The less biased Great Joker Debate

[dgraz]

Perhaps this version will make people happier. This is about the Red Joker, if you believe that H2W needs a change then make your own poll.

[Sliver Chocobo]

No, no it doesn't can we stop talking about this now and move onto something more inportant

[CRC]

Anyone can at any time.

Please feel free to post a detailed examination of the strats or schemes and what we can do about them.

This is neither a joke nor sarcasm. If we want to veer the discussion in useful directions, we need to do the veering, not beg other people to do it for us.

[Orboros]

Small minion hits big minion -> small minion lands a bad/average hit -> makes a flip -> flips red Joker -> big minion dies

i voted yes

[maverickman5]

Small minion hits big minion -> small minion lands a bad/average hit -> makes a flip -> flips red Joker -> big minion dies

Big minion hit little minion -> Big minion lands a good hit -> makes a flip -> flips Black Joker -> Little minion lives

= Balanced

[AdrianMills]

I voted no

'A million to one chance happens 9 times out of ten'

[Dorian]

I voted no. The jokers are great, they give me hope. Hope that my little zombie chihuahua can take down big bad aRamos. Hope that a desolation engine trying to smash nicodems face I after the mindless are gone will miss.A parallel I see for you dnd players is how would you feel if the critical hit and critical miss were removed from a d20 and it became a d18 with 2-19 and an extra 2&19? It removes that small glimmer of hope or that risk factor when the deck is low. I like it and feel it should be here to stay.

[Nagash1959]

While I am fairly new to the game I find the Jokers to be an incredible part of the game. I find them balanced because there is both a positive and negative option that have an equal chance of being drawn or flipped.

I find nothing wrong with the idea that a "lesser" minion can take down a "greater" minion in a single lucky shot (because Bad Things Happen) in a skirmish sized game each model needs to have a potential effect. Larger army scale games can afford to have some units that barely impact the final results, I can't say the same thing here.

I think the true balance from the Jokers comes from the current combat total system that leans towards having to take negative fate modifiers, thus preventing the Red Joker cheat if it is in a players hand. They need to land a pretty solid hit most of the time to actually drop that Joker, otherwise they have an equal chance of flipping it as they do any other card they are not holding.

Just my opinion, and I only have a few games experience, but it is how I feel.

Good day ya'll!

[pigi314159]

I apologize, but here is a bit of a rant directed to no one in particular that I feel encapsulate how I feel on the whole Joker issue.

Yes the red joker is strong. Disproportionately from other cards. And? Just because a single unit is given disproportionate value does not make it inherently broken. Case in point: Chess. The King is disproportionately more valuable. Pawn checkmates king, pawn broken?

What we are seeing is a system of randomness. Think about this, if you rolled a d20 versus a d4, every once in awhile the d4 would have a higher value showing on it. The odds suck, but it happens. So yes, the odds suck that you will flip the Red Joker, but it happens. When you accept the rules system of the game you accept that randomness occurs. This is no different than any other game system that requires some form of randomization.

For example:

Warhammer: Killing Blow kills a unit on a roll of a 6 (rule simplified...but the jist is there)

Dystopian Wars: Natural 6s explode into additional dice (meaning you can score theoretically infinite hits from 1 roll)

DnD: A natural 20 is always considered a hit, even if you could never normally hit the enemy.

Old School DnD: A natural 20 followed by a natural 20 (according to some house rules) resulted in insta-kills. (Vorpal longswords anyone?)

More Modern DnD: A natural 20 followed by a suitably high number resulted in a weapon potentially cubing its damage (if built properly)

Those of us DnD players accept that premise because we understand the system is random and the odds of it happening are statistically not significant.

Now there is a perception problem because humans do not think in terms of statistics, if it happens at all, it is therefore significant to the human mind. For instance in Civilization 2 a RNG was used to determine combat and you had the infamous scenarios where a Grecian phalanx could kill a modern tank. The devs look at the code and found that this should happen a statistically insignificant number of times and yet we all of those memories branded into our collective civ consciousness. So in future civs they tweaked the numbers to make it even less likely, and it was still too often for the players. And now, Civ's combat model uses no RNG. And now, unless your tank is near dead anyways, the phalanx should always lose.

That's the difference. Random and not random. Malifaux is a game that uses random cards. You will get these huge swings because it is random. Just like you landing that critical hit when you're a lvl 1 rouge, occasionally you will get jokered on. The Red Joker is the critical hit. It happens.

[Sliver Chocobo]

Small minion hits big minion -> small minion lands a bad/average hit -> makes a flip -> flips red Joker -> big minion dies

i voted yes

Your just as likely to flip the black as the red, in fact more so since the black overules the red, oh your opponent is just as like pull one of his/her deck as you are

Also how much damage can a low point model do on a severe 3,4 not much more than that, now if he/she were to flip a red joker the damage would be between 5-8, a high point would have 10Wd and possible some armour of some sort so no one shot kill

[Dreygan]

sooo.... if i charge and have a plus one twist from my weapon and flip 3 cards should the black joker not count either? It sucks, but theres that chance. Does it break the game to hold the black joker if its in my hand so i avoid flipping it? no, i basically am playing with a smaller hand to do that. Its two cards, one good, one bad, they can be frustrating or exciting but the arent breaking anything.

[Ozz]

It is simple, in friendly environments, the jokers are what create memorable moments in games as much if not more so than the unseen combos that someone pulls off.

But in a competitive environment the jokers can swing a clear win into a loss, even if the player who got the joker at just the right time was playing with far less skill.

For this i have voted no, due to i don't think malifaux is meant to be a hyper competitive game, it is meant just for fun, and the jokers add it. And if some one organising a tournament feels the red joker is to powerful, they have the option of writing their own rules for the joker at their comp, so i can see no need for any change to it myself, it is fun when you do it, and makes you cry when its done to you, but it is still fun

[Hatchethead]

Big minion hit little minion -> Big minion lands a good hit -> makes a flip -> flips Black Joker -> Little minion lives

= Balanced

Life versus death. In one instance, a model is obliterated and removed from the table, possibly turning the game on a dime. In the other instance, nothing happens (effectively).

= not balanced

Sure, maybe you needed that model to die to win the game. The BJ screwed you. But, more often than not, losing a model is far worse than failing to kill a model.

I voted yes.

... but as expected, those wanting a revision are in the minority. No surprise there.

[Math Mathonwy]

That's the difference. Random and not random. Malifaux is a game that uses random cards. You will get these huge swings because it is random. Just like you landing that critical hit when you're a lvl 1 rouge, occasionally you will get jokered on. The Red Joker is the critical hit. It happens.

How about we add a Green Joker that, when drawn, wins the game for you 8-0. It's just random and that's how it is. Sound good? No? Then you must have a limit on how much effect a random thing should have. For some people the limit is lower than it apparently is for you. This shouldn't be a huge revelation, really.

[OldManMyke]

but as expected, those wanting a revision are in the minority. No surprise there.

to look at it another way though 20% of people polled (at time of typing) would like to see a change, thats a pretty sizeable minority

I also voted yes BTW

[Hatchethead]

How about we add a Green Joker that, when drawn, wins the game for you 8-0. It's just random and that's how it is. Sound good? No? Then you must have a limit on how much effect a random thing should have. For some people the limit is lower than it apparently is for you. This shouldn't be a huge revelation, really.

Exactly. Everything else is quite moot. I feel the current RJ injects too much randomness into an already very random game. I don't mind that is can trump a negative flip--as well it should--but the extra damage is too much, the potential to swing a game on pure luck is too great. That's all there is to it (at least from where I stand).

[Orboros]

Your just as likely to flip the black as the red, in fact more so since the black overules the red, oh your opponent is just as like pull one of his/her deck as you are

Also how much damage can a low point model do on a severe 3,4 not much more than that, now if he/she were to flip a red joker the damage would be between 5-8, a high point would have 10Wd and possible some armour of some sort so no one shot kill

We could argue now what big and small minions are. I had my Dead Rider chopped to pieces by a Punk Zombie because of this more then once. Also we should include the chances of both minions being damaged already. The list goes on. In my opinion the reward is much higher in comparison to what you loose if you flip a Black Joker. If you couldn't pick the Red Joker on a it would be fine in my opinion.

[Hatchethead]

Is this a matter of casual versus competitive? Maybe the RJ should be tweaked for Gaining Grounds only. If a potential revision applied only to tournaments and official events, I for one would be satisfied.

[FoolWithTheFez]

Is this a matter of casual versus competitive? Maybe the RJ should be tweaked for Gaining Grounds only. If a potential revision applied only to tournaments and official events, I for one would be satisfied.

You know, I voted no, but I'd have no problem with this. I can see where it would cause some confusion for people new to the Tourney scene, but I'd still be in favor of this.

[Dustcrusher]

I think it's a lower priority issue, but I do think that there should be a look at the RJ before Malifaux v2 is released, specifically with damage flips/abilities like HtW. A look. Some consideration. Make sure that interactions like RJ + HtW2 are working as intended.That's all. If the Powers That Be decide they are, then that's that.

I also think that tournaments should try modified RJ + damage flip rules. Perhaps that's really the only place they are needed.

I know I'm in the minority here, and that's fine. I posted my thoughts on my blog, so as not to anger anyone. The blogs are easily ignored. Someone whom I won't name (I'm trying to be nice) stopped by long enough to basically tell me my priorities were out of order. The point was to have a good-natured round of armchair rulemaking for fun, and to show that writing a good/better rule for real is much harder.

A couple of neat ideas showed up in the comments- I find other players' ideas on how games should work fascinating, because there are always perspectives different from my own. It's like budget cultural anthropology (as well as a reminder that I should think long and hard before committing to designing my own game in earnest).

Apologies for the threadjack I'm about to make for just a moment, but I have to nitpick a couple of pigi's comments:

In D&D, a natural 20 just meant an auto-hit for normal damage, though I think at least one of the older versions had double damage as an optional rule.

1st Edition AD&D, using a vorpal weapon meant a natural 20 followed by a second 20 beheaded the target. This was an auto-kill if the creature could die by beheading, otherwise you hacked off a limb/tentacle/piece and did...I think it was max damage but I can't remember.

---------- Post added at 03:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:01 PM ----------

Is this a matter of casual versus competitive? Maybe the RJ should be tweaked for Gaining Grounds only. If a potential revision applied only to tournaments and official events, I for one would be satisfied.

Also, this.

[pigi314159]

How about we add a Green Joker that, when drawn, wins the game for you 8-0. It's just random and that's how it is. Sound good? No? Then you must have a limit on how much effect a random thing should have. For some people the limit is lower than it apparently is for you. This shouldn't be a huge revelation, really.

Hey! That's roulette. I know lots of people who play roulette. It's like the rules of the game were hidden or anything, they accept it as written when they play.

Sure, there should be a limit to how much a random effect has, otherwise you might as well not play. But to that end, the amount of randomness is already limited. One Red Joker in a deck of 54 cards is not statistically significant (at least not until your deck is down to the dregs and you haven't seen the Joker yet.)

So your argument is you want the randomness reduced even more? Well that can be easily accomplished. Option A) Remove the Joker, Option Add more non-Jokers to dilute the deck even more.

Less drastic? The Red Joker is less than 2% of the deck. It is true that as your turn goes on your odds of drawing the Joker increase more and more. That means if you don't see the Joker early in your turn, start flipping through more cards.

[Malovane]

but the extra damage is too much, the potential to swing a game on pure luck is too great.

This is what I like about the current mechanic - the level of lethality present. It makes taking an "elite" crew a potential risk knowing that the RJ could drop them in a hit. I feel that if you begin weaken the RJ you begin to devalue the cheaper/weaker models and allow those elite/expensive models to take greater control of the game. Of course that's not necessarily a bad thing. Its all very subjective. Where do you draw the line on too much randomness?

I feel like one of the "skills" to malifaux is figuring out ways to try and mitigate the randomness or at least swing the randomness to your advantage. I think the RJ plays into that a lot. The wild swings seem like such an inherent part of the flavor that is malifaux. Beyond just the card mechanics, its one of those things that seems to really set it apart from other mini-war games. Not sure what it is precisely, but I feel like I generally have more control over randomness in Malifaux than in some other games - warmahordes/40k. I don't feel like I'm at the mercy of the deck. I feel like its there for me to manipulate. The jokers being one more aspect available for manipulation.

As far as tournaments, I can definitely see that at a competitive level there would be a larger desire to remove randomness and have results be drawn from purely skill.

[Gruesome]

No, no it doesn't can we stop talking about this now and move onto something more inportant

You mean like schemes/strat changes seem to be picking up steam because, IMO, people would rather talk about ANYTHING other than RJ?

Some of us have tried in the past... Wanna see tumble-weeds?

http://www.wyrd-games.net/showthread.php?32110-Help-with-a-new-strategy-type

Like most forums, the things that stick out most in people's minds are the things they do not like, so they seldom notice other things.

I know that's the case for myself, anyway... Maybe I am the only one.

[Guy in Suit]

Exactly - if you think the RJ removes skill from the game - then you clearly lack skill at card counting!

[Gruesome]

:facepalm: