Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The Open Beta for Book 3 started up today.

Here's the link:
http://wyrd-games.net/community/topic/105761-playtest-documents-and-guidelines/

There's new models and upgrades for every faction, a solution to the Avatar problem, and rules for a campaign system not dissimilar to Necromunda/Mordheim.

Get playing!

Hah. They have an ice skater that has both Frozen Heart and is a Showgirl. That's amusing.

Yeah, I like that one a lot, lots of fun.

Less amused that they're mostly scrapping avatars.

Avatars were boring in their previous version anyways. You cometimes spent some effort playing in a playstyle only to change completely once manifested.

Also, many Avatars were just monstrous beatsticks. These Avatars at least synergize with the rest of the list before and after manifestation.

Also, I'm happy that Collette will probably be getting a better 50mm base Avatar rather than the three lingerie-strippers she currently has.

I meant vs. last beta (not vs. last edition, which was ridiculously complex) since they're campaign-only now, and no, Colette won't be getting an improved cooler large model instead of the 3 she had before: now it's super-bland plastic colette except mounted on an arcanist-themed generic base insert, since they're not making master-specific avatars any more.

Yeah, I really don't like the art for the new Collette. She looks so generic. The older stage magician looked much better. Now she's much less of a "showgirl" and more of a girl wearing denim. It's less inspired than lingerie-triplets Collette.

So what's the point in making them all 50mm bases if some Masters don't even have 50mm older Avatars? I guess this gives me conversion opportunities for what to do with the extra Kaeris I'll have when/if I get that boxed set.

I do like the direction for the Avatars. While I didn't use the old Avatars as I started in 2E, I get the idea behind them, and I think Malifaux is simply the wrong scale for them. Reading the new Avatar cards they seem to be good buff units post manifest but are in line with the games scale. Though I think they're missing an opportinuty not doing master specific avatars. They may not have their old impact, but never underestimate a hobbyists desire to buy all the things.

Really digging the campaign system though. This is what I wanted Corvus Belli to do with Campaign Paradiso, a generic way to play linked games with carried over buffs and debuffs depending on if you did well or not, or if units got killed. Feels a lot like Mordheim, which is great.

Overall my biggest disappointment is the lack of units being added, which feels very light. Though, continuing the Campaign Paradiso comparison, I get that they want the focus to be on the campaign system.

You wouldn't get that they wanted a campaign focus, given how things are being discussed over in the beta...

Personally, I'm fine with a small addition- maybe it's just a lack of as much disposable income, but I'm perfectly fine with fewer releases.

I personally like the avatar direction. I feel like it would be too early to include avatars in the base game (if at all). They just seem like in the fluff they are supposed to be these super powerful incarnations of their associated master, which makes it hard to balance them and keep them fluffy.

As for the limited model release, I like that as well, they still don't have plastics (or models) for all of Wave 1 and 2 if we got a ton of new units, we would just have even more models without units.

As for how things are discussed in Beta, I think that they want the campaign to be the big aspect of the book but that it is important that model releases be balanced to the core game.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
I meant vs. last beta (not vs. last edition, which was ridiculously complex) since they're campaign-only now, and no, Colette won't be getting an improved cooler large model instead of the 3 she had before: now it's super-bland plastic colette except mounted on an arcanist-themed generic base insert, since they're not making master-specific avatars any more.

Im sure Hoffman has his Avatar released this month, so I don't think you are right there.

Hoffman got the last avatar made, in plastic after 1st edition was gone for a bit IIRC. Either way, I picked one up during a sale of old stuff, and he certainly isn't a new model.

Also, from a designer:

3) Masters will not receive their own avatar sculpts. Instead, each Faction will receive a single Avatar sculpt. This sculpt will be more of a base insert than a model. It will be 50mm with a place to slot in a model on a 30mm base. So, for example, the Guild Avatar Sculpt might be a pillar of flames on a 50mm base with a slot for a 30mm base on top which you can put your master on. The Resurrectionist avatar might be a bunch of Undead hands protruding from the earth carrying a throne which you can slot your 30mm Master base on top of, etc etc (these are just me guessing, nothing final). In this way there will only be seven avatar sculpts, each themed to a Faction, which act more like base inserts. I should stress that these base inserts will only be necessary while using the avatars during the campaign and only if you don’t have the original sculpts.

That sounds a million times better than a separate model!

It's convenient, but I like pretty models and make my own bases, so... meh. More annoyed by the non-tournament than by the standardized insert- I can still convert my own minis.

On the other hand, maybe they realized that they were hard to balance or took focus away from the game objectives and are scaling it back. Some companies could take the hint.

Sorry, misspoke. Annoyed by the campaign-only. I'm okay with no tournament scene, but think they should have had official optional rules for non-campaign play with them.

BTW, which games are you thinking of?

I'm constantly submitted to rants that 40K and Infinity have jumped the shark... I'm starting to think I drank the kool-aid.

My friend swears that if 40K still only used the 3rd Ed BBB army lists, the game wouldn't have as many balance problems.

If one assumes a form of the argument is true (and we're all open to discussion, right?) then scaling things back might be a valid solution. Of course, it's easier for a company to say that a few models of which you could only field one at a time are now optional or very restricted than, say, someone who purchased 6 Valkyries.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Sorry, misspoke. Annoyed by the campaign-only. I'm okay with no tournament scene, but think they should have had official optional rules for non-campaign play with them.

They do, just talk with your opponent about them.

I 100% disagree that house rules are anything like optional rules.

I occasionally see optional rules played (easily under 1/3 of the time) in pickup games.

I've never had a pickup game where house rules have been used, past "I'm not sure what this interaction means and it'll take too much effort to figure it out, so does X sound good?"

While in theory they're about the same (both are non-standard ways of playing that you agree to do), in practice, that's not the case at all. If everyone were open and flexible, and people tended to house rule things well, that would be one thing (because there'd be very little difference between house and optional), but I've seen nothing but suspicion with house rules (merit, not intent)... Which holds a lot of weight, since the rare tournament/league environment with league house rules have tended to range between irrelevant and bad.

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
I'm constantly submitted to rants that 40K and Infinity have jumped the shark... I'm starting to think I drank the kool-aid.

Their idea for why Infinity has jumped the shark would be interesting. Personally, I think with its recent release it's just hit its stride.

Sorry, I was away from this sub-forum a bit.

Let's see... I get my ass whooped constantly as long as I don't put a TAG in play, or any other mini above 40 points (I play PanO, he plays Ariadna) but as soon as I do, I broke the game. 400 points game are an issue for him too, and I can almost get on board with this one for the complexity level, but I can't fault a manufacturer for offering players more options.

Personally, I don't think Infinity is a game you can really enjoy if you only play once every 2 weeks. Maybe the new edition makes finding rules easier, but constantly paging through the book was killing me. There are a lot of rule interactions that could be streamlined.

Yeah that's not jumping the shark. That's just having an issue with the complexity.

I agree. But try telling that to a physicist.