M.C.Crispy
United Kingdom
Basingstoke
Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Apologies for the (deliberately) inflammatory subject - I'm trying to generate some interest in the thread and am resorting to evil tactics.

I understand (at least some of) the reasons for this rule
Quote:
It is possible for certain character abilities to create or move
obstacles. When doing so, players can never completely cut off one area of the
scenario map from another, such that the area cannot be moved into without going
through the obstacles.
However, it means that certain abilities are less flexible than they might otherwise be and - like the ruling about invisible characters in doorways - it's a rule that's just there because it's necessary to avoid the game "breaking" or to avoid adding rule complexity. However, it's a very counterintuitive rule that also prevents some great tactical uses of some abilities.

What I'd like to propose is that Created/Moved obstacles should be treated as Trap/Contruct hybrids. Traps have the effect of blocking monster movement unless the only path is through the trap. Constructs have HP. Soooo... if a Created/Moved Obstacle acts as a trap, it'll control monster movement, but not block off areas of the map. If it acts as a Contruct, it'll have HP so monsters can break through it should it be the only path (i.e. it is blocking off an area of the map). Typical Constructs seem to have about 6HP, so I'd recommend HP of 5 + card level (or maybe scenario level)

What do you think?

What are the situations where it'll cause the same issues that RAW seeks to avoid?

Is there a more simple solution that achieves the aims of the Variant (allowing all tactical uses of Created/Moved Obstacles, without causing broken game/scenarios)?

Does this Variant achieve its goals (what did I miss)?
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastien Gadoury
msg tools
Re: Issue: RAW prevents some creative uses of Created/Moved Obstacles
This is a good idea.

The idea i came up with is simply to treat the obstacle like a dificult terrain, but with the aditionnal effect that all figure who wants to go over it should stop in an adjacent ex (so they cannot cross it in one turn).

This new effect combined with the dificult terrain should delay a figure for about 1.5-2 round worth of movement, and thematically it make sens that anybody is able to go over a table, but it take them a bit of time.

Sorry about the mistake that might have slipped, english is not my native language.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Latimore
United States
Arizona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
This seems to make obstacle creation much stronger than intended, and the game is easy enough without it. I don't think it's a good change for those reasons.

Also, RAW, obstacle creation gives some interesting choices on how to place them and use them. This takes away those choices as the best option will almost always be to trap monsters.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M.C.Crispy
United Kingdom
Basingstoke
Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
alphasquid wrote:
This seems to make obstacle creation much stronger than intended, and the game is easy enough without it. I don't think it's a good change for those reasons.
I don't see how it makes obstacle creation stronger than RAW, can you explain in what way it does this? I'm very happy to be persuaded to stick with the simpler RAW, but I need to be convinced that RAW is better, 'cos from here it doesn't. (I can place an invisible character or a construct in a blocking location, but not an obstacle 'cos it's permanent; making the obstacle non-permanent seems to address this issue)

Quote:
Also, RAW, obstacle creation gives some interesting choices on how to place them and use them. This takes away those choices as the best option will almost always be to trap monsters.
Well, it artificially constrains you to use obstacles in sub-optimal ways. Sure, it means that you have to be more creative in order to do anything useful rather than the most logical thing. I don't find that sort of challenge so much interesting as annoying and frustrating. I think we're having a glass half-empty/half-full kind of conversation in this regard
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom H
Australia
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mccrispy wrote:
I don't see how it makes obstacle creation stronger than RAW, can you explain in what way it does this?

Quote:
Well, it artificially constrains you to use obstacles in sub-optimal ways.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M.C.Crispy
United Kingdom
Basingstoke
Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Terah wrote:
mccrispy wrote:
I don't see how it makes obstacle creation stronger than RAW, can you explain in what way it does this?

Quote:
Well, it artificially constrains you to use obstacles in sub-optimal ways.
Your point is?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Kratz
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Late to the party, but in general I like the idea. I'd probably drop the HP of the obstacle/construct significantly, as stopping a couple of creatures for a single turn is probably enough benefit, and otherwise, with high HP and the right conditions, it could completely block off a large portion of the room for a large chunk of time.

Monster spoilers below:
Spoiler (click to reveal)
Imagine an ooze trapped against a created obstacle, with a melee monster behind it in the only legal space for it to move to, so because of low movement, the ooze will never move away. The ooze will only attack about 50% of the time, and if it does so, it will be at disadvantage, so you are probably looking at 4-5 turns to destroy the obstacle on average, and no one else can reach it. And while this might seem contrived, as a player character, you are going to seek these types of situations out.


Anyway, my point is that all summons I've seen are lost cards, and there are only a couple that allow multiple summons at once, and none allow a summons at range. It doesn't make sense to treat created obstacles having the same number of HP as a typical summons. I might go so far as to only give them 1 HP, which is roughly on par with giving out an immobilize for a round to a couple of critters.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M.C.Crispy
United Kingdom
Basingstoke
Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Stryker1979 wrote:
Late to the party, but in general I like the idea. I'd probably drop the HP of the obstacle/construct significantly, as stopping a couple of creatures for a single turn is probably enough benefit, and otherwise, with high HP and the right conditions, it could completely block off a large portion of the room for a large chunk of time.

Monster spoilers below:
Spoiler (click to reveal)
Imagine an ooze trapped against a created obstacle, with a melee monster behind it in the only legal space for it to move to, so because of low movement, the ooze will never move away. The ooze will only attack about 50% of the time, and if it does so, it will be at disadvantage, so you are probably looking at 4-5 turns to destroy the obstacle on average, and no one else can reach it. And while this might seem contrived, as a player character, you are going to seek these types of situations out.


Anyway, my point is that all summons I've seen are lost cards, and there are only a couple that allow multiple summons at once, and none allow a summons at range. It doesn't make sense to treat created obstacles having the same number of HP as a typical summons. I might go so far as to only give them 1 HP, which is roughly on par with giving out an immobilize for a round to a couple of critters.
Hmmm... I see your point there. It's no worse than a ranged monster with limited movement blocking a doorway (actually, it's not as bad, because walls block LoS and Obstacles don't). I was thinking of the times when I've blocked a doorway (or a gap between two obstacles) with a Summon. The Summon rarely lasts beyond the round after being summoned - frequently it is destroyed the first time it's attacked. Perhaps I could use HP = Trap Damage, which makes some sort of logical/thematic sense.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Latimore
United States
Arizona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
mccrispy wrote:
Terah wrote:
mccrispy wrote:
I don't see how it makes obstacle creation stronger than RAW, can you explain in what way it does this?

Quote:
Well, it artificially constrains you to use obstacles in sub-optimal ways.
Your point is?


His point seems to be that you answered you own question. You've implied that trapping monsters is the most optimal way to use obstacles, which I agree with, which is why I said this variant makes obstacle creation stronger than intended.

Anyways, if I were to implement this rule, I'd probably do it this way:

-Obstacles that are cutting off part of the map have 0 hit points, if attacked by any figure, they are destroyed. (Summoned allies will focus these obstacles as if the obstacles have initiative 99)

-Put a character token on an obstacle that cuts off part of the map when you create it. At the end of your next turn, that obstacle is destroyed.

Trapping monsters will still be a very strong play with these rules, but it will be somewhat less powerful.

It's hard to say without playtesting, but I think this would be fine.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M.C.Crispy
United Kingdom
Basingstoke
Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't want a rule that applies only to "blocking" Obstacles, I want a rule that applies to all Created/Moved Obstacles. (I dislike anomalous rules that are there specifically to deal with edge cases and exceptions).

Having the Obstacle have 0 HP makes it almost zero effect: the first Monster breaks through and the Monsters that come next move through their Ally and attack normally. There's almost zero value against Monsters with Move >1.

I think that treating the Obstacle as a Construct (so it can be targeted using RAW Focus) and giving it HP = Trap Damage @ Scenario Level might work. It's possible that full Trap damage might be too much at higher levels, but I'm aiming for a Created/Moved Obstacle to be destroyed on the second hit (like pretty much all the Constructs I've seen in play).

I'll try to playtest it soon - but I've just had half the party Retire and I don't think that the replacement characters will have Abilities that allow the playtest (and I sure don't have the spare time to test solo).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Latimore
United States
Arizona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
mccrispy wrote:
I don't want a rule that applies only to "blocking" Obstacles, I want a rule that applies to all Created/Moved Obstacles. (I dislike anomalous rules that are there specifically to deal with edge cases and exceptions).

Having the Obstacle have 0 HP makes it almost zero effect: the first Monster breaks through and the Monsters that come next move through their Ally and attack normally. There's almost zero value against Monsters with Move >1.

I think that treating the Obstacle as a Construct (so it can be targeted using RAW Focus) and giving it HP = Trap Damage @ Scenario Level might work. It's possible that full Trap damage might be too much at higher levels, but I'm aiming for a Created/Moved Obstacle to be destroyed on the second hit (like pretty much all the Constructs I've seen in play).

I'll try to playtest it soon - but I've just had half the party Retire and I don't think that the replacement characters will have Abilities that allow the playtest (and I sure don't have the spare time to test solo).
What you propose sounds overly strong. Especially so against the smaller monsters that have low attack.

It's going to be simple to pop obstacles into chokepoints and trivialize the threat of everything on the other side while you recover or pick them off with ranged attacks in many situations.

Against some melee bosses, this is absurdly strong and will trivialize the boss fight.

Giving the the created obstacles negligible HP is one way to avoid this, mostly. It's still absurdly strong sometimes, as it practically stuns/disarms many monsters. Maybe more if you line up multiple obstacles in a row they have to get through.

Either way, it becomes the default way to open new rooms (right up there with going invis in the doorway).
3 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trang VP
Australia
flag msg tools
Correct me if I'm inaccurate here, but isn't the only class that interacts with obstacles the Cragheart? We're talking about a few ability cards here, some of which are already very powerful. The level 4 Rockslide card has been talked about in other threads as one of the best cards in the game, due to (but not only due to) it's amazing versatility. The ability to control space and also cause damage to all enemies adjacent to where you place multiple obstacles is very strong.

And it isn't even a lost card. Other permissible ways of blocking a chokepoint, such as summons, are lost cards/consumed items. You're proposing a Cragheart should be able to keep enemies blocked off multiple times over the course of a scenario, meanwhile doing damage to them as he blocks them off.

So we have one class that already takes top 2 most powerful out of the starter classes (next to Scoundrel) by a fair margin because of some very powerful obstacle-placing cards, and now the desire is to jack up the power level even more by removing what minimal restrictions on permissible placement there are? And the mechanism to do so is an additional set of rules just to deal with a few Cragheart cards that perform very well as they are? I can't buy into the underlying premise that there's a need to fix something here. The Cragheart is already immensely fun and strong.
1 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M.C.Crispy
United Kingdom
Basingstoke
Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
alphasquid wrote:
mccrispy wrote:
I don't want a rule that applies only to "blocking" Obstacles, I want a rule that applies to all Created/Moved Obstacles. (I dislike anomalous rules that are there specifically to deal with edge cases and exceptions).

Having the Obstacle have 0 HP makes it almost zero effect: the first Monster breaks through and the Monsters that come next move through their Ally and attack normally. There's almost zero value against Monsters with Move >1.

I think that treating the Obstacle as a Construct (so it can be targeted using RAW Focus) and giving it HP = Trap Damage @ Scenario Level might work. It's possible that full Trap damage might be too much at higher levels, but I'm aiming for a Created/Moved Obstacle to be destroyed on the second hit (like pretty much all the Constructs I've seen in play).

I'll try to playtest it soon - but I've just had half the party Retire and I don't think that the replacement characters will have Abilities that allow the playtest (and I sure don't have the spare time to test solo).
What you propose sounds overly strong. Especially so against the smaller monsters that have low attack.

It's going to be simple to pop obstacles into chokepoints and trivialize the threat of everything on the other side while you recover or pick them off with ranged attacks in many situations.

Against some melee bosses, this is absurdly strong and will trivialize the boss fight.

Giving the the created obstacles negligible HP is one way to avoid this, mostly. It's still absurdly strong sometimes, as it practically stuns/disarms many monsters. Maybe more if you line up multiple obstacles in a row they have to get through.

Either way, it becomes the default way to open new rooms (right up there with going invis in the doorway).
Thanks for the input on this - I do understand your concern (and share it wrt making the Obstacle have too many HP). Thinking about it, there are some other rules that exist for reasons of simplification and "broken game avoidance" that otherwise make no sense to me and which break the theme immersion. I'll have to think about it a bit.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M.C.Crispy
United Kingdom
Basingstoke
Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TrangVP wrote:
Correct me if I'm inaccurate here, but isn't the only class that interacts with obstacles the Cragheart? We're talking about a few ability cards here, some of which are already very powerful. The level 4 Rockslide card has been talked about in other threads as one of the best cards in the game, due to (but not only due to) it's amazing versatility. The ability to control space and also cause damage to all enemies adjacent to where you place multiple obstacles is very strong.

And it isn't even a lost card. Other permissible ways of blocking a chokepoint, such as summons, are lost cards/consumed items. You're proposing a Cragheart should be able to keep enemies blocked off multiple times over the course of a scenario, meanwhile doing damage to them as he blocks them off.

So we have one class that already takes top 2 most powerful out of the starter classes (next to Scoundrel) by a fair margin because of some very powerful obstacle-placing cards, and now the desire is to jack up the power level even more by removing what minimal restrictions on permissible placement there are? And the mechanism to do so is an additional set of rules just to deal with a few Cragheart cards that perform very well as they are? I can't buy into the underlying premise that there's a need to fix something here. The Cragheart is already immensely fun and strong.
Thanks for the input! I understand your concerns over a non-lost card being used in such a powerful manner.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.