Hamelin is better than we think

[Math Mathonwy]

Perhaps it's just that I have played such a huge number of minis games, I dunno, but I seem that I come to this from a different angle to most.

But balance is very difficult in a game where multiple options are available to every player. If we are talking every crew needs to be balanced against every crew I don't know how likely that is to happen. Malifaux as a whole is very well balanced because of how the VP system works. You declare your faction, find out what you are doing, then hire your crew.

I agree. The question "is Lady J better than Rasputina?" is something that can be answered with "sometimes, depends on the schemes and the situations and such". And you can replace Lady J and Rasputina with most of the Masters. But there's a couple, where the answer will be more clear cut. "Is LCB better than Rasputina?" "Yes." "Is Colette better than McMourning?" "Yes." Maybe not exactly always, but most of the time.

And my thesis is that it wouldn't take much work in balancing to bring all the Masters into the first group. Not a popular opinion, I know.

Yeah, there will probably, even then, be a Master who wins the most and a Master who wins the least. Such is the nature of the beast, but that's not a problem in my view. That there is too big a gap between the best and the worst Master, now that is, if not a problem, then at least a non-ideal situation.

[Odin1981]

This reason being that I said stolen being rare 3 is this: If hollow waif's where rare 5 as well you would basically have two masters that would never die (assuming you weren't dumb running your stolen at people), now I understand with leve they have to be within 10", but there is nothing like that for hamelin. You can't really have them be a rare 2 due to not much you can take.

But rare 3 is completely feasible if your are of a reasonible intelligence level you would still have a very survivable master that all but a few crews that have companion that could alpha strike and take the master plus 2-3 dudes out.

The spell that makes insig being non master only is mainly just to cut down on bitching from other people because that way win, lose, or draw your always guarented to have 1 dude that can take objectives (theoretically pipes could make master insig).

I think the main problem that has people with whatever each individuals top 5 master list is that in my humble opinion is that the top 5 are head and shoulders above 6-10. If changes were made to them not with the intention of knocking them to the ground but bringing them to a closer level with 6-10. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying they should be equal with 6-10, I'm just saying make a closer disparity than currently is.

The main problem that alot of people have is that they believe their will be true balance. This can never happen. It is more likely no matter how many things happen there will always be a top 5. The only thing I'm saying is bring down the top 5 (dreamer, pandora, colette, hamelin, and X) to where its a acceptable level compared to other masters. They will still have a advantage but it just won't be so wide.

[Drake]

Or you could balance them somewhat by making the "lower tier" masters have better Avatar versions :goodbad:

Seing as that isd a dynamic yet to be introduced, it would be a good way to make some masters more powerful and balance the scales..make their Avatar versions more powerful upgrade than the already powerful master's Avatar forms...

[Necromorph]

Yes, but with Levi, you always have those 2 waifs if either of them or Levi survives till the end of the turn. Stolen have to be generated every time you need one. Did you know that Odin? I know the times we played and I had Levi I was very new to the game and didn't fully understand him. The waifs have a rule that says something along the lines of "this model is summoned to Levi at the end closing phase if a friendly Levi is on the table." They will come back, he doesn't need to keep summoning for that second waif over and over (this is on the V2 cards as well, so if this has been errata'd or changed, lemme know, haha). Stolen, however, do not, thus taking 1 of his 3 ap per turn to bring a new one in. For Levi, waifs are simply a means to bring him back, as he is designed to die. Stolen are a means to bring Hamelin back, but they have many other uses in his crew (thus why he gets a Ca debuff when he comes back, to make up for that difference between waifs and Stolen). He also needs to sacrifice a stolen to come back.

Besides, he does...not...have...crew...options. If you make stolen rare then you are taking down 1 of his 2 core units. Sure you can use dogs and tots, but they have no direct synergy with him. Stolen and rats have lots of synergy and were obviously intended to be his core units. So, if we make stolen rare then he'll need some new units in further books to stay viable. If stolen are rare then they will be reduced to the status of waifs (positioning defensively so that they are less likely to be targeted), and then their other capabilities are more difficult to utilize. If they did make stolen rare, then they would need a significant stat buff to make them harder to kill, because 1 wd with ignorable debuffs (well ignorable if it means you get to kill Hamelin as a result) just doesn't cut it.

Edited June 17, 2011 by Necromorph

[Math Mathonwy]

The main problem that alot of people have is that they believe their will be true balance. This can never happen. It is more likely no matter how many things happen there will always be a top 5.

Not very sure about that "alot of people". The way I see it, I'm the only one in the thread who believes that balance is achievable and my definition of balance is a situational balance, not an absolute one. Right now the top tier Masters are almost unconditionally better than the second tier ones.

The only thing I'm saying is bring down the top 5 (dreamer, pandora, colette, hamelin, and X) to where its a acceptable level compared to other masters. They will still have a advantage but it just won't be so wide.

This I agree with.

[magicpockets]

Or you could balance them somewhat by making the "lower tier" masters have better Avatar versions :goodbad:

Seing as that isd a dynamic yet to be introduced, it would be a good way to make some masters more powerful and balance the scales..make their Avatar versions more powerful upgrade than the already powerful master's Avatar forms...

Depends on what happens with Avatars I guess, and whether they're giving one to each master or if there's certain ones who have an avatar option. Book three may go a long way yo balancing some stuff out - but until we know, we don't know!

[magicpockets]

^^ I'd thrown Perdita, Kirai or Leveticus in the top 5 too

Edited June 18, 2011 by magicpockets

[Omenbringer]

Or you could balance them somewhat by making the "lower tier" masters have better Avatar versions :goodbad:

Seing as that isd a dynamic yet to be introduced, it would be a good way to make some masters more powerful and balance the scales..make their Avatar versions more powerful upgrade than the already powerful master's Avatar forms...

Depends on what happens with Avatars I guess, and whether they're giving one to each master or if there's certain ones who have an avatar option. Book three may go a long way yo balancing some stuff out - but until we know, we don't know!

We will find out soon enough (once Book 3 releases), however I am pretty confident the Avatars are not going to be utilized as a tool to patch the weaker Masters. The "introduce model B to make Model A more playable" approach has been tried a lot in mini gaming and very rarely does it do anything to actually balance anything (if anything it usually just makes things worse).

[magicpockets]

We will find out soon enough (once Book 3 releases), however I am pretty confident the Avatars are not going to be utilized as a tool to patch the weaker Masters. The "introduce model B to make Model A more playable" approach has been tried a lot in mini gaming and very rarely does it do anything to actually balance anything (if anything it usually just makes things worse).

Agree 100% with Omen on this. Guess that's why we're all committing so much time to this to try an tweak the balance of the existing problem rather than trying to "patch" it.

[Sandwich]

Fair enough, but there's no real reason for either. What difference would limiting Stolen to 3 have on the game as generally people keep one or two at the back and then summon/sac one in the same turn for -2WP? And why make it non-master? You have a higher chance of resisting it with better stats and use soulstones and - if suggested changes were made - you have a better chance of beating the Ruffin style duel. Should we be suggesting his melee attack can only target non-masters too?

Not true at all. Sure he "only needs one", but they're too easy to kill so one isn't as big a security blanket as you'd suggest. Also some play styles for certain scenarios rely on having multiple stolen so you'd really be messing with a core mechanic there. And lastly, as I think Sandwich said, Hamelin already has a limited model pool and doing that would make it even more restrictive.

Right, so your answer - bearing in mind you're "not messing with any core mechanics" - is to effectively say he doesn't need the ability to come back when killed so we'll effectively get rid of it?

From chats we've had offline I think Lure Malifaux Citizen would be better suited as a 14 to cast, meaning he needs a 7+ when he's first on the board and an 11+ when he comes back. If it was 17 (bearing in mind his card mechanic) you'd almost never get it off once he returns to the game at -4Ca.

And I personally feel losing insig if he dies would be too much of a change when mixed with the other two - there's a difference between weakening him enough so he's not an "auto-win" button and making him a weak master. Overall he should be on a power level with Collette and LCB - and I'd say making Lure a cast and making Bully ruffian esq is enough.

Having said that, we're play testing it against Collette at the weekend so will post back our thoughts too.

I completely agree with everything you just said.

Although I could also see LMC as a 12 or 13 instead of 14, just to make it a little more accessible.

Its still a core spell to any and all strategies involving Hamelin, and requiring a 7+ to cast it seems a little steep.

But it would certainly limit the "I AM JUGGERNAUT YOU ARE DEAD" idea to Hamelin currently, so I'm not even going to pretend I want to dismiss a 14 Ca at this point.

Not actually directed at you Magic, because I agree with you.

On the whole "Losing Insignificant if dead" completely removes the idea of Hamelin.

He's supposed to be able to die, come back, and get right back to business.

If he dies after expending super high amounts of resources making key models only for him to then get knocked by your master, there's no reason for him to even come back, you now have a crew full of models ready to annihilate him.

If Bully is changed to a Wp->13 duel, he'll be a lot better off.

[magicpockets]

"I AM JUGGERNAUT YOU ARE DEAD"

That made me laugh out loud

[Necromorph]

Haha...agree with you guys. Here's the issue, people that read this post will see me, sandwich and magic agreeing with each other and say "well yeah you play Hamelin, why would you want to see him cuddled." Well, it's not that we don't think he needs changes (he does), but then again, so do all the other book 2 masters. The problem is we have played him against a lot of opponents, and we understand what makes him weak and what makes him strong, so some of the ideas people are coming up with (some of which are good)...are just plain based on misinformation and bad experiences.

I get the feeling that a lot of people want to see him cuddled because they had 1-2 total blowout games against him and just get pissed instead of trying to figure out how to beat him. Honestly (and we were talking about this today) I think Colette is the strongest master in the game. The issue is that out of all the people that play her, maybe 5% have mastered her incredibly steep learning curve. That's why we don't see more "OMG Colette is toooooo strong! cuddle PLZ!" posts. I'm not naming names or calling anyone out so don't get offended, but colette is extremely difficult to play, but once mastered is just brutal, and is probably one of the only masters that can go toe to toe with Hamelin in most scenarios.

I feel Hamelin gets a lot of attention because he is "the guild of book 1." A lot of people don't know how to take him and he is very strong when a player base isn't familiar with him. Yes, he is a bit too strong at the moment, and he doesn't have as steep of a learning curve as LCB or Colette, but they are incredibly brutal, and it's not just Hamelin that needs fixing.

That being said, as we've all mentioned multiple times, he is a relatively limited master that relies on a few core mechanics / crew makeups, and attacking those directly (i.e. limiting stolen to rare #) is a surefire way to ensure that he is underpowered in further expansions. In the end, I'm sure there will be plenty of things in further books that will make Hamelin seem insignificant (no pun intended) and will balance him out.

:soapbox:

Edited June 21, 2011 by Necromorph

[magicpockets]

^^ I'm tempted to fly Drake and his Collette crew out to play the anti-Hamelin brigade, they'll be begging for rats by the end of turn 3. I agree Collette's crew is insane when used correctly.

[sinistercats]

Did that battle report with Colette vs Hamelin ever get posted? I'd be super interested in seeing some of the little tricks that worked or didn't work.

Thanks!

[magicpockets]

Did that battle report with Colette vs Hamelin ever get posted? I'd be super interested in seeing some of the little tricks that worked or didn't work.

Thanks!

It's on my to do list.... erm.... will get it done... (sorry)

[Sandwich]

Haha...agree with you guys. Here's the issue, people that read this post will see me, sandwich and magic agreeing with each other and say "well yeah you play Hamelin, why would you want to see him cuddled." Well, it's not that we don't think he needs changes (he does), but then again, so do all the other book 2 masters. The problem is we have played him against a lot of opponents, and we understand what makes him weak and what makes him strong, so some of the ideas people are coming up with (some of which are good)...are just plain based on misinformation and bad experiences.

I get the feeling that a lot of people want to see him cuddled because they had 1-2 total blowout games against him and just get pissed instead of trying to figure out how to beat him. Honestly (and we were talking about this today) I think Colette is the strongest master in the game. The issue is that out of all the people that play her, maybe 5% have mastered her incredibly steep learning curve. That's why we don't see more "OMG Colette is toooooo strong! cuddle PLZ!" posts. I'm not naming names or calling anyone out so don't get offended, but colette is extremely difficult to play, but once mastered is just brutal, and is probably one of the only masters that can go toe to toe with Hamelin in most scenarios.

I feel Hamelin gets a lot of attention because he is "the guild of book 1." A lot of people don't know how to take him and he is very strong when a player base isn't familiar with him. Yes, he is a bit too strong at the moment, and he doesn't have as steep of a learning curve as LCB or Colette, but they are incredibly brutal, and it's not just Hamelin that needs fixing.

That being said, as we've all mentioned multiple times, he is a relatively limited master that relies on a few core mechanics / crew makeups, and attacking those directly (i.e. limiting stolen to rare #) is a surefire way to ensure that he is underpowered in further expansions. In the end, I'm sure there will be plenty of things in further books that will make Hamelin seem insignificant (no pun intended) and will balance him out.

:soapbox:

You've hit it pretty hard on the head.

That all said, balancing Hamelin can be very difficult because he's in a spot right now where if you take anything, he's too weak, and if you give anything, he's far too overpowered.

I think the changes you, Magic and Drake have brought up would work to make him balanced to those who know his innerworkings and to those in an official tournament, but in an unexperienced enviroment, he's still going to be gamebreakingly overpowered because his learning curve is so strange.

When his tricks and trades are learned, it almost becomes mathematical in how to beat him, but before you really have time to learn what the f*ck he does, its just overwhelming.

Between the Rat Swarm, the Stolen spam, Bully, Irresistible Lure, Understand the Soulless, Ruffian and so forth people just come to say "$$$$$$$$ it, lets do something else."

And I sympathize with Wyrd because Hamelin really is a cool master to play with and against.

He's just your standard "wtfomg crew" that every mini game has.

If it wasn't Hamelin getting pegged with the title, it'd be Colette, and if not Colette, then Pandora, or Perdita, or whoever.

- - - - - -

To anyone reading, a summary of proposed changes and reasons being are,

Supported by Magicpockets, Sandwich, Necromorph

1.) Lure Malifaux Citizen:

Currently, (1)Lure Malifaux Citizen is a (1) action that states "Summon one The Stolen. This Action may be taken once per turn."

The proposed change is

(1)Lure Malifaux Citizen

(CC:13 /Rst:-/Rg:C)

Summon one The Stolen. This Spell may be cast once per crew, per turn.

The idea behind this change is that currently Hamelin can summon a Stolen each turn with no difficulty, effectively making a well played Hamelin unstoppable. At its base, the change works to increase difficulty of an already killed Hamelin from returning. In its extent, it will not break Hamelin's basic playstyle because it will now allow his Wretch to summon The Stolen for him pre-death, making the Obedient Wretch a must have. Which in further extent actually also helps to slow down the unstoppable Rat Swarm,because that'll be two less points spent on a Rat to start.

2.) Bully:

Currently, Bully states "This model cannot be targeted by Ht 1 or Insignificant models."

This is flat out broken and no one is going to argue that.

With 4 different and very easy ways to make any model on the field Insignificant. (The Stolen's (All)Abandon, Malifaux Rat's (1)Overrun by Vermin, Hamelin's (1)Understand the Soulless, Hamelin's Trigger Cb(:masks)Haunting Melody [Pipes])

The proposed change is

"Bully: Ht 1 and Insignificant models must win a Wp->13 duel to target this model. This Ability may not be ignored."

This removes his 100% invulnerability while still placing punishment on Insignificant models. There is no reliable way to banish Ht 1 models from targeting Hamelin without wrecking an enemy crew that relies on Ht 1 models, but if the Ht 1 restriction were removed, Hamelin would be outswarmed by Gremlins hands down. Its an unfortunate truth that there can be no balance between Hamelin versus Gremlins, but its true.

By adding a Wp->13 duel to Bully, you increase the effectiveness of The Void as most enemy crews will be forced to cheat to target Hamelin, especially if you make use of his Rats Cb(:crows)Rabies[Yellow Teeth] or The Stolen's No Humanity.

Honestly a Wp->13 duelmay seem like its gamebreaking specifically due to The Void, realize both the Rat Catchers and Stolen have a Wp->13 as well. (Ruffian, Harmless)

- - - -

The following change is supported by Sandwich and Ratty.

3.) Model Replacement

Currently, when a model is summoned off of the death of another model, (i.e. Malifaux Rats via Voracious Rats) they are placed in Base to Base Contact.

Normally, for any other crews, this means absolutely nothing. You have no reason to care.

But when it comes to a Hamelin crew utilizing the Rat Swarm, (See my Tactica if you want detailed instructions on howto) the Rats are effectively at a Wk of 6". (Base Wk 5 +1" for Base to Base contact when summoned.)

This makes it very easy for a Rat Swarm to sweep across the board very, very quickly.

The proposed change is to simply replace the dying model. (Not as in the Coryphee Replace, a new model is generated, just in the same spot.)

This change will work to slow the swarm down significantly.

It will also speed up beginner games by 50%.

Ask anyone, it's a pain in the ass to find a spot for each of your 14 rats twice a turn.

Edited June 21, 2011 by Sandwich

[magicpockets]

This change will work to slow the swarm down significantly.

No it won't, you're talking a few inches per game here. Just to clarify why I think it's a bad idea -> it removes a mechanism for opponents to reduce the size of the swarm as summoned models with no space to be summoned into cannot be summoned, so currently you can prevent replacement models being summoned with clever placement of your own models.

[Ratty]

No it won't, you're talking a few inches per game here. Just to clarify why I think it's a bad idea -> it removes a mechanism for opponents to reduce the size of the swarm as summoned models with no space to be summoned into cannot be summoned, so currently you can prevent replacement models being summoned with clever placement of your own models.

It can be over 2" a turn over 6 turns, that's 1/3 of the board.

Yes with careful micromanagement you can make the swarm smaller, but with careful micromanagement you can add a foot to your swarms movement over the course of the game. It's a level of micromanagement that was never meant to be there. If your considering where you place every rat to stop them placing there models in a way to stop you respawning that's adding an aweful lot of extra time to the game. On top of having to shuffle 14 rats twice a turn.

[magicpockets]

It can be over 2" a turn over 6 turns, that's 1/3 of the board.

A theoretical maximum of 2" a turn? That's not much for a model that has slow

Yes with careful micromanagement you can make the swarm smaller, but with careful micromanagement you can add a foot to your swarms movement over the course of the game. It's a level of micromanagement that was never meant to be there. If your considering where you place every rat to stop them placing there models in a way to stop you respawning that's adding an aweful lot of extra time to the game.

I've never found it slows the game down, it takes seconds - that's all.

On top of having to shuffle 14 rats twice a turn.

Again this doesn't take long at all. Pick up one spare rat and put it in b2b with a dead rat. pick up that dead rat and put it into b2b with another dead rat. repeat until the end and put the last rat back on the side of the board.

[Ratty]

A theoretical maximum of 2" a turn? That's not much for a model that has slow

Theoretically has slow. It can activate 3 times a turn.

[magicpockets]

Theoretically has slow. It can activate 3 times a turn.

Fair point. I've never seen someone use 2 RCs though, but you're right

[Sandwich]

No it won't, you're talking a few inches per game here. Just to clarify why I think it's a bad idea -> it removes a mechanism for opponents to reduce the size of the swarm as summoned models with no space to be summoned into cannot be summoned, so currently you can prevent replacement models being summoned with clever placement of your own models.

I agree that it can remove the swarm slowly, but it works both ways.

With the current ruling I have to carefully place my rats to ensure that when they come back, they'll come back.

If I take the time to very carefully place my rats, it won't force me to remove a few, it'll just give me a couple inches to move them.

The current ruling only works to slow the game down.

Currently, Rats can move 17-18"+ with just a single Rat Catcher.

((0)Writhing Mass, Walk, Current Placement ruling.)

Which I think we can both agree is just way to much period.

[Omenbringer]

On the whole "Losing Insignificant if dead" completely removes the idea of Hamelin.

He's supposed to be able to die, come back, and get right back to business.

If he dies after expending super high amounts of resources making key models only for him to then get knocked by your master, there's no reason for him to even come back, you now have a crew full of models ready to annihilate him.

This is the reason I would recomend wording it "If Hamelin is not on the board after the End Closing Phase then models that where made Insignificant by Understand the Soulless lose the characteristic" (this would occur after the point where Hamelin would come back from Indiscriminant Void, so not mess with his rebirth mechanic). Additionally he doesn't really have to spend "super high amounts of resources" to make the key models (and that is some of the problem with him).

Haha...agree with you guys. Here's the issue, people that read this post will see me, sandwich and magic agreeing with each other and say "well yeah you play Hamelin, why would you want to see him cuddled." Well, it's not that we don't think he needs changes (he does), but then again, so do all the other book 2 masters...I get the feeling that a lot of people want to see him cuddled because they had 1-2 total blowout games against him and just get pissed instead of trying to figure out how to beat him. Honestly (and we were talking about this today) I think Colette is the strongest master in the game. The issue is that out of all the people that play her, maybe 5% have mastered her incredibly steep learning curve. That's why we don't see more "OMG Colette is toooooo strong! cuddle PLZ!" posts. I'm not naming names or calling anyone out so don't get offended, but colette is extremely difficult to play, but once mastered is just brutal, and is probably one of the only masters that can go toe to toe with Hamelin in most scenarios.

I feel Hamelin gets a lot of attention because he is "the guild of book 1." A lot of people don't know how to take him and he is very strong when a player base isn't familiar with him. Yes, he is a bit too strong at the moment, and he doesn't have as steep of a learning curve as LCB or Colette, but they are incredibly brutal, and it's not just Hamelin that needs fixing.

I agree totally with "the most book 2 masters need re-balancing" crew. I have said as much in my earlier posts. Hamelin was the focus of this thread so he is getting all the attention (keep in mind that I have played both with and against Hamelin for a long time and dont want to see him cuddled into oblivion either, just toned down).

Colette also needs some re-tooling and she doesn't have as high a learning curve as you would think, just a lesser apeal. Now if 'n you wanted to start a "Colette is better then we think" thread, let me finish my dinner and I'll meet you there. I play her as well and would definately argue that she needs toning down. What other model combines the use of up to 5 AP a turn (thru her reactivate ability with no possibility of failure), the use 2 free artificial SS during the turn (1 she has to use to reactivate), insane mobility (first turn treasure hunt success potential), and one of the best assasination spells in the game (which nets her a free SS if she kills the target with it). All this is aside from her standard crew choices which are very good as well.

As for the Dreamer I got an idea on how to bring him in line as well.

[Regnak]

Can I just ask a really silly question... I'm new to Malifaux and do not YET own the second book. Looking at the models there is a Hamelin the Plagued and a Hamelin the Rat Catcher. Are these the same rules etc just a variant figure or do they have totally separate rules?

[Hookers]

Can't believe I haven't weighed in on this thread yet.

Hamelin isn't overpowered. He is not going to win every tournament just for taking him. If you win a tournament with hamelin, you are still a good player (the same as if you win any tournament with anyone).

Here are the problems with Hamelin, and they can't be fixed without completely redesigning him from the ground up. Therefore he will be left as is or maybe a bandaide or two if people still feel he is really powerful.

He does not care about cards

And cards are what make the game fun.

He does not care about suits

And suits are what make the game interesting.

His crew doesn't cast spells, and has very little player interaction in general.

And games get boring without player interaction. This is why alternating activations is superior to "I get my whole turn, you get your whole turn" a la Warhammer. The rat catcher just says "Slaughter rats" and then places all his rats. This is straight dead time. Same thing with teleporting the rats around and then marking off a Wd for each of them every time. Its unnecessary and provides zero gameplay. Experienced hamelin players just skip these steps altogether and go for a "close enough" approach, or realize that it doesn't matter if a rat has a Wd on it or not. A lot of game time is tied up in Hamelin playing with and micromanaging his rat horde which isn't fun for either player.

He doesn't care about the lives of his crew.

And that is what makes any game interesting.

You have to care when you lose a resource. For every crew in the game (including Ressurectionists because they have to spend resources to get their models back if they die, and not all of them can come back) losing a model is a big deal, having to cheat a card to accomplish something is a big deal, using soulstones is a big deal. The only resource that Hamelin cares about is soulstones. That's 2/3 of the game that he ignores. Not cool.

Hamelin answers the question "can a crew be designed so uniquely that he can succeed and be functional without a hand?" It's a cool idea in theory. In practice it ruins the game. Cards are the random element. If you are designed to not use the random element in the game you are inherently going to seem powerful. Thats why things that "autohit" or "autowound" in Warhammer seem cheesy. They are guaranteed. No chance of failure. Between Fate is Meaningless, and permanent + attack flips for rats, and Nix in general, the Hamelin player has a lot of sure things he can bet on, and leaves very little to chance. You ever try to fix a boxing match so you can bet on the sure thing and win most of the pot just to have some guy tell the whole world about it and ruin your odds? It's a question of ethics I tell ya...

He is a $%*#ing Nihilist.

And there hasn't been a Big Lebowski Master developed yet... I think this is his biggest issue honestly.