Guy in Suit Posted September 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Right. If they gamble themselves to death you still don't get points, but they waste valuable AP. None of our regulars play the bomb as far as I know. I've played against as many as 6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgraz Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Nothing seems game breaking to me. And the notice is plenty far ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mythicFOX Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Lilitu - Rare 1 Jack Daw does not grant either player additional victory points Sorry if I've missed this, but why these two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolomyte Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Sorry if I've missed this, but why these two? I'm guessing they are trying to limit the lure bomb to three lures a turn as opposed to six, I personally would just change the trigger, but thats here nor there. Jack daw ruling is a pretty commonplace thing at tournaments, his VP swing ability is unique and can lead to abuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mythicFOX Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Jack daw ruling is a pretty commonplace thing at tournaments, his VP swing ability is unique and can lead to abuse. Can you explain how you can abuse this? 'cause I'm struggling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolomyte Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Can you explain how you can abuse this? 'cause I'm struggling. He just adds an additional means to gain a victory point above and beyond what other games that arent running jack daw have. IE if a player with jack daw wins the game and earns 6 vp to 4, he ends up with 7vp to 4. If the game would end in a tie, whoever killed jack daw wins the game. which makes it an assassination jack daw kind of last few turns. If you remove that rule it just leaves the game up to strategies and schemes. which I think everyone is usually fine with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buhallin Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 How is that different from any other scheme? More importantly, why is it a problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolomyte Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 How is that different from any other scheme? More importantly, why is it a problem? Its different from a scheme because some games would have access to this "third" scheme, and other games would not. Hypothetically, lets say every game in the tournament ends 6-6. the Jack daw players, would either have won 7-6, or lost 6-7. compared to two armies that did not have jack daw, and were limited to 6-6. Thats the basis behind the ruling. I believe. I could care less either way, as I dont plan on having less then 8 vps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calmdown Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 You're still limited to 8vp in a game, and Jack Daw can provide VP to both players. And he requires a fair bit of investment to actually get a kill or be killed. Why would you change him? It makes no sense. This is why I never sugges altering rules for tourneys. People always start changing rules for things arbitrarily just because they dont like them. I think banning a crew or forcing people to not use crews more than once etc is fine (ie, "format" rules); but when you start adding/removing rules from cards, changing rarities, changing SS values, etc, I think you really need to know what you're doing and unfortunately most people don't. Better a consistent set of broken rules than an inconsistent set of different broken rules Same holds true for most games that people decide to mod/houserule tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolomyte Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Not my tournament. im just posing my theory as to why they did / are doing that. I've seen it done that way before. I feel if you dont like a to's rules, you are more then welcome to not play in their tournament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy in Suit Posted September 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Why limit Jack Daws VPs? Cuz I am too effin' lazy to add a column to track it on my spreadsheet, thats why But Dolomyte basically summed it up - you get VP's for strategies and schemes - each of which I track for statistical purposes. Having a random floating variable in Jack Daw skews the stats and is annoying. And also, it starts arguments when a player hasn't came up against it before that are tough to reconcile: "Great game! I got my Strategy but you got both schemes for a 4-4 draw." "No, I win 5-4." "ZOMGWTF?!?" "Yah, this model, Jack Daw killed a guy so I win. It is right htere on the card." "No he didn't! When? You didn't say anything. GDIAF cheetin N00wbsauceQ@!" *draws chainsaw* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calmdown Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 And also, it starts arguments when a player hasn't came up against it before that are tough to reconcile: I agree with your aforementioned stuff in theory, but this is pretty bad. I'd tell the guy to stfu. His lack of game knowledge is hardly your fault. I'd imagine pulling "no, you lose, because those Stitched dont count for Slaughter, or your Grudge scheme" is much worse in any case Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy in Suit Posted September 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 I agree with your aforementioned stuff in theory, but this is pretty bad. I'd tell the guy to stfu. His lack of game knowledge is hardly your fault. I'd imagine pulling "no, you lose, because those Stitched dont count for Slaughter, or your Grudge scheme" is much worse in any case Which is why we decided to change that as well. You have to understand - after each tournament we all go across the street, drink microbrews, hold hands and sing kumbayah. Lots of love in the local Malifaux community - would hate to leave anyone feeling slighted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buhallin Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Its different from a scheme because some games would have access to this "third" scheme, and other games would not. Every game has access to this third scheme. Whether they choose to take it or not is up to the players, just as it's up to the players to not take the full number of schemes. As for the "I've never seen that before!" so you leave it out... Meh. I honestly don't think that holds water as an argument. Zoraida and a few others have end-of-game moves that could hose an opponent for more VPs, and people could be equally unaware of them. Do you ban those as well? And same goes for the players potentially getting into arguments over whether Jack actually killed something. Remembering how many models Raspy killed via Mirrored spells seems to be harder, and an opponent may not know about it, so do you ban Reflections of December as well? <shrug> Their event to do as they will. Just seems like a lot of this is personal dislikes rather than anything that is actually addressing problems with the rules or the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q'iq'el Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 You're still limited to 8vp in a game, and Jack Daw can provide VP to both players. And he requires a fair bit of investment to actually get a kill or be killed. Why would you change him? It makes no sense. I agree with not changing things in principle. But there's another thing to consider. If you are confident you can win with your crew and you have Jack Daw, then you can choose if you take an unannounced scheme or 2 SS extra. As long as Jack Daw kills someone and survives, you get 1 VP (same as for an unannounced scheme) and end up with 6 or 7VP if you completed everything... and start with 2 SS extra. Obviously anyone can hire Jack Daw, but maybe some TOs don't want to see Jack Daw on every table. He's good enough as is anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy in Suit Posted September 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 It's because adding a 'Jack Daw' line makes my scoresheet ugly - the anecdote was more for funzies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hookers Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 no tournament (including gencon) that I've played in has a line for jack daw. you just write it in, or add it up, and when the TO asks you tell him, "jack daw has killed a man" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetid Strumpet Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 "Jack Daw has killed a man" ... Is it just me or does that sound like a great Malifaux folk song, done by Bob Dylan or Leonard Cohen? :hijacked: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.