Avatars - a step too far?

[graeme27uk]

Reading about some Avatars, it seems that manifesting them is a bad idea.

Surely, the idea of avatars was/is that they should be better than the Master from which they came. Even if it involves changing how the master plays, they should be better so that going through the trouble of manifesting is actually worth it.

Or have I got that wrong?

[Ratty]

Slightly, having an Avatar that vastly changes the Masters playstyle can be just as valuable as an Avatar that is slightly better than their Master.

For example look at Rasputina, A master that is great at range, but you hardly want the enemy up in your face. If you attach an Avatar, You don't actively try to get Manifest Requirements as early as possible, it fairly easy to pick up one of them just in your natural play style. Then if things get dicey you can change to a version which is much more able to survive up close to the enemy.

In other words some of the Avatars are worth the 2ss to have options in play. Just having one attached means that the enemy has much more issues predicting what you are able of doing.

[graeme27uk]

So would you say that avatars are worth their 2SS cost? I read that Pandora's avatar is considered a down-grade, so why would you want to take that?

I can see the point if an avatar changes the play-style of a master, but if its less effective in that play-style then is it worth the cost? Rasputina is good at casting ranged damage, and her avatar is a melee character. I get that, but I've read that her avatar, whilst better than non-avatar Rasputina in melee, is not really that great compared to melee non-avatars elsewhere.

Avatar models are great, it would be a shame if their rules didn't match so they see little table-top presence.

[nilus]

So would you say that avatars are worth their 2SS cost? I read that Pandora's avatar is considered a down-grade, so why would you want to take that?

Don't trust everything you read on the internet. Take a look at the models stats and see what you think they are good for. Avatars were never meant to be upgrades, just play style changes. They general have a boost in power but at the expensive of another ability.

[JackRussel]

I like them, some are just for fun and others help bring some masters up to par in my opinion. Plus the models look awesome so I don't get what's not to like.

[Ratty]

Pandora Avatar Rocks... I can remember one game where I was in deep trouble... I had to hold the center of the board, Hordes of Zombies all over me, Avatar Nicodem firing Decay onto me via the Zombies. I was in deep trouble..

Manifested Pandora, all the zombies routed and ran for the hills. Sweet as.

[cerealkiller195]

wyrd has said repeatedly that avatars are a power step side ways, they aren't meant to be "epic" as in other games as far as power. They aren't over the top just give you options in game.

Maybe i'm biased but i loved playing ramos before, now that his avatar is out it changes him from a mediocre caster to an better summoner/melee fighter with a few tricks.

[tadaka]

Second on APandora being good just look at it this way it turns her in to a master with 4 general action points 2 casting expert points and 2 0 actions. People just look at half of it being stuck in one spot as no good. Play her well and she proves to be very solid.

[rancor709]

Oh the Avatars. They are 2 stones for options, some of them have niche uses, some of them like Ramos/sonnia make them stronger more versatile pieces. Others provides them some options they don't normally have but could help situation-ally. Bottom line your not behind the 8 ball if you dont' have them unless you play Ramos or Sonnia Cridd.

[Cadfan]

So would you say that avatars are worth their 2SS cost? I read that Pandora's avatar is considered a down-grade, so why would you want to take that?

I can see the point if an avatar changes the play-style of a master, but if its less effective in that play-style then is it worth the cost? Rasputina is good at casting ranged damage, and her avatar is a melee character. I get that, but I've read that her avatar, whilst better than non-avatar Rasputina in melee, is not really that great compared to melee non-avatars elsewhere.

Avatar models are great, it would be a shame if their rules didn't match so they see little table-top presence.
You need to take a step back and consider the game in its entirety.

First: An avatar that changes a master's play style halfway through the game is automatically a power upgrade, even if the avatar form is flat out weaker than the original master. This is because it gives you the option of playing one way early game when that way is best, and then customizing yourself to a new situation part way through the game. Rasputina is a good example: her avatar form is basically a giant insurance policy against melee attackers that only costs two soulstones. Or consider Colette: Her avatar is an insurance policy against the death of the Coryphee and Cassandra. Very few avatars are actually designed to be manifested as rapidly as possible. Most are intended to be manifested at the perfect moment.

Second: In Malifaux you create your list after you see your strategy, and after you see the board. For avatars that are better in certain situations rather than others, you can just take it when its needed, and not take it when it isn't. So Pandora's avatar roots you in place... ask yourself: Is this a game where that's actually useful? Or harmful? Then take it or not, based on the situation.

Third: Avatars only cost two points. They aren't supposed to be more useful than having two soulstones in your cache.

[dgraz]

And then there was AMarcus.

Sorry, couldn't help it.

[Hatchethead]

I'm not a super fan of manifestation requirements. The process should be simple and consistent. If I had my way, manifestation would occur as follows (for all Avatars):

Turn 1: Not permitted to Manifest.
Turn 2: (all) Manifest
Turn 3: (2) Manifest
Turn 4: (1) Manifest
Turn 5: (0) Manifest
Turn 6: Manifest is an optional, free action.

I realize that some Avatars are balanced by how difficult they are to manifest, but I really don't care for that. I dig what they bring to the table, I like the notion of a situational "sidegrade", but I don't like manifestation requirements stealing focus from what Malifaux is all about: Strategies and Schemes.

Just my two bits.

[nix]

There was mention somewhere that the Avatars were also supposed to add an "advanced" factor to the game. Adding in one or two additional manifest objectives adds to that "advanced" nature.

[Sybaris]

The fact that Avatars haven't become auto-include into lists makes me believe that Wyrd was successful in creating a system variation without too much change in the balance of the game.

It would have been easy for them to really push the sale of the expensive models by making them super cost-efficient and/or powerful in comparison to normal masters. But instead they have made avatars a tactical choice with pros and cons.

[SpiralngCadavr]

I'm not a super fan of manifestation requirements. The process should be simple and consistent. If I had my way, manifestation would occur as follows (for all Avatars):

Turn 1: Not permitted to Manifest.
Turn 2: (all) Manifest
Turn 3: (2) Manifest
Turn 4: (1) Manifest
Turn 5: (0) Manifest
Turn 6: Manifest is an optional, free action.

I realize that some Avatars are balanced by how difficult they are to manifest, but I really don't care for that. I dig what they bring to the table, I like the notion of a situational "sidegrade", but I don't like manifestation requirements stealing focus from what Malifaux is all about: Strategies and Schemes.

Just my two bits.

I agree that I'd prefer something more straightforward (partially because I'm a relatively new player, so am wary of adding yet more rules to my games), but, I think that, far from changing focus, the objective-driven manifestation requirements feel entirely in line with the semi-narrative, objective-based system I've been playing.

[notmikehill]

I'm just gonne piggyback on everybody and say it's a playshift from the normal style of a master. Take Levi for example: That master is super slow and lacks mobility. Once he manifests, he has gained mobility through the manifest.

Same story with Pandora, she's a highly mobile model but once she manifests, she is literally grounded, making her perfect for holding objectives.

[graeme27uk]

Take Levi... his avatar benefits from having the riders around. So if people are wanting to take his avatar then they are going to want to take riders. But having riders (more than 1) is not going to do non-avatar Levi any favours...

[magicpockets]

Take Hamelin. Without his avatar he can kill everything, with his avatar he can - oh, wait....

[Fetid Strumpet]

AHHHH, but you see he kills everyone in a different way! *wink*

[Sandwich]

Yeah, non Avatar he has to do it one at a time.
With Avatar he does it all at once.

;D

I kid I kid I kid

[ooshawn]

I do like the idea of doing away with manifesting requirements. It seems like it would balance a few things out. Taking it a step further i think the healing flip needs to be free and not cost a ss.

[Mike3838]

I think manifest requirements fit well as mini objectives, but some need rethinking. I'm talking about those that basically just say "You must waste 1AP in turn 1/2 on a useless action, and then you can manifest". There's no tactics involved, just AP sacrifice and possibly a cheated card.

Im talking things like Seamus having to cast Face of Death twice when there's no enemies nearby, and similar.

Mike

[nix]

To be fair, he does not have to cast it on turns 1 and 2. You could wait until it made sense to cast the spell instead of wasting the activations.....

Just making a point, not that I actually play that way. With aSonnia, I actually build part of my crew around getting a benefit from doing my manifest requirements early.

[SpiralngCadavr]

Taking it a step further i think the healing flip needs to be free and not cost a ss.Dunno about doing away with requirements, but I like this. That rule seems sort of odd, as it stands.


I'm talking about those that basically just say "You must waste 1AP in turn 1/2 on a useless action, and then you can manifest". There's no tactics involved, just AP sacrifice and possibly a cheated card.
Yeah, I feel like 1 moderately difficult and interesting objective is better than 1 of them maybe feeling tacked on.

[Requirement]

Yeah, I feel like 1 moderately difficult and interesting objective is better than 1 of them maybe feeling tacked on.

You can already manifest with only one requirement done. It uses AP as well, but then, sometimes it just makes sense to manifest. There are very few instances where I would say "Man, I would never actually do that in a game" while looking at the manifest requirements.

I like the idea of making the healing flip not cost a soulstone... but as it stands I also look at it as an AP free healing flip... so there is already some benefit involved.

[JonotheGoose]

Anyone tried the Kirai avatar? Still tossing up on it myself.

[Fetid Strumpet]

Outside of very niche situations I pretty much feel Kirai's avatar is an Auto-Never-Include. Please understand I'm not knocking what it can do, it's a fairly ok melee model. The problem is that Kirai doesn't need to be a fairly ok Melee Model, she has and can summon shikome, which are amazing, and the Ikiryo, which is decent as well. Also in order to manifest you give up almost every advantage that contributed to why you are even playing Kirai. You give up Kirai's survivability, you give up her mobility, you give up her crew's mobility, all to gain an ok melee model.

Now that said if you want to play Kirai, and don't want any other resser master her avatar does have a place, because it is only through her avatar that you will have any reasonable chance of ever getting max points for Contain Power. Also Kirai's Avatar, can be a great deal of fun, as it will be a headache for anyone who still attacks your crew when she comes out, as she will punish them very much for doing so.

The avatar is a very good modeling opportunity. I had a great deal of enjoyment painting and modeling mine. In terms of effectiveness..., like most avatars for the book 2 masters bring it out for fun, leave it in the case for the tourney.

[Dezzo]

i don't buy miniatures unless i can use them (or bent on using them).... so far all the masters bar one have Avatars that are meh.

Raspy
LJ
Perdita
Ramos
Victoria

Ramos' Avatar strikes me as something I should have... but I am having so much fun with LJ and Perdita... I have yet to get much practice in with Ramos... Infact... I have been tinkering with an idea for Raspy but that is for another thread.

[JonotheGoose]

Got a good price on it so I might get it for the model and play around with it at home.

At the moment I am not sure I want to get into the other resser masters as none of them jump out of me theme and fluff wise. I had only bought Kirai for a mate to use but he is still undecided on malifuax at the moment.

Cheers for the comments guys :)

Dezzo keen to hear about your Raspy plans.

[nurglez]

I was very excited when I heard about Avatars, and naturally expected them to be more powerful versions of masters.

My friends and I are still rather inexperienced at malifaux, but we are working on that :D

I'm yet to play with an avatar, however I am impressed that as mentioned above, they are a shift in power as opposed to being over powered (coming from 40k the newer something is the more overpowered it is generally).

Reading the rules for avatar lcb/dreamer just makes me want to try it out, even though its so far from what I would usually try. and the change to perdita seem interesting too (I have a nightmare LCB that I shall use for his avatar until its released, and am currently pinning together Perdita's avatar).

I love the theme of certain characters, and the little bit of story in front of each avatar in twisting fates is awesome.

[Hardlec]

Avatars are not uber-superdy-duperty. Good. Malifaux is not a game you win with your cheque book.

Style of play is the main reason to choose a master. Being able to switch is a powerful option. The interaction with your crew is almost as important. Being able to change means you can keep your opponent guessing. Otherwise a zillion spiders always wins.; -)

[korva]

1 char

[pixelante]

The Avatar of Slaughter is an upgrade, the Viks get some 0 spells at last!

[Sandwich]

Eh some are amazing and make the master better at their primary focus (Sonnia Crid, Viktorias) some switch your play-style at a certain point but are still solid (Ramos) and some are just plain bad. (Rapsy, Perdita)

... Wat?

[dgraz]

... Wat?
lol. that really made my day.

[korva]

1char

[Sandwich]

I don't even want to sound remotely rude, but what's your reasoning behind that statement?

[Jonas Albrecht]

I've made no secret that the Avatars bug me from every conceivable standpoint, but there are a few things that would make me dislike them less regarding gameplay. The big one is multiple ways to bring them into play.

I've always liked the idea of being able to being able to choose between paying for them with some kind of upfront cost (like Soulstones) or having to pay for them via manifestation.

[NeuroFire]

To be fair, he does not have to cast it on turns 1 and 2. You could wait until it made sense to cast the spell instead of wasting the activations.....

Just making a point, not that I actually play that way. With aSonnia, I actually build part of my crew around getting a benefit from doing my manifest requirements early.

Would you be willing to share? I'm curious as to what crew would benefit from her casting of Inferno. Doing 10 damage to enemy models could certainly be a benefit, if it can be done early enough to matter, but I don't see how Inferno benefits a crew unless she's already close enough to damage enemies with it.
I love and adore aSonnia, but having to spend my (0) on Inferno can be a little stressful. I would generally only use it in end game, generally preferring her other (0) actions earlier on. Doing damage with spells is reasonable, but having to do 10 wounds can take a lot out of me, especially if I'm avoiding Confiscate Lore to keep my (0) free.

[Tograth]

take 2 desperate mercs. Turn 1: inferno. knocks them down to 1 wound. turn 2: violation of magic on each -> 2 healing flips, plus 2 witchling stalkers.

the turn you want to manifest, (as long as it's not turn 2) you use (0) inferno again, then you manifest and use casting master to violation or cast Pyre.

[NeuroFire]

take 2 desperate mercs. Turn 1: inferno. knocks them down to 1 wound. turn 2: violation of magic on each -> 2 healing flips, plus 2 witchling stalkers.

Ahhhh, much obliged. (What's the 2 healing flips from?)

[Tograth]

the desperate merc has the ability A Last Noble Deed. when its killed it gives a model within 4" a healing flip. Really nice for healing your own guys, or screwing over Leviticus.

[nix]

Tograth got it.

I tend to do exactly as he mentioned, with my competitive aSonnia list containing Santiago and 2 desperate mercs and a guardian. The guardian typically shield bashes santiago for 1wd, then protects santiago. Santiago, Sonnia, and the 2 mercs all walk to a point no more than 6 inches outside the deployment zone and Sonnia burns the mercs and Santiago for 3 points with the first Inferno casting.

Starting Turn 2, I have a powered up Santiago with a guardian protecting him, and 2 Merc's who are ready to become stalkers. I find that I often have the opportunity to either burn a stone for Confiscated Lore then violate the merc's into witchlings, or to burn the stone, walk, and unleash fiery hell onto the enemy. In a perfect setting (usually against someone who has not played vs Sonnia), I draw 2-3 tomes between turns 1 and 2 and get off the Fireball plus the violates without needing to walk. this ends up typically burning 2-3 stones, but puts me ready to manifest on turn 3.

[NeuroFire]

the desperate merc has the ability A Last Noble Deed. when its killed it gives a model within 4" a healing flip.

Ooooo, I did not know that.

The thing about Santiago is a good idea, too, I'll definitely be trying that. Thank you :)

[DarcXON]

Also I'm pretty sure that most of the Avatars are trying to follow the Fluff to a point. Which is why Hoffman somehow becomes for susceptible to blasts (He is unconscious and cannot dampen) and Hamelin loses a lot of power (as he is recovering). If you try to compare the fluff to the models it is pretty close.

As for the power of the models, the only one that I auto include (not that there aren't others more powerful) is ASeamus, and that is because he is so much fun to have. Even if I only use him for 2 turns (usually wait to activate him late game).

[ReubenHappens]

I kind of feel bad for desperate mercs. So many strategies revolve around - "Take two desperate mercs, murder them, profit!"

[Adran]

I kind of feel bad for desperate mercs. So many strategies revolve around - "Take two desperate mercs, murder them, profit!"

Maybe thats something for an achievement league - Get a desperate Mercenary to survive until the end of the game.

[D_acolyte]

I do not play with them and have not seen avatars used well where I am, but I do not think they are a step too far. I have toyed long and hard with the idea of getting Pandora and Rasputina. I feel that Avatars where a good move for Wyrd's game play and fluff, arguably better then adding another master to the factions. None of the avatars look to be supper powered, they are just different and tend to come with their own sacrifices from the original master.

[dunce002917]

I kind of feel bad for desperate mercs. So many strategies revolve around - "Take two desperate mercs, murder them, profit!"

cuz it would cost you a soulstone to have the Desperate Merc to survive till the end of the end.
I use them as front line first blood minions... i care less if they die early.. that's why I hired them.

[ReubenHappens]

cuz it would cost you a soulstone to have the Desperate Merc to survive till the end of the end.
I use them as front line first blood minions... i care less if they die early.. that's why I hired them.

It's not so much the dying that bothers me, it's the fact that they seem to get purchased for the express purpose of being killed by your own crew! But that's not going to stop me using a desperate merc in my Kirai crew for exactly this end...

[dunce002917]

It's not so much the dying that bothers me, it's the fact that they seem to get purchased for the express purpose of being killed by your own crew! But that's not going to stop me using a desperate merc in my Kirai crew for exactly this end...

Well, bad things happen in Malifaux... so let's do our best to NOT be a desperate mercenary....

At least for my Sonnia crew, they become Witchling Stalkers... I dunno if that's a fate worse than death..

[eudaimon]

The biggest thing for me is the 2 ss cost to attach the avatar.

As has been said by many people, at best the avatars are a side grade for most masters, and in other situations they are incredibly situational. For many masters, you directly sacrifice their core competancies, and that means you lose lots of the synergies you have with your crew.

In my local gaming group, no one ever plays with an avatar, despite us all having avatar models for our masters. We all tried them, but really can't justify the 2 ss cost to attach something which may well be detrimental to your play, will mostly be something that doesn't have that much of an impact, and only rarely will be a benefit (yes yes yes, I know that some avatars, most noticably aRamos are awesome, I am talking about avatars as a WHOLE).

If an errata was released that removed the 2ss cost, I think you would see many more manifestations, the game would be much more colourful and fluffy, and Wyrd would sell more models!

[Forar]

The obvious problem with eliminating the 2ss cost is that it would make those Avatars that are generally considered to be awesome to be auto-includes at likely zero penalty.

Yes, I'm sure there'd still end up being situations where being forced to transform would be detrimental to a given game, but for those select Avatars that are already awesome, this could well cause a balance issue, especially when they do work in one player's favour, meaning they've now gained an edge over their opponent for 0ss, who is in turn paying 0ss to take something that *might* be good at some point.

Basically what I'm saying is that such a move might simply exacerbate the issue.

[Tiny]

In my local gaming group, no one ever plays with an avatar, despite us all having avatar models for our masters. We all tried them, but really can't justify the 2 ss cost to attach something which may well be detrimental to your play,

Roy doesnt use avatar mcmourning? amateur!

[i_was_like_you]

If you're worried about the 2ss cost, maybe offset that by taking one less Scheme.

Sometimes it's far easier to deny an opponent their VP from their Strategy and / or (announced) Schemes than it is to try to take that second Scheme (or third in a Brawl).

Considering some of the manifest requirements are practically schemes in their own right (while others, like Ramos' make a spider and an electrical creation, are practically gimmes), it makes sense to focus on either manifest requirements or your Schemes, and then use your manifested avatar to finish up your Strategy.

[This would be part of where avatars make the game more advanced, just by trying to track your master's manifest requirements and your Schemes and your strategy, all while trying to deny your opponent all of the above.]

Hiring your master's avatar does paint a target on its head, and there isn't much that is more disappointing in a game than to have your master die without manifesting, especially if you were relying on the avi for completing your Strats and Schemes.