draw your hand you only have about a 2% chance of flipping it so it really isn't that high probability wise to really effect a players decision making process in weighing in on should you be worried about it.

At 40 cards left in the deck it is around a 2.75% chance per draw, 30 about 3.5%, and finally at 20 cards left its a 5% but generally for the crews I play I don't often get that deep into my deck (I play perdita, sonya, and Colette) unless I get a plethora of trigger happy paired shots or more than 1/2 my crews are in defense stance and getting attacked.

[Dumb Luck]

I used to advocate holding onto it for the whole game but now I tend to side with ukrocky - keep it in your hand if there's a big turn coming up and then proceed to disregard it.

[Hansel]

Hey guys/gals? If you want to continue the houserule discussion, can you take it to another thread? Thanks!

Consider, that flipping the Black Joker is not always all that bad. The only cases where it really messes up with you are the damage flip and the healing flip. The former, because by that time you must have already invested a lot into getting the attack off (cheat as high as possible, perhaps toss the Soulstone in) and if it fizzles the cost in resources is rather big. The later, because you can lose your master with a twist of bad luck.

That is only a small portion of all the flips you make during the, even if the really important one.

In all the other flips Black Joker simply means you lose the duel. Could happen anyway (and on bright side you don't waste any Control Cards on cheating). Sucks to lose 1 or 2 AP on an attack which didn't work, but even if you held to your Black Joker, your opponent could have still beaten you with his own Flip/Control Hand. You just can't know that.

If I draw a Black Joker in a decisive turn, where I plan to have all the attacks, when I know I'll have to heal my master etc. etc. I'd hold to it. But early in the game it hurts too much to limit your hand size by 1 and late in the game it may not mater anymore. It's not an absolutely good move to make in every circumstances.

Great points. This has expanded my knowledge of the game and made my tactics better (in theory, anyway: we'll see what happens when I play!). Thanks for that.

[Pink Horror]

Doesn't it depend upon how many positive or negative flips you tend to get? If my strategy relied upon positive flips, I may hold onto it, but if I was planning for single card flips, it's not so important.

[Hookers]

it is very rarely a good idea to hold on to it.

there is only 1 or 2 turns a game where you will go all the way through your deck. therefore you are not likely to even flip it in any given turn. meanwhile it is using up one of the most valuable resources you have in a card slot in your hand.

some models benefit from discarding it (flesh construct), otherwise drop it like you would any other low card.

[cerealkiller195]

I never hold it in my hand, every time i flipped into a black joker it has never mattered much anyway. I rather not keep the card in my hand denying a better card from getting into my starting hand.

[Cats Laughing]

I've managed to flip it for damage for Rasputina (December's Curse, of course) on consecutive turns, in multiple games (and I haven't even played that much yet). I know it's probably not statistically worthwhile to hold it, but as a statistical anomaly, I'll take the insurance of holding until my deck likes me better.

[Q'iq'el]

So, between your post and Buhallin's...

One model. One model (Colette) might get effected in our games. Assuming she was going to make a soulstone that turn.

This is not overdoing it. But it doesn't even matter. If we were to sit down at a table together, guess what? We wouldn't be using this rule. Its almost certain I wouldn't even bring it up. This seems so out of character for you, Qi. Passing rather harsh judgment with so little information.

I'm not passing a judgement and I do not base my opinion on little information. What I said doesn't affect Colette and Colette only - I'm trying to show you that the change you introduced has a ripple effect that affects the balance of all the factions and models.

The game is designed so that you can hold into Black Joker. Black Joker *IS NOT* the worst card there is - it is a card with many peculiar and situational uses and you remove certain powerful abilities (clearly considered by the designers in the game balance) from all the minions and masters who have the use for this card.

Flesh Construct or Colette are merely examples - not the only cases. How about any model that can use Flurry or Rapid Fire? Black Joker is a valid card to use with these, but you take it away. How about any model that has to defend from Slit Jugular or Headshot? That potentially is every model in the game

Buhallin. The Red Joker is supposed to be a boon to the player. Drawing it is indeed lucky, as the card is supposed to be about empowerment. It's not meant to be a nullifying threat lurking in your deck. That's how I see the Black Joker, and have modified the rules in my games only to reflect this.

This is absolutely arbitrary and in fact that amounts to passing judgements on the purpose of the cards and rules without enough information.

Red Joker isn't always a boon and Black Joker isn't always a threat. This is Malifaux where everything is fuzzy and depends on the context. If your intention is to kill your Canine Remains to produce some Corpse Counters, but the Canine Remains flips Red Joker on it's Defensive flip. Is that a boon or have you just been hosed by flipping the Red Joker? A Black Joker in such situation would arguably be the best flip possible.

And if you are allowed to hold to Red Joker to prevent such nastiness from happening, how is it that doing the same with Black Joker is wrong?!?

Accordingly, there are creatures and masters who use perverted magic, go against the "common sense" such as it may be in Malifaux - for them Black Joker is a good card and it goes in agreement both with the fluff and with the intent of the rules.

This is absolute nonsense. Being able to hold onto the Black Joker is not a core mechanic, nor does being forced to discard it effect each and every model in the game. It has not had anything resembling an unpredictable effect on our games.

Of course it is a core mechanic. The rules for the Red and Black Joker are stated in the "Fate Deck" section of the Rules Manual - the second chapter and a set of the most general rules to boot. Models are designed around ability to use Black Joker you hold in your hand - that alone casts clear light on the intent of the designers and makes it very clear it is a core mechanic.

But you do more than just remove ability to hold Black Joker, and that's what disturbs me the most. The game is designed and balanced around players having full hand for every turn. A full Control Hand is one of the most important resources to manage. To increase the hand size or to redraw a card during the turn are a rare and very precious abilities - you have to pick up totems or minions and thus limit your crew choice to get access to them. Some of these talents are restricted to the masters in many crews - see Bloody Fate or Reanimate as an example. Some masters are not allowed to have a full hand - again, a balancing factor.

I'm trying to point out the house rule you mention not only affects the models which are specifically designed around ability to use the Black Joker, you also affect *every single model* when it comes to situations where the size of Control Hand matters (and thus make the ability that drain Control Hand more powerful). You also neuter some of the most powerful abilities in this game by adding a chance for them to fizzle, which they are not supposed to have (Bloody Fate mentioned above, for example).

You have a house rule which is clearly build around your perception of the intent, which is faulty. It may well be that you see no obvious effect for the crews you play, so you assume the adverse effect is negligible. It may be, that you don't even realize how many legitimate uses would a Black Joker have in the very crews you play. It may also be that no player in your group has attempted to use a master which can manipulate the Deck or drain opponent's resources, where the changes you introduced would be even more hurtful.

The bottom line is this: Why introduce House Rules which go against the design and are absolutely unnecessary? Why remove from the players the ability to choose and judge for themselves, even though they are clearly intended to have such ability? Holding to Black Joker may remove the threat of the card, but it comes at a considerable price and may be an unsustainable choice if the opponent assaults your resources anyway.

Edited June 2, 2011 by Q'iq'el

[Drake]

I for one have been on the sour end of the Black joker flip too many times, and have only played a dozen games. Thankfully I havent yet flipped it for Colette healing flip (no doubt I will now!), but having ben given the choice to hold it, I would every time, unless it is the last turn or 2 of the game. Even then, with the ability to re-flip to continue the game for my crew, and Cassandra's extra activation, and all the positive flips the Duet gets, there is an even greater chance of re-flipping the Black Joker if I ditch it, so I certainly like the option to hold onto it.

Each to their own, and I wouldnt begrudge anyone their house rules, assuming all players involved agree, but I do think being able to hold onto it, and not suffering the -1 control hand as described, is the best way to play the game, as intended.

[osoi]

I'm not passing a judgement and I do not base my opinion on little information. ....

Not going repeat the rest so quickly

Absolutely wholeheartedly agree. Your hand is very very important, one of the nastiest things you can do it get of discard control card effects not because you kill models as a result etc but because you are denying a serious resource.

I wont say anymore as I fear it wont be as eloquent as Q'iq'el put it.