nyys
quoting myself - insanity beckons
Agreed. Even though the spirit of the power would be generally understood, you just know there would be someone out there trying to double up removing wounds when Misaerx destroys a figure.
-
Welcome to the Heroscapers 2.0 site! We've still got some dust to clear and adjustments to make, including launching a new front page, but we hope you enjoy the improvements to the site. Please post your feedback and any issues you encounter in this thread.
The Book of Misaerx the Kyrie Warrior
- Thread starter Strack9
- Start date
Agreed. Even though the spirit of the power would be generally understood, you just know there would be someone out there trying to double up removing wounds when Misaerx destroys a figure.
Its kind of weird what they're doing with the Kyrie descriptors. All the new ones are "Warriors," (on the third left descriptor) although their name also includes "...the Kyrie Warrior." Misaerx (pronounced 'Miss Airks?') can give her Life Drain after she dies to Kilkorax, since she can hand it off after being defeated to "a Unique Warrior Hero that follows Revna." l(So not limited only to Kyrie). Meanwhile some of the old Kyrie are Warriors by left hand descriptor, but others are not, yet still have "Kyrie Warrior" in their name.
Other who do not have Warrior as a left hand descriptor do have Kyrie in their top left hand descriptor but not in their name. Hence Protectors of Ullar are "Kyrie" in their top descriptor (rather than Warriors in the third descriptor) but are Protectors not Warriors in their third descriptor, and do not have Warrior in their name either.
My local rules expert, Sherman Davies (former now somewhat retired C3V Inner Circle Member) says that Misaerx can only give her ability to those with a left hand "Warrior" descriptor, and not the others who do not, even though they are Kyrie Warriors in name, which I find confusing. They are not Warriors but are called Warriors?
Worse, he also says that Misaerx, since she has Undead as a top descriptor and Warrior in her third, is not a Kyrie, (for bonding purposes) even though she's "Misaerx The Kyrie Warrior." So SD rules that she is not a Kyrie, even though she has that in her name, with which I disagree. God help us if they ever have someone who bonds with Kyries as such! That would be impossible to untangle, unless its very carefully detailed.
To me, if you call someone a "Kyrie Warrior," they are a Kyrie and a Warrior! So far that's not a rules problem because nobody bonds with Kyries as such. Yet.
(lt seems upthread here that both Nukatha and Strack9 agree with Sherman Davies (see Posts #4 and 5 above). Therefore consider this both a protest vote about how Kyrie cards were and are being written, and a warning about possible future cards that may bond with Kyries!)
[Note that most of this is a cross post from my thread Consolidated List of Problems With The Renegade AOA Roll Out].
Other who do not have Warrior as a left hand descriptor do have Kyrie in their top left hand descriptor but not in their name. Hence Protectors of Ullar are "Kyrie" in their top descriptor (rather than Warriors in the third descriptor) but are Protectors not Warriors in their third descriptor, and do not have Warrior in their name either.
My local rules expert, Sherman Davies (former now somewhat retired C3V Inner Circle Member) says that Misaerx can only give her ability to those with a left hand "Warrior" descriptor, and not the others who do not, even though they are Kyrie Warriors in name, which I find confusing. They are not Warriors but are called Warriors?
Worse, he also says that Misaerx, since she has Undead as a top descriptor and Warrior in her third, is not a Kyrie, (for bonding purposes) even though she's "Misaerx The Kyrie Warrior." So SD rules that she is not a Kyrie, even though she has that in her name, with which I disagree. God help us if they ever have someone who bonds with Kyries as such! That would be impossible to untangle, unless its very carefully detailed.
To me, if you call someone a "Kyrie Warrior," they are a Kyrie and a Warrior! So far that's not a rules problem because nobody bonds with Kyries as such. Yet.
(lt seems upthread here that both Nukatha and Strack9 agree with Sherman Davies (see Posts #4 and 5 above). Therefore consider this both a protest vote about how Kyrie cards were and are being written, and a warning about possible future cards that may bond with Kyries!)
[Note that most of this is a cross post from my thread Consolidated List of Problems With The Renegade AOA Roll Out].
Last edited:
SkyWhale
Active member
Also posting what I said in the other thread, there are no units that are "Kyrie Warrior" in name but not Warrior in class. But yes, it is confusing that both of the Revna "Kyrie Warriors" are actually Undead.
It would also be incredibly busted to have a unit that had just plain Kyrie bonding, but hopefully these Revna units get bonding so Misaerx is no longer useless.
It would also be incredibly busted to have a unit that had just plain Kyrie bonding, but hopefully these Revna units get bonding so Misaerx is no longer useless.
So, say, an Undead Cowboy with six guns and a cowboy hat who had the descriptor Undead but didn't have the descriptor Cowboy would not be a Cowboy? But if he had the descriptors Undead and Cowboy, he would be? Just checking.
It seems he would be a Cowboy but not bond with anyone who bonded with Cowboys. Its bad enough to be Undead, but to lose your life long race or personality designation? They must all be very depressed. I never cared for the Undead, but now I feel for them.
It seems he would be a Cowboy but not bond with anyone who bonded with Cowboys. Its bad enough to be Undead, but to lose your life long race or personality designation? They must all be very depressed. I never cared for the Undead, but now I feel for them.
I hear you. Nevertheless, whatever their game functions or not, a Kyrie is still a Kyrie! If not, why was she (Kilkorax) included in a "Kyrie box?"
BTW, if you include VC there are cowboys who are not Lawmen; the bad guys like Garrett Burns, Josie Whistlestop, and Tombstone Gunslinger (Outlaws).
BTW, if you include VC there are cowboys who are not Lawmen; the bad guys like Garrett Burns, Josie Whistlestop, and Tombstone Gunslinger (Outlaws).
Last edited:
The rules use keywords it checks for, and the name is not part of it unless it’s specifically calling out a specific unit.
Game rulebooks need hard rules like that, since if you started being able to assume things like names and such counting then it can get chaotic quick.
Game rulebooks need hard rules like that, since if you started being able to assume things like names and such counting then it can get chaotic quick.
Just_a_Bill
Well-known member
"This Kyrie is not a Kyrie" is so counter-intuitive that it merits an R&C. (This has already misled people in the Books for both Misaerx and Kilkorax, understandably so.) Maybe something along these lines:
In addition, I noticed that this unit's name is misspelled "Misarex" twice in the first post.
Don't feel bad about these things, Strack or anyone else. Both of these issues stem from poor unit naming. (And honestly, "Misarex" was already what my brain was hearing every time I see it, so I think it has become her name in my head. Maybe I'm not the only one? At least I know how to pronounce it that way.
)
In addition, I noticed that this unit's name is misspelled "Misarex" twice in the first post.
Don't feel bad about these things, Strack or anyone else. Both of these issues stem from poor unit naming. (And honestly, "Misarex" was already what my brain was hearing every time I see it, so I think it has become her name in my head. Maybe I'm not the only one? At least I know how to pronounce it that way.
)
Last edited:
Just_a_Bill
Well-known member
Heh, for me I think she's Miss Irks.
It's pretty frustrating when new additions gunk up the game for no good reason. Putting "Kyrie" in these card titles was all downside, and shows a lack of understanding of how the game works.
Last edited:
Nice proofread! Fixed.