Pretty simple question, for those players that used to play in classic. Who was/were your main faction(s)?
M’self? Well, I really dug Elijah’s Flock before they got sent to boothill at the end of the knicknevin arc. Something about crazy religious zealots and the seven sins was just oodles of fun. And then the Collegium had my heart, scientists looking to make a difference in the name of progress, couldn’t get enough of the lovable nerds.
How bout you all?
Edit: Oh yeah, Lost Angels were kind of neat, but didn’t like their focus on mystic goods, never felt like a proper replacement for the Flock.
I think the first things my brother and I bought were a couple of Classic Pinebox starters (two factions in each? Think we got Whateley/Texas Rangers and Law Dogs/Sious Union?), plus a Collegium Starter and a Law Dog’s: Hunter’s Office starter. We went on a family holiday to Spain and ended up spending up much of our time indoors playing cards instead.
Hope Morgan Cattle Company helps fill some of the Collegium shaped hole in your heart.
It does ^^ I was happy to see Max Baine again, and all the other familiar faces Dave Montreal, Xiong Wendy Cheng, even (Amazing) Xemo’s Turban.
In Reloaded, I play pretty much all outfits when I get the chance to have an opponent
Good point on the fixed distribution model, reminds me of a beef I had for a while, as it almost seems paradoxical when comparing the Trading Card Game (yay! more choice!) model vs the Collectible Card Game (duh dull same old) :
having a lot of randomness (TCG) seems to dull the diversity of actual gameplay while enhancing the value (monetary) of particular cards needed for specific combos, thus justifying the need of further expansions to deal with the stratified, stale and sterile supremacy of certain decks and maintaining interest in the whole game with frequent iterations; i.e. flooding the senses by a stunning seizure-inducing display of semblance of diversity of elements of gameplay.
— then CCG has a fixed set with 0 randomness, but encourages experimentation with shared gameplay mechanics and resources → less variance, more strategy, in general. The challenge is not obtaining the top tier cards, but understanding the entrails of the game system and playing with ‘em. At least when not just grabbing premade (possibly brokenly OP) decks on the net… then again powerplayin’ will most certainly make you miss on all the flavorful interactions and roleplaying possibilities offered by the setting (Doomtown/Deadlands offers a lot of that).
TLDR: Raw power vs flexibility, ye olde dilemma. Also: having fun vs winning.
Pretty much the difference between Texas Holdem and Omaha (excitability vs stability)… or, at the very extreme, pay 2 win vs pay 4 bling, especially if you don’t design your own deck and only google the optimum stuff
As much as I’d love to see Fear Levels implemented, it pains me to admit it: having that extra layer of complexity might be a pain in the nether regions (pun intended) that could make the game balance nightmarish to manage for the devs.
I’m sure some sets of house rules & added flavour/powers to cards could make Fear Levels enjoyable even if imbalanced. Personally I like to add a roleplaying layer to my games, some kind of narrative to justify even the weirdest of gameplay elements and combos. It’s probably why I like AD&D (2e) more than 3/3.5e (d20): balance is practical but boring, crazy stuff is charming