Monster Menagerie 2

For your weekend enjoyment, Monster Menagerie II. I have to say that when I started the process of design for MM2, I was not particularly inspired. I wasn't sure that the set was going to be useful or interesting. I'm very happy to report that I could not have been more wrong.

An idea thread was started, with a host of ideas coming from a number of different players. I have to say that I didn't really use any of them verbatim, but my versions of these creatures truly drew from the player base, and from a number of things the players wanted. I did have to implement them in a group of point costs that I thought would be productive for the future meta. And while some creatures use some of the tried and true powers we've seen before, there is some innovation here.

We have a new spotter with the Rat, some fearsome mind flayers that are probably undercosted, but are also a bit fragile, a new take on the Galeb Duhr, and very different versions of the Golems, including an old rusty Iron and a demon-possessed Clay Golem. We have swarmable goblins, honor-bound hobgoblins, siege orcs, and a kobold king. We have a warlock that can possess his minions, and attack through them, and a black wizard that is likely to be in one of my warbands. Whether you like riddles that cause damage, or mafioso beholders, this set should have something for you.


Monster Menagerie II.

Comments

bakterius's picture
Member since:
7 July 2011
Last activity:
23 hours 18 min

hiiiii, nice surprise on this bad wheater mornig. Iam realy angry on my luck with boosters.. dropped me almost all wanted creatures except damn beholder and foulspawns (i love beholders) soo, i must write to santa from troll and toads..
Edited ..

Loki's picture
Member since:
13 July 2016
Last activity:
6 weeks 2 days

Hello

Elf Ambassador (Monster Menagerie 2 #11/43) has:
Envoy: You may include one Elf creature in your
warband from the Wild faction.

Battle Plate Marshal (Underdark #1/60) has:
Warband Building: All Dwarf creatures are legal in
your warband.

Can both powers be used in the same warband?

FriendlyAlienist's picture
Member since:
7 July 2011
Last activity:
5 days 21 hours

I thought Tiefling Warlock was a lady, not a lord... Cool

Ira's picture
Member since:
27 May 2013
Last activity:
2 days 21 hours

Loki wrote:
Elf Ambassador (Monster Menagerie 2 #11/43) has:
Envoy: You may include one Elf creature in your warband from the Wild faction.

Battle Plate Marshal (Underdark #1/60) has:
Warband Building: All Dwarf creatures are legal in your warband.

Can both powers be used in the same warband?

As currently written, yes. Those powers have different names and therefore the duplicate effects rule doesn't apply. Maybe the "Envoy" power was intended to be "Warband Building" but it seems like it was intentionally omitted.

As a note, this was the first set in a while that I wasn't on the development team due to time constraints, and I think it's great that other people are stepping up to get more involved! Well done!

tried's picture
Member since:
12 January 2010
Last activity:
21 hours 4 min

Please see Tsucora Quori for a comparison. The envoy powers allow a single creature to join a warband outside of faction restrictions. It was never technically ruled a warband building power.

John Flipp's picture
Member since:
10 December 2015
Last activity:
1 week 2 days

Hobgoblin Champion?!? What!?

+ 1 attacks for each hobgoblin that didn't activate yet.
If i understand well, with a warband of 8, you have +8 attacks with the first, +7 with the second, +6 with the third and so on....
And that is a champion two!? I don't know, i am not an expert in cards, but isn't that a little strong, considering Hobgoblins already have many good champions for warband building?

Also is it voluntary to have just the Golem keyword to the Ancient Iron Golem? To me it is obvious it also is a Construct but maybe it would be too strong for construct warbands?

tried's picture
Member since:
12 January 2010
Last activity:
21 hours 4 min

He should be a champion 1, sorry. (of course, you can use more than one.)
I'll fix this typo quick!

And with a warband of 8 you have +7, because SOMEBODY has to activate to attack, right?

EDIT: There was no reason to penalize the Golem, its a construct. Also, extra box is gone now.

skyscraper's picture
Member since:
10 July 2013
Last activity:
3 hours 11 min

JP: you're right about the numbers, but the exact wording is "that have not taken a turn yet", not "that have not activated yet" (in the latter case, it would be +7 for the first in a warband of Cool.

I think you're right that this is a strong power! Especially for the first half of the warband.

This Champion requires an Hobgoblin-exclusive warband to be fully efficient, while the Goblins have the upper hand on Champions and synergies. I don't think that the Hobgoblins will become too powerful with this Champion. I've tried making Hobgoblin warbands, and they are tough to make competitive warbands with. I hope that this Champion will help them. That, the items that were released (the Bladebearer Hobgoblin's item especially comes to mind).

I also like that this Champion does not give the usual +2/+5 that many champions grant. I

I also think that the Champion's CP1 is also very strong, it's nice to have CP's that compete each other. Though CP2 might be a bit stronger, CP1 might be useful for a chance to take out a key piece.

Finaly, I really like the flavor and theme of this CP. Hobgoblins are all about organization and discipline. This is also what will be required by the player to make the most out of this CP Smile

Let the Hobgoblins conquer! Muahahaha! Smile

skyscraper's picture
Member since:
10 July 2013
Last activity:
3 hours 11 min

Dwayne wrote:
And with a warband of 8 you have +7, because SOMEBODY has to activate to attack, right?

However, the CP's text says "that has not taken a turn yet", not "that has not activated yet". To me, "taking a turn" requires the turn to be entirely resolved. So it would be +8 for the first Hobo to activate. No?

Ira's picture
Member since:
27 May 2013
Last activity:
2 days 21 hours

EDIT: Development-specific feedback removed, and shared directly instead of clogging this thread.

For this particular CP, my thoughts:
Hobgoblin Champion CP 2: Use at start of round: Until end of round, each hobgoblin ally has +1 to attack for each Hobgoblin in your warband that that has not yet taken a turn this round.

When is a creature considered "to have taken a turn." For attacks, we consider "make an attack" to be satisfied when targets are chosen. I think it would be reasonable to consider "take a turn" to be satisfied as soon as the creature activates. The other option would be "take a turn" is only satisfied during the "end of turn" step for a creature's turn, but that means that a creature who is currently acting wouldn't have taken a turn yet, and that seems strange to me. I think the proper timing for "take a turn" should be on activation.

Also, since Dwayne was the designer and he seemed to think it would be +7, we can infer his design intent was to be +7, so our ruling should be consistent with that.

John Flipp's picture
Member since:
10 December 2015
Last activity:
1 week 2 days

Thanks for making the changes to the Ancient Iron Golem!

Also; The power Blood cackle from the Gnoll Rage Spawner should have the "Gnoll" word capitalized throughout,
and I'm not sure but I dont think the actual Worg figurine was a "common" like the card says. It would be the first large common i ever see if so.

Sirohk's picture
Member since:
7 July 2011
Last activity:
11 hours 19 min

Great looking set so far.

Question on the Black Wizard. It’s Blindsight ability says Ignores Invisible, Ignores Conceal. Does this mean that the Black Wizard can’t see through smoke? Is this Blindsight different from other Blindsight on other creatures?

Thank you.

Cool

John Flipp's picture
Member since:
10 December 2015
Last activity:
1 week 2 days

A quick question concerning also the Black Wizard.

Let's say a creature have been affected by his Soul Drain power, which states: 15 ongoing necrotic damage (until end of battle).
Can an ally of the affected creature with a power such as "remove a condition that affect an adjacent ally", remove it just as well as if the condition was simply (save ends)??

tried's picture
Member since:
12 January 2010
Last activity:
21 hours 4 min

@Sirokh
The power is called Blindsight.
It is addressed directly in the Smoke terrain section.
@John Flipp
It is still a condition, it just has a different duration.
If the power says "end a condition that a save can end', however, it would not take effect.
If it can end any condition, it can end this one.

Also, a creature that has activated may not have taken its (complete) turn, but it definitely has not "not' taken its turn. This creates a complicated situation.
Like most triggers, the effect is considered to have occurred when declared, as Ira points out.

skyscraper's picture
Member since:
10 July 2013
Last activity:
3 hours 11 min

Thanks for the clarifications guys! Great stuff!

Sirohk's picture
Member since:
7 July 2011
Last activity:
11 hours 19 min

@ Tried

Agree, covered in the Old Rules that say creature is treated as "Invisible" and it says A creature with Blindsight ignores smoke squares when determining line of sight to creatures and squares within the range of its Blindsight and when determining whether creatures within the range of its Blindsight are invisible due to smoke terrain.

So what about in the V3 rules? I cannot find the same language.

Cheers.

Cool

tried's picture
Member since:
12 January 2010
Last activity:
21 hours 4 min

Oh...I see your question now.

It is very likely that smoke will not block line of sight in the next set of rules, but the wording is tricky.

I'm still playing with precise wording, but something like:

Option 1
If tracing line of sight to a target requires the line to cross at least two edges of a (smoke) terrain square, that target is invisible to the creature.

Option 2
Line of sight is blocked when it touches a second edge of any square of (smoke) terrain.

The first version appears on its face to hold that status quo, EXCEPT that I intend to have similar rules for (forest) to make the game more understandable/universal. The second version may well be better, because I do not like the ability of terrain to conditionally convey a status upon a creature.

skyscraper's picture
Member since:
10 July 2013
Last activity:
3 hours 11 min

Did you not use the expression "unseen" in V3 that was a status usable both for Invisible but for other situations also, i.e. LOS is blocked, attacker is blind, etc...?

Or am I importing stuff from RPGs here? In which case, what do you think about defining for V3 an "unseen" status that differs from, but is referred to, in cases of invisibility, blindness, blocked LOS, smoke, ...?