I was reading the forum in the weekend and I read a post maked for Harpua where he said that Giant get worse than ever whit the new rules, but I am reading the FF rules and i think that giant get a good treatment.

So What i am missing here ?

Thanks.

If i have the post i will bring it.

Basically, opposing characters no longer have to deal with the two-square adjacency on movement when passing or breaking away from giants. It was mostly only good when a giant faced a zero-range, non-flying, non-HSS figures anyhow. It's not too often you can get a favorable match-up like that for your giant.

*looks at Hercules*

Well ... I guess I wouldn't mind if we still had that option ...

My giant question is:

Question

Well ANSWER to your question

thanks Glen Quagmire

Meh...that's a slightly large question, but I would not really call it giant.

In any case, the 2 square adjacency was the best thing that Giants had going for them. Now, they get a limited type of movement....if they don't already have *cough Dragonman cough*. The thing is, giants were all about board control. Not the same type of control that someone like KC GL had, but rather the movement part of it. They made it alot more difficult for grounded figs to get around. And they could tie figures up and not be attacked through close combat.

Correct me if I'm wrong but you can now TK giants.

Getting Giants into battle has always been a problem. They are easy targets b/c line of site is easy to get on Giants. Now they can carry someone if they have no tokens and they can be TK'ed.

This sounds like a good trade off for the 2 square rule.

What about Charge and Quake with Giants. Since they don''t have to stop 2 squares away can't they target more characters when they quake. You can target the figure your adjacent to AND the figures behind them 2 squares from you.

Or how about attacking over the top of one figure to reach the figure behind. I see the no 2 square rule as a plus on the offensive side.

Precisely

That wasn't really a change to the giant rules. It was a change to the TK rules. (And one which I imagine was unintentional.)

Carrying someone is ok, but it is a rather lame verion of Carry.

Not to me.

It would only cost 5 points to do that before. Paying the 5 points (and only then if you want it) is far superior to giving up the mobility restrictions you place on your opponents.

There's no difference there.

Eh, I think it's fine, as Giants now have more movement of their own. Giants continue to benefit from relative safety when they double team (a giant behind his close combat pal can keep making attacks) and from immunity to the features of terrain (for the most part). I DO miss the 2-square tie-up, but would gladly accept it as a new Feat card. All in all, I see the role of Giants changing now, and the role of Plasticity once again becoming larger.

I prefered the old style of giants myself. We had giant stride to fix the movement problem, and nothing else really needed to be done. I loved holding off charging opponents, or bringing in a cheap giant to tie up opponents.

Now? I don't enjoy them as much. I liked clogging up a hallway.

Ahh the good old days, eh Entertainer? Stilt-Man was a classic...

I do agree, the 'fix' is neither here nor there for me, didn't overly help or hurt. Though I think that with Giant Stride out there, and no 'Giant Control' in place, it seems counter-intuitive to provide a 'fix' that makes a previous fix irrelivent.