Yeah, I got the impression that Fickle Fans was meant to be more of a "Screw everything" card, the way That Card is, or Sedative Flechettes, or Devious Disruption. I think the goal is to add some chaos to what would otherwise be a fairly staid game of "Get the lead and just keep playing 'til you win."
I often like to root for the underdog. So, the losing team has a good chance of winning my favor. In the Bloodsworn Colosseum, I guess thatād make them the winning team.
Thatās the effect Fickle Fans suggests to me.
Wow, condescension much! I like it. More since your post is quite empty besides that.
Ok, let's "stew" on it a minute, since you are clearly way ahead of me here and I need to catch up. And I'm taking your word here as good as all the designers and delta playtesters, it's not like you are patronizing me just because you felt like it (let's remember this is a firendly forum).
What would I call a card that removes victory points from the winning side side and gives them to the losing side? Well, it's not catch up, ok. Let's call it "pool-token-moving-card-from-winning-to-losing". Now that I have a good label for the mechanic, pool-token-moving-card-from-winning-to-losing, let's see if the arguments I wrote in the post still stand.
Uhm, my points seems to still stand that what the card does hurts the gaming experience more than it helps it, since you can have the winner of the game decided but something different than the rest of the game has been about. It's cool to have something that relates to the crowds vouching for the underdog. But even if we decided it's a "underdog appreciation" mechanic, I still think it was not well implemented and there were better ways to do it (examples mentioned previously). I'm sorry if your playtester ego is hurt because I don't think this was as good as it could have been when I had no participation in it's creation or testing (and here I'm only calling out Foote on this). And I'm pissed that I tried to articulate what was my valuation of the card, what I think was wrong and how would I go to improve it and receive such a dismissive response. I know this is the game's forum, where the biggest fans are, but seriously it would help a lot if criticism to the game was not taken personally and not counter-argued at that level.
Now, that being said, I have no reason to change my mind so far. Phanta added some cool info about what is to plan for that card, silopolis and Trajector added their interpretation about the card. And while I may have nothing in particular to respond to them their post are desirable because they, who seem to not agree with what I posted, provide info which I might have not thought about and might bring our positions closers.
PS: About the "Screw Everything" idea, it doesn't hold. Well, the comparison to the other cards doesn't. Devastating Aurora, Sedative Flechettes, Devious Disruption and others are reset cards to avoid Heroes getting a set up so powerful it makes the rest of the game trivial. The analogy to those cards would be something like removing all titles from Heroes and putting them back in the Title Deck or Title play area. And what I mentioned about other implementations does address the "Get the lead and just keep playing 'til you win" point.
-
Your stew is boiling. Blow on it before you sip it.
-
You didn't label a mechanic as much as you just kinda restated exactly what the card physically does. Not quite the same thing, though I feel you are just being a bit cheeky.
-
Your argument from the original post is that Fickle Fans doesn't work well as a Catch Up mechanic. And I can't help but to agree with you on that point. However it's not meant as a Catch Up mechanic which still means the entire basis for what you are arguing needed to be rethought. It's a pure Reversal of Fortune mechanic, which aims to serve a totally different purpose. And honestly Fickle Fans fills that particular type of role perfectly. While at the same time, it trys to capture the feeling of how paper thin public opinions can be and how easily they can turn on a dime, which is a theme that strongly resonates with people's real lives (sports, politics, ect) and it applies directly to the backstory and win condition of the Bloodsworn Arena. If you want to discuss the merits of reversal of fortune mechanics I'm all for it, but lets keep in mind what that is trying to accomplish and if there are other ways to do it while still filling a strong thematic need (and I am of the opinion that the thematic pros of the card heavily outweighs the mechanic cons).
...mechanics that when triggered change who is in the lead or decide who is the winner are bad4) Why? Happens all the time in games. Especially when one team does something to score points to get ahead of the other team. Is that not a mechanic that triggered a change in who is in the lead?
Rewarding the players for planning when that card to comes into play, IMO, hurts the experience more than what the mechanic achieves.5) Did you just say rewarding players for strategic planning around potentially bad cards and situations is bad? I know very few gamers who would agree with that premise.
I'm sorry if your playtester ego is hurt because I don't think this was as good as it could have been when I had no participation in it's creation or testing (and here I'm only calling out Foote on this).6) No need to appologize for anything buddy, you didn't hurt my feelings about anything. You sound more hurt than me. Sorry if I was dismissive towards you. Lets hug it out.
Please apologise now.
if I see another incendiary post on this thread I'm going to lock it.
I never, ever want to see people being rude. You may well be offended by things people write. I know I have been. Even so, please either find a polite way to point out that you're offended, or don't do it. You are welcome to send a private message to the mods if you don't want to directly engage with someone that has offended you.
Nah, I was being as much as an ass as you had.
]It's a pure Reversal of Fortune mechanic, which aims to serve a totally different purpose.
I am humbled. I was not aware of a "Reversal of Fortune" mechanic existed. Do you have a link were I can read a definition of it? I was not able to find one after a bit of Google search. My appreciation so far from the name and from, huh, a card in Munchkin is that a random event makes the loser win (and/or make the winner lose) just because. And well in Munchkin it rather falls into the "Take That" category.
If that's the case, well, it looks just like a bad version of Catch-Up. I mean "totally different purpose" in this case is to have the loser be the winner (when the card is played) instead of having the loser be closer to the winner and have a chance at a comeback. And that that is a desirable thing. Seriously, what it does is bad howerer you want to call it.
In the end it's subjective if it represents the crowd's favour well or if it doesn't. But if we are drawing comparisons from the real world, in no popular sport the underdog team is awarded free goals just because the crowd feels like it. There are sports with Handicaps, like Polo, but that's related to previous results. The closest we would have is reality-like TV shows were which participant keeps playing and which one is kicked out of the competition is decided by the audience's vote. So the analogy there would be that the crowd always like the one who is 'losing' within the show and wants to make them win. Not my cup of tea, but neither are those shows. And they are not usually about physical competitions but about artistic and/or social performances. So IMO, no, Fickle Fans is not good thematically and it doesn't capture the audience shifts moods in the scenario the heroes are presented.
Why? Happens all the time in games. Especially when one team does something to score points to get ahead of the other team. Is that not a mechanic that triggered a change in who is in the lead?
Because in this case it's a random event, tied to who is winning. Fickle Fans might do nothing or win/lose you the game. It's not someone doing something in particular to put them ahead. Throughout the game you are winning points by dealing damage and earning titles and that has a clear thematic tie in. Now the game might be decided by something totally different. Just because. That's anti-climatic (a game example was given in this same thread). And that's basically why the card is being called out.
Did you just say rewarding players for strategic planning around potentially bad cards and situations is bad?
Yes, because it pulls you off the theme. Card counting is not a desired behaviour in thematic games. Risk management is, but if players are aware of what's the risk involved. How to convince a player that the crowd will like it better if his Hero just sits around and does nothing that turn, while they have enjoyed see him kicking butt and taking names? Just because you know which is the last card in Kaargra's deck? It's impossible not to reward deck knowledge in this kind of game, more since cards have a variable power. But that knowledge should not steer you to 'game' the system, to take actions totally off the theme. I can get behind Fickle Fans being exploited after deck manipulation because that means that some off-the-arena action was taken by the Heroes to improve their situation.
- Your stew is boiling. Blow on it before you sip it.[ā¦]
- No need to appologize for anything buddy, you didn't hurt my feelings about anything. You sound more hurt than me. Sorry if I was dismissive towards you. Lets hug it out.
There's a difference between being a jerk and being cheeky. And as said before, the thing that is off in both your posts is the lack of actual content.
I would suggest that there are other cards which can be as table-turning as Fickle Fans. Okay, so Fickle Fans can make you lose by bringing about the alternate loss condition of "Kaargra gets too many points" if you were at the "heroes have nearly enough points" status. But Devious Disruption can make you lose if you're at the "heroes have a whole load of equipment/ongoings" status by making you either nuke your stuff and take a bit of damage or nuking some/none of it and taking more/lots of damage and thus probably ending the game through hp incapacitation. Technological Singularity is the same, at least for equipment-heavy heroes who're set up with a lot of stuff, and that one doesn't even give you a choice about whether or not to destroy it. It just does and then you get hit based on how much of your stuff got broken, which can easily incap Omni-10 instantly if he's got most of his stuff out.
I'm not sure how Fickle Fans is really any different - if it comes out in Kaargra's favour then you're just losing by a different way than by running out of hp. And ven then you're not guaranteed to instantly lose, you just might be close to it if the point total is nearly at the victory point.
The issue is not being just table-turning but also random, disconnecting from the rest of the Villain theme, and punishing the side ahead disregardless of how much impact the punishment has. I'm pretty sure this thread would not exist if Fickel Fans said "H-2" instead of H.
The difference with the cards mentioned is that equipment is not a win condition. You can choose to fight Baron Blade and Omnitron with basically no equipment/ongoing and still win (and I mean that ignoring how hard that would be). You can't beat Kaargra without pool tokens.
Devious Disruption and Singularity would fit the analogy if Fickle Fans hit the team that had the most Titles. You don't actually need Titles to beat Kaargra but it's rather diffiult to do it without them.
And the narrative is also different. In BB and Omni thematically they pulled out the big guns and the fight continues, the flow of the story is not interrupted. In Kaargra the audience like to see the gladiators beat each other. No, suddenly they reward the ones who were not giving a good show. And back again liking the ones fighitng. There's a disconnect there.
I mean, what reaction do you have in a game when you see those cards? BB/Omni makes me curse out loud. Fickle Fans made me go "Eh... okay, whatever".
The thing is, you do need hit points in order to win - cards like Devious Disruption and Technological Singularity deprive you of those, as Fickle Fans deprives you of Victory Points (or are they called Favour Points, I can't remember now) and if the numbers go against you enough, you lose. And it's only H - that's three whole points if you only have three heroes. Okay so if you have five that's a quarter of what you need to win, but with five heroes you should in theory have more means in which to earn points back again ;).
I'm not so fussed about it being "thematic". I mean, this is a card game, not an RPG. If I want to be sat at a table pretending to be a character fighting an enemy, I'll play DnD or something ;). I'm not RPing when I play Sentinels, though I am playing a game in which the bad guy's hp has to hit zero before mine do (unless I'm fighting the Dreamer ;)).
Fickle Fans is just that, about the fans being fickle - changing their minds on a whim. I seem to recall that happens in the film "Gladiator" in that scene where MAximus (the main good guy in case you haven't seen it) is among those chained togther with crappy weapons playing the part of the "barbarian horde" intended to be wiped out by the "mighty champions" (or whatever the announcer calls them, I've only seen it once and it was around the time the film came out so I can't fully remember every detail) who're guys in chariots armed with much better weapons which I think include bows and arrows or some other kind of ranged attack. So they get all the cheers. But Maximus, having been a general in the army, gets his fellow slaves to team up and work together and actually win because he knows (or I think someone told him earlier, possibly the trainer guy) that true victory comes from having the audience on your side. So he co-ordinates his team to win the fight and ends with the crowd cheering him ("Are you not entertained?"). So the chariot guys entered the fight with loads of Favour Points but then Maximus and team fought really well and the crowd went "Oh hey, actually those guys are really cool, lol the barbarians are beating the Romans this is kind of funny" and started cheering for them instead. Max got the crowd on-side and wins in another way besides beating all the enemies (though he does that too, of course).
Anyway, there are only two copies of the card in the deck, just as there seem to be two copies of most of the really horrible cards in the game (Devious Disruption, Aurora, Flechettes, Singularity, EPEā¦), so that's a 2-in-25 chance that one will come out each time a card is played. That's pretty small, less than 10%. And surely you'll only lose if it puts Kaargra to like, 19 points and then she immediately earns another oneā¦which I suppose she might since if it comes out in the Play phase then various gladiators (and herself) probably still get to act in the End phase. Still, if that happens, the reverse could happen in another game. And anyway, it then gives you a reason to fight her again for revenge and kick her arse :D.
I look at Fickle Fans the same way I look at any villain card that heals the villain: It sets back the work the heroes have done. We've had non-Kargra games in which we were on course to win and one healing card from the villain allowed them to survive long enough to finish off the heroes. It's the same situation, it's just using HP as the counter instead of the pools. Admittedly, the HP scenario isn't an instant win, but it can result in a win that can't be stopped when a loss was expected.
I actually like that Fickle Fans can go both ways, though.
In the end it's subjective if it represents the crowd's favour well or if it doesn't. But if we are drawing comparisons from the real world, in no popular sport the underdog team is awarded free goals just because the crowd feels like it
You have a thematic disconnect here. The pool in the Arena deck does not represents "points" that we score on a scoreboard. It is supposed to be a representation of how the crowd feels about our heros. Without the "favor of the crowd", they can never leave.
You're right no team is given free goals because the crowd feels like it in real life. But that's not remotely close to whats being portrayed here.
So the analogy there would be that the crowd always like the one who is 'losing' within the show and wants to make them win
Again, you're really off base here. If someone has higher crowd favor, then the crowd favors them. It's straight forward. How does an instance of one Fickle Fans represent the crowd "always liking the underdog"? It's really just changing who the crowd starts to cheer for, it has nothing at all to do with who is "winning" or "losing". In fact, there are no points or scores in the arena to figure out a winner or loser. It has everything to do with how the crowd sees you. Crowds can be pretty hard to please sometimes. You could call them fickle, if you will.
Ameena is spot on with her Gladiator reference though. *Thumbs Up*
ā¦and if Fickle Fans causes the heroes to win or lose, itās just like the times in Gladiator or Spartacus when the official gives a thumbs-up or -down. Often, that gesture comes from the state of the crowd and not what the official actually wants to do.
After a long losing battle, the crowd cheers the heroes, Kaarga gives the heroes grudging respect, and lets them walk with their freedom. Or the heroes were doing well, but at the last minute the crowd sided with their favorite house gladiatorā¦and Kaarga pointed her thumb at the ground.
Honestly, Fickle Fans seems like one of the MORE thematic āThat Cardsā in the game.
Fickle Fans is also a 2-in-15 chance of appearing due to the unique nature of Kaagra's decks.
Actually I believe a thumbs up was a bad thing, as it meant "Yes, go ahead and kill them". Thumbs down was "No, don't kill them, let them go". It's just that for us nowadays, a thumbs up is a good thing, and since getting killed is generally seen as not-very-good, to us we've come to associate the thumbs up with not getting stuck with a nasty pointy object. Or so I've heard (I think it was on QI) ;).
Well for the crowd at the time, the killing blow was the good thing. So Thumbs up makes sense.
I know this is completely subjective and I understand that what you are actually saying here is that you don't share the thematic considerations I'm bringing up. That's cool. But in a game like this theme is important, subjective, but important.
But this is not the analogy FFans creates. This translated in the game is that the team that had the least tools (in this case Equipment, Ongoing, Targets, Titles apply) beat the other guys (even stole some of those tools) and the crowd cheered when they won, when they earned those 'points' by themselves. The crowd didn't cheered on them when they were losing, bloodied and dying just because they were behind.
What Rabit says about HP healing card is closer to FFans. IMO FFans translates to what Devious Disrpution (or similar card) does would be something like "If the Heroes have more than 15 HP, deal them 20 damage and heal the Villain 20 HP. If they have less than 5 HP, heal them for 20 and deal the Villain 20 damage." Numbers can change but the idea stands. I'm also like that FFans can go either way, I'm just not happy about how it does it.
And I seem to address that exactly after the part you quoted, you know, when I mention it's closer to TV shows, ones I'm not a fan of? And the game has specific rules of how to achieve the crowd's favour, analogous to scoring goals in some sports, and it works as a scoreboard since it determines the winner and you can tell who is closer to winning from looking at it. So the interpretation clash is between FFans and the Favour token rules. You have two different mechanics (dealing damage and who has the most tokens) to represent the same thing and in my case it creates a conflict.
Because of how the card is implemented, it always favours the one who has the least tokens which means it's the one who has, in it's sum, dealt the least damage and earned the least number titles.
Btw, what about that link?
That's cool, but we have a card that depcits that situation, Bloodsworn Judgement, and it has nothing to do with it.
I feel like we are beating a dead horse on this argument.
Some folks like it and some folks don't for whatever reason. People didn't like Fixer and Expat either for various reasons both understandable and not-so-understandable, but the tide has turned with them recently. Fickle Fans will see it's day as well.