You are currently viewing HCRealms.com, The Premier HeroClix Community, as a Guest. If you would like to participate in the community, please Register to join the discussion!
If you are having problems registering to an account, feel free to Contact Us.
So figures now with special powers must really get you all mad and confused. Each one having a different power, sometimes several ones.
So every one of a figure with a like set of combat values should have the same set of rules to govern what they can and can not do?
Sounds like a boring game.
Of course not. Special rules provide VALUE. They make the game funner and more colorful, and in most case provide comic accuracy. In short, they Enhance the game. They make it Richer.
This rule specifically, does NOT provide value having it work multiple ways with different Colossals. It adds confusion, and provides no value over having a single rule.
Oh, so two different Namors having different special text is adding value to the game, but two different colossals having different text is not adding value to the game.
It does in fact get simpler. You could give the questioneer an answer that he could immediatly apply to the game he was playing. Your answer doesn't answer the question AT ALL, it just redirects the questioner to "look it up himself". (which is not a helpful answer)
Oh, I whole-heatedly disagree! Teaching somebody how to learn for themselves is much more of a crucial life skill than teaching them I beg for scraps of knowledge that others will let slip by to them.
"Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he never goes hungry."
And again, read what is being said. Being a colossal has nothing to do with destroying objects. Simple!
Quote : Originally Posted by DemonRS
Justify to me why this thread is necessary and I'll keep it open..
Quote : Originally Posted by Girathon
It pissed me off all weekend rorschachparadox wasn't dead.
But how do you know? Maybe GD has a perfectly reasonable reason. Maybe the ability was that little extra bit to make the older Colossals worth their points, but when it came time to design the new figures, they didn't need that extra tactical advantage, so it was left off.
The point is, you don't know the answer to the "why" any better than anybody else, so why don't you just drop it?
I already gave one perfectly reasonable explanation...pointed objects.
You guys keep using figures like Professor X to make examples. I almost wonder if using Iron Man to make the examples might get more attention.
Of course not. Special rules provide VALUE. They make the game funner and more colorful, and in most case provide comic accuracy. In short, they Enhance the game. They make it Richer.
This rule specifically, does NOT provide value having it work multiple ways with different Colossals. It adds confusion, and provides no value over having a single rule.
There is only a single rule. You just don't like it. Being a colossal does not allow you to stomp objects. Done and done.
Quote : Originally Posted by DemonRS
Justify to me why this thread is necessary and I'll keep it open..
Quote : Originally Posted by Girathon
It pissed me off all weekend rorschachparadox wasn't dead.
But how do you know? Maybe GD has a perfectly reasonable reason. Maybe the ability was that little extra bit to make the older Colossals worth their points, but when it came time to design the new figures, they didn't need that extra tactical advantage, so it was left off.
The point is, you don't know the answer to the "why" any better than anybody else, so why don't you just drop it?
I actually think your logic is backwards - Destroying objects you stand on makes Colossals Weaker, not Stronger. It means they can't use the healing vine, or the turret.
But either way, I am more than happy to listen to suggestions of why the game designer "by design" wanted some sentinals to destroy objects they stand on, and some to not. If someone could provide a reason why this duality provides VALUE. I would probably change my opinion if they had a good point.
Um, if no one could however provide a "Good reason" for having two different rules, would you change your opinion?
Or are you just a "Don't question the game designers" kinda guy?
I actually think your logic is backwards - Destroying objects you stand on makes Colossals Weaker, not Stronger. It means they can't use the healing vine, or the turret.
But either way, I am more than happy to listen to suggestions of why the game designer "by design" wanted some sentinals to destroy objects they stand on, and some to not. If someone could provide a reason why this duality provides VALUE. I would probably change my opinion if they had a good point.
Um, if no one could however provide a "Good reason" for having two different rules, would you change your opinion?
Or are you just a "Don't question the game designers" kinda guy?
Why would I believe this? You haven't been able to see any of the good points presented to you thus far. Why would you begin now?
I just do not see why THIS is the sticking point here.
There are dozens of rules which do not work the same over each colossal. One biggie is how EE and PW work differently on the various colossals, but those changes are not the same on each colossal. Heck the two different Dr. Manhattan figures work differently from each other in that regard.
That is just one of many.
Regardless, this thread has run its course. The answer was given long ago. The advjce to take the debate elsewhere was clearly disregarded as it is obvious this guy wants to argue for the sake of arguing.
I just do not see why THIS is the sticking point here.
There are dozens of rules which do not work the same over each colossal. One biggie is how EE and PW work differently on the various colossals, but those changes are not the same on each colossal. Heck the two different Dr. Manhattan figures work differently from each other in that regard.
That is just one of many.
Regardless, this thread has run its course. The answer was given long ago. The advjce to take the debate elsewhere was clearly disregarded as it is obvious this guy wants to argue for the sake of arguing.
Good point. This thread is done. I'm making an executive decision and closing it down.