Arcane Wonders Forum
Mage Wars => Spells => Topic started by: Wildhorn on November 29, 2013, 11:15:11 AM
-
Shouldn't Skeletal Sentry be errated to have Soldier subtype? I mean... Skeletal Minion has it and I think something with a sword and an armor is much more a soldier than something that hold a femur...
-
Indeed the minion does not look even remotely like a soldier.
-
Indeed the minion does not look even remotely like a soldier.
So the dead fallen upon the battle field and stripped and burned and then reanimated doesn't strike a cord with you?
-
Bump.
Can we have the skeletal sentry given the subtype soldier please?
-
It was in new faq
-
hmm.. cant find it. got the 1 from january.
thanks though - i can make my SB now ;)
-
I was wrong I thought it was in faq, but I know it was mentioned somewhere. Message laddinfarce and hell probly update
-
Indeed the minion does not look even remotely like a soldier.
So the dead fallen upon the battle field and stripped and burned and then reanimated doesn't strike a cord with you?
He has no armor and he is carrying a club. If you are equipping your soldiers like that their is something wrong.
-
Why would my undead skeleton (!) soldier need any armour? :)
(Not) equipping your underlings like this says a lot about your attitude towards your troops. It may not be the most compassionate attitude, but it's economical - especially if you take the number of troops and their availability into account. Why bother with equipping your low-rank undead soldiers if you can simply replace them by reanimating another fallen?
-
So are you trying to imply that if a, say, knight in full armour dies and you animate his skeleton, it (or you) will take off its armour? :)
And you can substitute the knight and his armour with any normal soldier and what kind of armour he wears.
-
Good point!
On the other hand: it's a skeleton, so it's been lying there for quite a while. Someone might have taken its armour. Or the bones reassemble bit by bit so the armour will just fall off during the process. Anyway, just speculating here. :)
-
So the dead who have fallen upon the battle field thenstripped and burned and then later reanimated doesn't strike a cord with you?
Armor and weapons have/had value along with boots, belts, etc. Most of the time dead bodies were stripped and burn to prevent disease. That is my understanding at least. So I have no issue with a skeleton with nothing but his bones on and wielding a femur as a weapon.
-
Anyway the matter is, if a stripped skeleton with just a femur is a soldier, why the skeleton with a full armor and a sword is not.
-
Anyway the matter is, if a stripped skeleton with just a femur is a soldier, why the skeleton with a full armor and a sword is not.
I concur he should have the soldier subtype. Someone asked why he would be like that (in the art) and that was my attempt to explain with flavor. The subtype in the Core set is only on three living creatures. So unlike like a couple of other cards in the DvN release that got an errata'ed added subtype, this one didn't. Why? I am not sure.
-
This errata would only help the warlord, right? Why no love for the Warlord? :'(
-
I hope they will errata it for FiF. I like the concept of a Warlord controlling an army of dead soldiers. It is a bit costy SP-wise, but it is so cool. Having a level 2 undead soldier would help a bit.
-
I don't get the insistence that this NEEDS errata.
If there's not a significant balance problem, or something not working how it's intended, I don't see errata as necessary.
The lack of a soldier keyword on this skeleton is mildly inconvenient at most, so I'm fine with the card working the way it's printed.
-
Right now, every humanoid skeletons are soldier except that one (because it is from the core set and Warlord was not existing yet).
Also, it is very inconsistent that a skeleton with sword and armor is not a soldier while a stripped skeleton minion is a soldier.
Also, it kinda hinder Warlord that want to play with skeleton soldier by lacking a lvl 2 creature. People might not care much about Warlord, but I like the thematic of a Warlord controlling an undead army. Some kind of Darklord.
-
Yesterday I played vs a Druid with my Skeleton Warlord. I had a very hard time because I didn't have Skeletal Sentry as soldier. Minion were too weak to deal any real damage and with Kralathor on board they were just fertilizer. Mort and the Knights were constantly Tanglevined or Snatched away of action.
Skeletal Sentry if they were soldier would have been a very good thing. More resistant than Minion would not have fed Kralahor that easy and they would have been easier to put on board than knights.
Please, make Skeletal Sentry a soldier, for the sake of the fun Skeletal Warlors provide!
-
Maybe skeletal sentry's are like security guards and volunteer forces...they think they're police or army, but they're not really ;)
-
So they're... skeletal mall cops?
-
So they're... skeletal mall cops?
Paul Blart, The Dead Mall Cop?
-
Maybe even Paul Blart, Mall Corpse.
-
That was pretty much what I had in mind when I was thinking why you'd have sentry's that aren't soldiers. Could have been a little AW in house joke...
So they're... skeletal mall cops?
-
Skeletal Sentry is tired to be a mall joke. Make it a real soldier!
-
This errata would only help the warlord, right? Why no love for the Warlord? :'(
why Warlord want Love , he have a new extension for the nexts month 8)
i created a soldier spell book and a new skeleton with soldier's subtite its not necessary, the knight is very correct .
-
This errata would only help the warlord, right? Why no love for the Warlord? :'(
why Warlord want Love , he have a new extension for the nexts month 8)
i created a soldier spell book and a new skeleton with soldier's subtite its not necessary, the knight is very correct .
Because a Skeleton Warlord spellbook lack level 2 undead soldier. Level 2 creature are very important because they are the perfect middle ground of cheap/weak level 1 and strong/expensive level 3. When you need some meat/power but only has mana of 1 round channeling, you get a level 2 out. Skeletal Sentry would be perfect but since it is not a soldier, it doesnt fit in a warlord spellbook because it cant benefit from orders and some other spells (current and FiF incoming ones).
This is why Skeletal Sentry NEEDS the soldier subtype. To allow skeleton soldier spellbook to be whole.
-
This errata would only help the warlord, right? Why no love for the Warlord? :'(
why Warlord want Love , he have a new extension for the nexts month 8)
i created a soldier spell book and a new skeleton with soldier's subtite its not necessary, the knight is very correct .
Because a Skeleton Warlord spellbook lack level 2 undead soldier. Level 2 creature are very important because they are the perfect middle ground of cheap/weak level 1 and strong/expensive level 3. When you need some meat/power but only has mana of 1 round channeling, you get a level 2 out. Skeletal Sentry would be perfect but since it is not a soldier, it doesnt fit in a warlord spellbook because it cant benefit from orders and some other spells (current and FiF incoming ones).
This is why Skeletal Sentry NEEDS the soldier subtype. To allow skeleton soldier spellbook to be whole.
No, it definitely doesn't NEED to be anything. You WANT it to be a soldier. Apparently very badly, but wanting something badly doesn't turn it into a need.
-
This errata would only help the warlord, right? Why no love for the Warlord? :'(
why Warlord want Love , he have a new extension for the nexts month 8)
i created a soldier spell book and a new skeleton with soldier's subtite its not necessary, the knight is very correct .
Because a Skeleton Warlord spellbook lack level 2 undead soldier. Level 2 creature are very important because they are the perfect middle ground of cheap/weak level 1 and strong/expensive level 3. When you need some meat/power but only has mana of 1 round channeling, you get a level 2 out. Skeletal Sentry would be perfect but since it is not a soldier, it doesnt fit in a warlord spellbook because it cant benefit from orders and some other spells (current and FiF incoming ones).
This is why Skeletal Sentry NEEDS the soldier subtype. To allow skeleton soldier spellbook to be whole.
No, it definitely doesn't NEED to be anything. You WANT it to be a soldier. Apparently very badly, but wanting something badly doesn't turn it into a need.
Truth it is a huge difference between needs and wants. If AW chooses to make it a soldier they will let every body know then. No point in trying to force the issue.
-
Well I consider skeleton soldier spellbook to be a very cool and nice thematique. Just like a canine beastmaster.
But now imagine if Timber Wolf dis not have animal subtype. Suddently, canine spellbook lose alot of interest. They couldnt be spawned by Lair, could.not be pet nor benefit from various totems. You would have to play with either Fox or Dire Wolf.
This is the situation of the Skeletal Sentry.
-
I cannot see that this issue is a big problem. As far as I can see this is rather a fun book than a competitive one. You already have a big tax burden spellpointwise, because of all that skeletons which count double for the warlord. If you would play against me I would definitely don't have a problem with houseruling the skeletal sentry so that it has the soldier subtype. I think thar would be fair game. Maybe just ask the guys you are playing with, if you could houserule this way.
-
I agree it isn't a big issue in the grand scheme of things, and I'm sure he can (and probably does) house rule it for casual games. However, I disagree about this being a "fun" book rather than a "competitive" one. I think it could be quite viable in a competitive environment (at least as far as Warlord books go in general). If this is his preferred spellbook, and he does wish to use it in official events, then the issue becomes a far bigger concern for him than it may be to us observers.
He makes some decent points, both mechanically and thematically, as to why it should receive such a change. The best counter argument I can think of is simply that errata sucks and should be avoided in my opinion unless absolutely necessary. The lack of a soldier subtype might not make a lot of sense, and might not be completely fair, but it's not absolutely necessary. It doesn't break the game any. Thus, my vote would be against errata. I'm fairly conservative on the use of errata though.
I do hope that your book sees support though in the future. It sounds like a very fun and creative strategy and having Arcane Wonders embrace it would be awesome.
-
It is not just a fun spellbook, it is a competitive one (would be with skeletal sentry being soldier). Yes you pay double for skeletons, but they worth it with their immunities and Warlord tools for soldiers make them really shine more than in a Necromancer spellbook.
They have high hp but no armor, which Warlord has so many way to add that it make them strong in his army. All that build lack is a level 2 undead soldier. Then it would be competitive and it would add to the diversity of the game. More builds = less cookie cutters = more fun.
-
I agree with you Zuberi that errata sucks. I would prefer a brand new level 2 skeleton soldier, but there is already a skeleton level 2 that just lack a subtype to be perfect. It just happens it got released before DvN else i bet he would have got it along the other humanoid skeletons.
-
I would like to see the errata only because it would be like the army Ash fights against in Army of Darkness.
(http://www.best-horror-movies.com/image-files/army-of-darkness-1992-bruce-rifle.jpg)
-
I'm not sure about the story behind tanglevine, but that was re-released in DvN with the "vine" subtype added. So I guess I don't see the big deal here. (Especially considering strangle vine came out in the same set)
-
I feel like the change would be minor enough to not cause issues if it were implemented. If AW did change it, it would probably either appear in FiF or in the alternate Necromancer expansion.
However, I don't think AW cares enough to make the change.
-
I feel like the change would be minor enough to not cause issues if it were implemented. If AW did change it, it would probably either appear in FiF or in the alternate Necromancer expansion.
However, I don't think AW cares enough to make the change.
I think AW cares alot about their players. Just the excellent customer service proves it.
But I know an errata require a good reasons, either it is for game balance (the 3 errated cards) or for gameplay experience (vine on tanglevine).
I think soldier subtype addition to Skeletal Sentry would fall in the second category. It would make more sense thematically and it would allow the viability of a new Warlord build which increase diversity of this amazing game.
-
You've about convinced me, Wildhorn. Although I'm not the target audience that you are trying to convince, I thought I'd throw that in there. You make a lot of very valid points, and I think it really comes down to whether or not Arcane Wonders wants to fully embrace a fringe build with such an errata.
Don't take that derogatorily, please. It sounds like a very fun and quite viable build. However, I think it's clearly not intended as the Warlords primary method of operation (considering they aren't even in his school of training). They are currently a side consideration and any build making them the focus instead is kind of on the fringe of how the Warlord was intended to operate.
I think before they make such an errata, they would have to broaden the appeal of a soldier Skeletal Sentry. If they introduce more cards that are usable by anyone which targets Soldier's specifically, then having this change will not only benefit a fringe Warlord build but also any other builds stacking soldier buffs. Currently the only card I can think of that falls into this category would be the Armory that was previewed. This would definitely increase the power and appeal of a skeletal Necromancer and make him clamoring for the same change you are.
Of course, they then have to balance this to make sure they don't make zombies and other undead irrelevant. It can be a hard ship to steer.
-
I agree with you Zuberi, making an errata change just for 1 build is quite difficult. But like you said, with the Armory introduction, a skeleton soldier necromancer would be tempting, but he would face the same problem as the warlord, lacking a level 2 soldier skeleton. I always talk about Skeleton Warlord because I prefer the Warlord over the necromancer, but Skeleton Necromancer would be very happy to have the Armory to affect their level 2 creatures too.
-
I would think that subtypes by designers intent mean that other mages can use this creature in some manner (in a lesser way) that synergizes with the mages particular talent.
For example [mwcard=DNC02]Deathfang[/mwcard] is very obvious a Dark mage creature type, particularly the Necromancers type of creature. However by giving it the Canine subtype it will also play well, though a bit more expensive, with a Straywood Beastmaster. I would not categorize this as fringe though....
I think that the reason the Sentry does not have the subtype in question, is that during its design phase of this card, the skeletal synergy via the Soldier subtype hadn't been developed. If this card were started in design today from scratch, I have no doubt that it would have the Soldier subtype.
-
So, I've been dealing with a lot of rulings and errata lately. In so doing I've been looking at a lot of rulings, and that was where I found something quite interesting. In the most recent printing of the Core Set, Skeletal Sentry is Soldier, Undead, Skeleton.
As my core set is a first printing, it had never come up. Needless to say I'll be fixing the Rules and Codex Supplement. We should have a new version up in the next day or so.
Congratulations Wildhorn, you had already won and I didn't realize it.
-
Is that printing 3 or is there a printing 4 now?
-
3rd. As far as I know that is the most recent printing.
-
Unholy shit YES!!! Finally I am complete.
Tremblez pauvres mortels! Le Seigneur de Guerre vous terrassera de son armee de soldats squelettes!
-
Congrats Wildhorn. Well deserved.
-
Apparently both of my core sets are second edition. Mine are just Skeleton, undead.
-
Is there a chance we can get the updated art for [mwcard=MW1C32]Skeletal Sentry[/mwcard] on the Card / SBB database? While at it, can we get the errata version of [mwcard=FWJ04]Garrison Post[/mwcard] updated also.
-
Congratulations Wildhorn! Total victory is yours my friend!
-
I love it when AW listens to the people, first garrison post and now skel sentry....amazing
-
Unholy shit YES!!! Finally I am complete.
Tremblez pauvres mortels! Le Seigneur de Guerre vous terrassera de son armee de soldats squelettes!
My french is really bad, are you inviting me to a dinner or are you really happy about skeleton sentry? :)
I must congratulate you! Now, when you finished your crusade about "skeletal sentry soldier subtype" in short SSSS, what are you going to do next? :)
-
Good, now it feels more natural.
So is there place on page where all most updated cards are?
I know that in Resources & Downloads section are 3 errata cards (Battle Fury, Hand of Bim-Shala and Temple of Light), but Garrison Post is missing (since it's official now it should be there).
Apart from that there are some cards that change only a bit (added subtype) like Mohktari - Great Tree of Life, now Skeletal Sentry. there was also some change in description for Malacoda and maybe more cards which i don't remember. Ahh .... some walls which didn't have unavoidable trait has it now. Can you add updated pictures to that section so it's easy to find, remember (or print) and in conflict situations to show opponent?
Thanks in advance ;)
-
Moonglow amulet gain mana subtype, Idol of Pestilence now do poison damage.
I had a conflict about Idol of Pestilence and Necromancers Poison immunity. It is not always that you play against reasonable opponent. If it is not written in stone, it is not real. It would be cool if all changed cards have their substytute for download, so i can put them into sleeves with original cards or just had them with me in my auxilery files and all those changes had a aura of officiality instead of "it is written on the forum... somewhere..." . I am aware about FAQ, i am super possitive, this is just a plea, not a angry rant :)
-
Garrison Post should have an updated version added to that page soon, as in the next couple days. As for the others it hadn't crossed my mind yet. I did have a short document (4 pages) that covered all of the cards that have had some sort of functional errata to them. It was up for a while and I've noticed that now it is not. I'll work on getting that back up. That's a short direct document that covers cards that have had functional errata. All of the added types where on there.
Short version is I'll see what we can do.
-
thanks, but if you can do visual version - it would be great!
-
Garrison Post should have an updated version added to that page soon, as in the next couple days. As for the others it hadn't crossed my mind yet. I did have a short document (4 pages) that covered all of the cards that have had some sort of functional errata to them. It was up for a while and I've noticed that now it is not. I'll work on getting that back up. That's a short direct document that covers cards that have had functional errata. All of the added types where on there.
Short version is I'll see what we can do.
That would be fab thanks Laddin,especially with card art as the others note. There are a fair few small changes now, and tracking them through a refenece sheet is getting challenging. We're still casual players I guess, but having correct cards and text does helpna lot.
Thanks.
-
I played a game yesterday with the GP and SS erreta. It was so smooth and nice. It allowed me to get 2 sentry out so I had to nice creature to attack and defend me while i was building more mana to get more "meaty" creatures out. (pun intended). Nothing could pass throu my army of skeletons. I can't wait for Armory!
-
So has this been added to a list of errata'd cards somewhere? I can't seem to find it if so...
-
So has this been added to a list of errata'd cards somewhere? I can't seem to find it if so...
I would expect to see the update in the FAQ that should be released with FiF.
-
I'm actually working on that FIF update. Skeletal Sentry's subtype will be in there.
-
I'm actually working on that FIF update. Skeletal Sentry's subtype will be in there.
Thank you