garion wrote:Well this was an interesting read.
@ JT-Y and Milo, with all due respect - you really should be consulting some of the more seasoned people on this web site. This is coming from someone who is hyper-critical of some of the people here and the shenanigans that went on during CRP. But ultimately without the 'seasoned pros' this game will die so you should be careful when adding nonsensical skills and rules. It would be wise to stop dismissing them. There is a lot of noise in BB forums, and many people are inexperienced and pretty clueless. But out right disregarding opinions from people that have played the game consistently for 30 years plus is a bit naive or possibly arrogant.
I agree the skills in this thread aren't a huge problems. But they also aint good for the game and send alarm bells ringing for the old heads as they are rules for rules sake.
I get you want to appeal to new customers. I really do. I get that flashy skills that sound zany etc... bring people in. Gaping Maw, Kick team mate although pointless and a bit daft - I do get, though missing out Loner, incorrect pricing is just sloppy, come on son.....
I agree that these skills have little to no effect on the game but that is a very poor defence for their inclusion. Weeping Blades; everyone here agrees is a very poor piece of game design.
Finally, have you considered creating a feedback thread to read through, and also a suggestions box? Yes you will get crack pots but there will also be rough diamonds.
Okay, there's a lot to unpack here. I'm not sure you can find any instances of me "dismissing" seasoned pros, here, so I think that's the wrong foot to start off on. I have always tried hard to listen to different opinions and I don't tend to dismiss people just because they believe differently. But I'm human, so if I have indeed done it, I'm sorry. It wasn't my intent.
So, based on feedback from the release of BB2016 and DZ1, Andy and James have assembled a rules review and playtest group, of which JT-Y and I are both a part of. (There are others, as well, but I leave it up to them if they choose to out themselves or remain anonymous.) Two things to take away there: Andy and James LISTENED to the feedback, realized that a change was necessary, and implemented it; and the playtest group wasn't in place during the time BB/DZ1 and some other rules were written, and so have no responsibility for those rules.
Next, please understand that production timelines are a very real thing, and many of the items you have seen up to this point (including Grak and Crumbleberry, and the Human Nobility/Savage Orc teams) were written long ago. They predate the involvement of the playtest group.
What you have been seeing up to this point is largely rules that were written prior to the release of BB2016 and all of the feedback. I think James and Andy have both listened to the feedback and now recognize that those "seasoned pros" you refer to expect a different rules balance than WH40k or AOS players do, and have adjusted their style as a result.
I can point to four items that the playtest group was involved with so far: DZ season 1 errata, DZ season 2, the WD/BG rules, and the optional rules for the Special Play cards. So you can judge our impact, for better or for worse, on those items, at least so far. Generally speaking, the feedback to those items I have seen has been positive.