The Red Joker

[letsallchant]

im telling ya the way forward is to just change the wording slightly on HtW. instead of saying "damage flips against this model receive one - per indicated number", an ever so slight change to "damage flips against this model receive up to one - per indicated number" would be good... if its a small deck and you think the joker is in there, only give the flip one (or none?) -ve. if you know the jokers not going to pop up then go for maximum -ve flips. i think this would solve the problems and make the models harder to kill, which is the whole point of the ability?

[Lucidicide]

Keep in mind that almost everyone arguing for a change isn't arguing that the Red Joker should come out of the deck or that it shouldn't have a big impact on the game like the Black Joker. Let's not get caught up in arguing that randomness is just part of the game when no one is denying that.

Kadeton -- For the most part, no one (or almost no one) is arguing that the Red Joker shouldn't overcome negative twists or that it shouldn't be at least severe damage. It will still be a random flip, it will still be a million to one chance, and it'll still be a huge deal.

Qi'iq'el -- No one (or almost no one) is arguing that the Jokers are bad or should be taken out of the game. People want the randomness and they want bigger impact by design. It's just a matter of how big that impact is. Bigger than a 13? Yes, definitely. Bigger than the Black Joker? Eh... And you can see from my posts and the general feel on this thread that the Red Joker does have a bigger game impact than the Black Joker.

Anyway, I just don't want to get caught up in this whole "randomness is good" argument. We all know we're playing a game and that randomness is a part of the game. Almost everyone enjoys the bigger impact of the supremely random joker flip. It should be a very noteworthy moment. But there's a difference between a noteworthy change and a staggering change.

Regardless, I've posted enough on this thread making arguments to try to highlight where I think the issue stems from. But as I've said all along, I don't actually care if it doesn't change -- I just think it's a worthwhile discussion. But I've said (more than) my piece by now.

[Capt.Caveman]

I think the entirety of this post can be easily summed up as, "Hard to Wound models are actually very easy to wound because they get hit so often."

[Valcurdra]

I think it is obvious to any player that has played a few games of malifaux that lucky jokers can and often do have a huge impact on the result of a game.

Getting a double severe damage on your master is pretty much instant loss.

Red jokering a heal flip when your master is on 1 wound is pretty much instant win.

Black jokering one with the night on bete noire is probably instant loss.

And there are many less extreme examples where jokers can decide a game.

As a casual player who plays with friends for fun I don't mind it because after the game I have had fun and have a story to tell.

I do think the joker mechanics damage the credibility of the game in competitive play. It would be incredibly frustrating to lose tournament and nice prize package because of an unlucky joker. I can totally understand what sandwich is talking about.

I think tournament organizers balance the schemes well by forcing players to take different ones each match. So maybe tournament organizers can bring in a simple house rule regarding jokers to make sure tournaments go to the deserving winner.

[Q'iq'el]

Obvious? You mean to say noticeable.

In many cases Red Joker is overkill and the flips where severe damage wouldn't be enough but the secondary flip kills the target... those are really rare. In most cases it is merely a "14" with free suit. Sure it beats :-fates, but that too is just a fraction of the duels.

The game is inherently random. The deck mechanics don't make it more predictable than dice games (all you can predict is what cannot be flipped, if you have good memory) and removing the Red Joker won't fix huge swings of fate, simply because you guys speak about perception and not the nature of the game.

There is a reason why players quickly learn to take full Soulstone cache and value Arcane Reservoir so high. Soulstones and Control Hand are what counters (or rather allows to plan for) the random in the game.

If you want a less random game, house-rule in bigger SS Caches and larger Control Hands. It will still be random as it will depend more on the Control Hand draw, but at least the bad luck and good luck can be "distributed" according to one's liking.

[Morgan Vening]

The game is inherently random. The deck mechanics don't make it more predictable than dice games (all you can predict is what cannot be flipped' date=' if you have good memory) and removing the Red Joker won't fix huge swings of fate, simply because you guys speak about perception and not the nature of the game.[/quote']

To be fair, no-one's calling for the removal of the Red Joker. They're calling for one particular instance of the Red Joker's functionality to be toned down, or removed, when it pertains to a specific instance (negative flips on a Damage Result, or only with H2W 2+).

Now, I haven't played enough (especially with H2W) to have developed an opinion on this, and the number-crunching analysis is beyond what I'm willing to put work into (it seems really complicated), but IF Hard To Wound being an issue for the RJ is accurate, and not just standing out because of the swing effect, then I do think it's probably a good idea to change it. Rather than having a fairly common ability not work in the way it's meant to.

Morgan Vening

[Q'iq'el]

Well, I should word it "even removing the Red Joker", because changing one small instance is even less likely to fix the problems which are merely perceived and clearly blown out of proportion. (It is more of trans-system crusade against randomness on the part of the community than an issue with Malifaux).

Sure, HTW, especially HTW2 can be disadvantageous... in all the cases where Red Joker got flipped. It is advantageous in all the remaining cases, including those with Black Joker and both Jokers.

The real question is, why shouldn't it be so? There are many abilities one wishes the model wouldn't have at some point. Having a model Immune to Influence is just as much of a headache as an advantage, depending on situation. Nothing to see here, move on.

[Nephalumps]

Something I think is worth bearing in mind: the Red Joker and the Black Joker aren't really the same as rolling a "critical miss" or "critical success" in another game.

While they have the same result ("Awesome!" or "NOOOOO!!!!", respectively,) there is a significant difference: if you go through your Fate Deck, you are guaranteed to hit both Jokers (unless, of course, you've got one tucked away in your hand.)

I've had plenty of turns where my opponent and I have burned through our entire Fate Decks and had to reshuffle. For crazy turns like that, you know as your Fate Deck gets smaller that you're getting closer to whichever Joker you haven't run into yet.

Point of fact, this is the issue that some players have with H2W:2. Since you know you're going to hit the Red Joker if it's not in your hand or flipped for Initiative, you toss as many attacks at the H2W model as you can, fishing for that Red Joker to pop during one of the many damage flips you'll be making (and hoping you don't get it on one of the lead in flips.)

So, at least from where I'm coming from, the issue isn't just that the Red Joker is powerful; it's that the Red Joker is powerful and you're almost guaranteed to run into it on a busy turn. Likewise with the Black Joker.

Do I find it to be an issue when I play? No, not really. It creates an interesting bit of psychology with the game, and although you can push hard to get the Red Joker on a lot of negative damage flips, you still can't guarantee it won't pop early and muck up that plan.

Do I think the Red Joker should have less of a swing on a set of damage flips? Yeah, I do. I'm all for the Red Joker blowing someone up if you cheat it in, or if you someone in the noggin', because it's just punching through the ceiling. Makes the game interesting, and as a player you can try to push the duel totals to keep your opponent from pulling that off.

But having the Red Joker turn a damage flip into a super hit feels wrong. The Red Joker should still be a boon here, but maybe the second card you flip should also take the 's the original damage flip did? Having a :-fate:-fate damage flip turn into a double Severe soul crushing smite makes having more negative flips to damage feel less effective, and I don't think that should be the case when it's all some models have going for them defensively.

[Foton]

The Red Joker as is makes for some exhilirating gameplay, as does the Black Joker. nothing like throwing a hail mary and flipping the RJ on damage and changing the entire game in one unlikely swoop. Same with the Black Joker showing up just in time to save you.

[micahwc]

...or condemn you.

[Kega]

I think it might be better if, rather than always working on a negative flip, the red joker could be cheated in despite negative flips.

This would mean that hard to wound still isn't going to protect you from getting crushed by the joker, but your opponent would have to spend a valuable resource to do so, and multiple negative flips wouldn't be a double edged sword.

Another solution might be to remove the extra damage flip and just cause severe damage which ignores armor and spirit so it's less bursty and more symmetrical with other defensive abilities.

[Lucidicide]

I think it might be better if, rather than always working on a negative flip, the red joker could be cheated in despite negative flips.

/shudders.

That's one of the scariest things I've ever heard!

[CRC]

Actually it's not, since he said "instead of always working on a negative flip", so you'd flip say 3 and 8, sub in the RJ for the 3, and have a result of 8.

[Lucidicide]

Actually it's not, since he said "instead of always working on a negative flip", so you'd flip say 3 and 8, sub in the RJ for the 3, and have a result of 8.

I think maybe you need to reread it.

I think it might be better if, rather than always working on a negative flip, the red joker could be cheated in despite negative flips.

This would mean that hard to wound still isn't going to protect you from getting crushed by the joker, but your opponent would have to spend a valuable resource to do so, and multiple negative flips wouldn't be a double edged sword.

If hard to wound isn't going to protect you from the joker [because it can be cheated in], then you're not just removing one low card from the equation. You're getting hit by an always cheatable joker.

[Q'iq'el]

You may be guaranteed the Red Joker pops out, but you are not guaranteed it will pop out where you need it. It gets wasted on initiative flips, it pops out during the duel's initial flip and so on. Even where it does count for damage, it may cause 10 wounds to a model you'd kill with 2, being a total waste of 1 or 2 good cards.

So no, Red Joker doesn't swing the game reliably. It doesn't swing it each time it pops up even. I had plenty of games where neither side had any practical benefit from Red or Black Joker thorough entire 7 turns, because it simply didn't come up where it would matter. This thread is an exercise in exaggeration.

And as I've said already, it doesn't matter if Red Joker turns your advantage (HtW) into disadvantage. There are many advantageous abilities which become obstacles in wrong circumstances. That is how the game has been designed. This inherent ambiguity of the system accounts for a lot of Malifaux' charm and I not only think it won't go away or be simplified, but we'll see more such abilities in the future, as they open the way to smart counters to very powerful models.

Edited February 23, 2012 by Q'iq'el

[Nephalumps]

So no' date=' Red Joker doesn't swing the game reliably. It doesn't swing it each time it pops up even. I had plenty of games where neither side had any practical benefit from Red or Black Joker thorough entire 7 turns, because it simply didn't come up where it would matter. This thread is an exercise in exaggeration.[/quote']

Actually, the better example of that is the original thread that spawned this discussion. Not hating on the discussion (I have zero frame of reference in the matter,) but based on that conversation, it sounded like Seamus was popping left and right due to Red Joker flips.

Regardless, you definitely have a point. It sticks in my craw that the Red Joker is such a big swing, but that's something I'll hopefully get more used to as I play the game more.

Besides, H2W is for suckers. Armor 4 lyfe, baby. :-P

[Spiku]

Besides, H2W is for suckers. Armor 4 lyfe, baby. :-P

Ophelia would like to thank you for this message.

[Adanedhel]

Leveticus looks around thinking, ah well, once card less to discard, and does 12 wounds, easily migitating the armour

[Nephalumps]

Ophelia would like to thank you for this message.

So would Kirai's crew, and that set of Gunsmiths over there. *wink*

Honestly, the best defense is not getting hit (and even that doesn't work, if you end up caught in blasts/pulses.) As Q'iq'el said, there is always going to be a way to circumvent a given defensive mechanic, and Wyrd has done a good job of introducing more and more counters to keep things interesting.

Leveticus looks around thinking, ah well, once card less to discard, and does 12 wounds, easily migitating the armour

Funny Levi story related to the Red Joker: my buddy has been searching for that epic Death Touch Red Joker flip ever since he picked him up.

Two games ago, he finally had it happen for him, but it was against my healthy Night Terror. 24 Dg, to 12, to effectively 3. Night Terror status: still kicking, just not as high. :-P

Which is another nod towards what Q'iq'el said about the RJ being so random that you can't ever bank on it showing up at the "right" time.

[letsallchant]

heres some thoughts i posted in another thread where it was claimed that getting a triple negative flip for damage was actually better than getting a double negative flip, due to the chance of pulling out a red joker...

******************************************************************

so if both jokers are in the deck, the probability of drawing red and black is the same, and if you draw both you lose. so your better off going for the two card flip

but... what if you have the black joker in your hand?!? its probably equally likely you would end up with the red joker in your hand, saving it for when needed. and holding onto a bad card costs you in game terms. so i dont think that makes any difference.

then theres the issue of the size of your draw pile. assuming the best case, you have the black joker in your hand or discard, and then you can fish for the red one... the chances of drawing it get worse depending on how large your draw pile is right? with almost a full draw pile, you would get very little statistical benefit from the triple flip... your probably better off getting the better average number from two cards?

and in the extreme opposite case, if you have three cards in your draw pile, and you know one of them is the red joker, the triple flip is always the best option by far.

so somewhere inbetween is where it becomes feasible to try for the triple flip?

and the target number is also a problem, if you absolutely need a high card then why not go for the triple, since you were likely to fail anyway. conversely if you only need a low or average card, two cards seems better.

anyway, stats is not my thing but it seems like there are very limited scenarios where you want to be drawing three cards instead of two on a negative flip. its like saying that your better off with a double positive flip on damage instead of a triple, in case you draw the black joker...

******************************************************************