http://pineboxentertainment.com/wp-content/uploads/public/doomtown_rules_compendium_v0.5.pdf
Thought you’ll like ta see this!
1 Like
So unless i am mistaken the only “new” items are:
- Auto-Revolver can no longer be used if it is equipped to a dude outside a shootout (pretty much how everyone had agreed to play the card)
- Rico lost his influence (He still has a crazy powerful ability, but now he isn’t an auto include)
- Undertaker no longer applies to dudes aced from your hand/discard (2 ghost rock was a lot to gain off of Buried Treasure or Gomorra Parish, it was starting to get OP as new acing abilities were added)
I think the change to James Ghetty/Lillian Morgan (able to pay for Auto-Revolver) is a new change, and one I agree with whole-heartedly.
1 Like
I kinda foresee Rico becoming useless this way tbh.
Thanks to @SavageJack for the excellent summary,
Nice to see you again @db0!
I think Rico Rodegain is still playable, the problem before was he was a near auto include as he was 3GR for 1inf (the in-faction baseline) but had a better ability than most in faction dudes, making him a near auto include. This led to strange early turns if you knew your opponent had no cheatin’ punishment, particularly if you have Barton Everest/Den of Thieves to boost your hand rank. Before, this aggressive option had little cost as it just switched out one of your other 3GR for 1inf dudes, now it is a proper choice with a tradeoff.
The Hyper aggressive Rico/Barton start is still possible:
Den of Thieves (1 GR discount on Grifters)
- Barton (4GR, 1 upkeep), Rico Rodegain (2GR), Jake Smiley (2GR), Makaio (3GR), Travis Moone (1GR)
- Still leaves 5 starting GR, so you could switch Barton for Milt Clemons if you want a way to generate more GR at the cost of 2 starting GR.
- 4 starting influence, 2 net income and Den of Thieves to make money too.
Morgan Regulators
- Jarret Blake (5GR, 1 upkeep), Irving Patterson (3GR), Rico Rodegain (3GR), Maggie Harris (2GR), Diego Linares (3GR),
- 3 Starting GR, 2 net income
While I do think Rico will see far less use than before, hopefully that opens up space for new grifters (I almost want to see a 1 influence grifter tried again)
With that said, the “Rulings” section of the new Rules Compendium is a copy/paste of the existing rulings, so here are some things for the team to add/clean up:
- As someone on Facebook pointed out, Clementine Lepp should read “A Bounty Hunter can be played against Clementine WHILE AT A SALOON, however it will have no effect” (nitpicky, but worth a fix)
- Lucy Clover (Exp.1) needs to be added with the ruling “Is the experienced version of ‘Lucinda “Lucy” Clover’ and counts for uniqueness” (To prevent rules-lawyering jerks)
- Doomsday Supply needs to be ruled where it can be used at all (@jayjester pointed out that under the old rule book Doomsday Supply can never be used, didn’t notice it changed in PBE’s rulebook)
- Mario Crane (Exp.1) needs a ruling on the trait “Mario counts as Sloan for Uniqueness”, some have argued that traits don’t function from Boot Hill, so acing Mario Crane should still allow you to play Sloan.
2 Likes
I missed that point in my summary @SavageJack, but you hit another important issue: Rico’s strength meant he squeezed out other grifters from starting posses non Den of Thieves homes. I’d like to see a 1 Influence grifter too in the future, but perhaps at 4GR to avoid competing with in-faction options as this makes the game samey and dilutes faction strengths/flavour.
Thanks for raising the Rulings issued mentioned on Facebook. Beyond my powers to alter these (I’m just a playtester) but from Facebook I can see that Pine Box are on it, so various kinks should get ironed out soon. Well worth raising things here and on Facebook to make sure they’re seen.
It’s funny because Rico got a number of buffs in PT because the initial version without inf was considered bad. Then value was buffed because even that was considered too weak. Just goes to show how difficult to balance it 
I do think this nerf went too much imho but let’s see.
3 Likes
Valuable feedback! The current version shows up in an awful lot of decks (David Hammond referred to Rico as an “auto include” on facebook and at the large Huddersfield Sheriff if was in all four of the Top 8 decks that were publicly posted, and probably several more), and I hope my lists above demonstrates that he’s still useable.
It’s not my errata (above my pay grade) but I think it is a good idea. This errata is simple and understandable - I can see why you might be tempted to knock 1GR off his cost perhaps as he’s now 0inf, albeit that gives people another thing to remember. I’d like to consider that if/when an errata reprint is done.
Playtesting is hard work! I can only hope we deal with questions and issues with the class and patience you showed when you were lead designer. Enjoyed meeting you and playing against your Putting The Pieces Together deck in Birmingham, even if I only realised it was you after the fact. 
Look forward to seeing whatever your next project is if you’ve got other design gigs on the go.
2 Likes
I agree with DB0, 3 gr for 0 influence grifter is too much, at least he is not as bad as Howard Aswell.
They also did fix traits. Very happy about that.
2 Likes
Rico should definately be 2gr now.
It also looks like “move to join” is impossible in place, you have to be in different location to use it.
Thanks @Inverted.
I’ll bring it up with the others. It may be that errata is reviewed later, so I’m interested in suggestions from other players too (or if people have an alternate way of balancing him). I’m partial to the 0inf, 2GR idea. He’d be very cheap in Den of Thieves, so that would need to be considered.
No promises, and we have to trade off the simplicity of the cut to 0 Inf v making him a little cheaper to offset this, but it’s great to hear ideas expressed in a constructive manner. Cheers guys.
@Swider, where is the move to join reference please? I’ll check if this is a rules change or just a partial quote on an old ruling. Thanks for your keen eyes!
Here’s the linked FAQ’s text on Carter’s Bounties for reference, which still lets you join from the same location:
“Carter’s Bounties
Can be used to move a dude into the posse from the same location, including a dude that
had previously left the posse.”
Also:
“A card ability may be used to move a dude into or out of a posse from/to the same
location as the shootout, as entering or leaving a posse fulfils the movement requirement
of any such ability.”
Edit: Might have found it! Assume the issue is this bit of the rulebook? FAQ seems to clear this up.
" Card effects that move a dude must move
them to a new location; the dude cannot remain at the same location, unless the effect is sending
them home booted."
Edited. I answered before reading your entire post. Yep this is exactly the fragment of the rulebook I had in mind.
Can you post a fragment you are referring to?
Cheers mate, good eye for detail. FAQ seems to handle this, if the rulebook phrasing is causing confusion I can ask the rules team to consider tweaking it.
This thread seems like a good place for anything else that looks wrong/confusing. I’m not on Facebook I’m afraid but I check it occasionally.
1 Like
I know some cards say ‘this dude joins your posse (moving if necessary)’ and some, like Shadow Walk, say ‘move this dude to join your posse’. This feels like an early templating inconsistency to me, but I don’t know for sure if that’s the case. Perhaps another thing to look at for potential errata/reprints?
Don’t think there’s a need, see the FAQ element that lays this out in my post above and repeated below. 
“Carter’s Bounties
Can be used to move a dude into the posse from the same location, including a dude that
had previously left the posse.”
Also:
“A card ability may be used to move a dude into or out of a posse from/to the same
location as the shootout, as entering or leaving a posse fulfils the movement requirement
of any such ability.”
1 Like
I actually was looking for it as “move” and “move to join” are two effects that confuse especially new players, I was hoping this would be clarified in revisited rulebook.
XPosted:
Not having read whats above me too thoroughly…
In general I am not a fan of functional errata. Errata that is only used for power level changes makes the game more difficult for new players to play. I understand changing for printing errors and so they work as intended, but completely changing how cards work is not something I am a fan of.
I would rather the cards be restricted or out right banned in tournament play. The creation of two formats, “High Noon Restricted” or something that has the ban/restricted list, and a format that allows the most powerful cards to run wild.
Just how I see it…
Other than that, in terms of Rico, why not just increase his cost by 1 and let him keep the influence? That way he still is an influence grifter, and the cost reduction for the deed is taken into account.