No preview is available for Freaky Mutant Man - Kit Fisto & Nahdar Vebb.pdf because its size exceeds 1.0 MB. To view it, click the "Download" tab above.
This deck definately has some cool cards and I really would like to playtest it in the future. It looks like the deck will be much stronger in Team play than in 1on1 though but I don't think that's necessary a bad thing.
A SECOND LOOK... That's a pretty cool card, I would like it even more if the defender has to discard his defense card. Would make it much more valuable and since Kit only has one of it I don't think this would overpower him. But it would add another tactical element to the match.
FORCE PUSH: I would preffer that card to be more standard like, push your opponent in a straight line until he hits something/body and he receives the damage. Makes much more sence from a logical standpoint.
Is RICOCHET meant to harm ONLY somebody Fisto could attack at range or can it also be somebody adjacent AND does it have to be somebody else as the attacker or could he also hit the attacker with his DD?
Right now I'm not sure if I would rather have two GET BACK cards than two RICHOCHET...
(This update just now adjusted wording and attack values on REVENGE for clarity and balance, and added card draw to JEDI RESOLVE. As of this comment, the deck has still yet to be tested out.)
Thanks for the feedback!
With SECOND LOOK, I'm intending it as a way to feel out the opponent's defense; with the reusable nature of the card, I want to avoid it being that damaging to the opponent; if I were to implement that effect, I'd probably prevent SECOND LOOK from being reusable.
FORCE PUSH functions exactly like Yoda and Dooku's FORCE PUSH cards (and is in the middle damage-wise between the two); I want to see how it plays out with the rest of Fisto's kit before making changes to it, and if I were to implement a card like you're suggesting (and it sounds like a good card idea, just not sure if I want to give it to Fisto), I'd probably call it something like FORCE TOSS to distinguish it from the established effect of PUSH in the base game.
RICOCHET can damage a character adjacent to Fisto, just like ranged characters can attack adjacent characters, and it can be applied to the attacker; the attacker is, barring shenanigans from other custom decks (like the Smash Bros set's Samus deck), always a valid target for the effect by virtue of the attacker having to be in position to attack Fisto in the first place.
(As an aside, FORCE PUSH and RICOCHET are borrowed from the Geektopia Kit Fisto deck, which this deck started off as an alternate take on, but then I dropped the NAUTOLEAN INSIGHT concept from the deck entirely; I'd like to see if I could make a similar effect work, but I don't really have ideas, so...)
GET BACK might be better to have as a two-of, yeah, though I do want Nahdar to be fragile; what this deck might need is a way to force the opponent to attack Nahdar instead of Fisto, in order for JEDI RESOLVE to consistently work in a standard 1v1 (REVENGE being more of a back-up in team games). Again, haven't tested the deck out yet, so we'll see how it works.
The thing with FORCE PUSH is that it also sucks in the base game. That's the reason everybody I know plays it like I suggested, regardless of the wording. But of course, that's up to your liking.
IMO, Fisto needs a bread-and-butter 3x attack. It could be JEDI RESOLVE as an A8 perhaps, and drop either SECOND LOOK or PINCER AMBUSH or GET BACK NADHAR. If you do keep GET BACK NAHDAR, I suggest reworking it a bit. Keep the Fisto 6 movement the same in both cases. I would remove the empty space between the two "if then" statements. Just, "Move Fisto up to 6 spaces. If Nadhar is alive, move him next to Fisto and Nadhar recovers 2 damage. If Nadhar is destroyed, Fisto recovers 2 damage." You could up to 3 damage to make him more powerful, up to you.
Both these guys can't be sitting around waiting for the other to die. Another way to go with JEDI RESOLVE is A6/A9 against minors. He would struggle to kill majors without Nadhar though.
Here's an idea for REVENGE to make it a little more original: Make it an A3 no action, A4 if an ally is destroyed, A5 if Fisto is destroyed. A5 no action is really tough. What's fun about this, though, is it lets them team up to make up to 4 attacks in a single turn, more teamwork, plus it better sets up STRENGTH PREVAILS. It's an old card from a version of Qui & Obi from either Moonsylver or PD Magnus, that I had a lot of fun with. Obi-Wan's Fury was A3 no action, but A6 if Qui was destroyed, which was just devastating. Just food for thought, REVENGE is certainly fine the way it is, even if I don't like that card name for a Jedi.
All legit points and very good ideas. As FMM is still around the community it would be awsome if he maybe would change some things. Otherwise I porbably will create my own version soon as I like to change the letter to smaller ones etc...cosmetic stuff.
I like the idea with 3x JEDI RESOLVE, throwing out A SECOND LOOK... I also like the A6/A9 idea.
I would keep PINCER AMBUSH as I think the card is cool and reinforces the team play between the two and I like GET BACK NADHAR with your suggested changes. So he also keeps enough movement in his deck.
The REVENGE idea sounds fun and original but very powerful to have it twice in the deck. Maybe we should do what Lucas did and change the name to RETURN instead of REVENGE ;)
What is your take on the FORCE PUSH problem? Would you rather change it to pushing him in a straight line until he hits an obstacle or leave it as it is?
As far as the A6/A9 for minors, it probably means Fisto will get up and into the battle and more likely get killed first, freeing up Nadhar to finish the fight. It's sort of opposite the usual but I think it will work. Or, you could give Nadhar the minor-killing ability and leave Fisto with the death-powerup.
It's funny you should ask about FORCE PUSH, I just emailed the Geektopia guys today about how I think we should change how we play FORCE PUSH. Here's what I wrote:
FORCE PUSH allows you to move a character "to any empty space" but I think we should play it as "any number of spaces". The change is, I don't think we should allow it to break movement rules and let you move over or through obstacles and enemies. It is a Negative Play Experience when it happens to you. If you can't get to a spot without going through an enemy, then you shouldn't be able to get to that spot with FORCE PUSH. On the Geonosis map, for example, I don't want to be able to set up a [killbox] by placing 2 characters to the right of the obstacle, just one space apart, then just FORCE PUSH someone into it. That's a cheap way to play the game. It's even worse on the Kamino Platform.
The FORCE PUSH problems bothered my like forever as so many cards also have different kind of wordings on it. So in theory one needs to clean up all decks he plans to use with one way to word those cards and than set up house rules how to handle FORCE PUSH or include the rule already n the card text if it is not to wordy.
I like your suggested solution to it because I always felt if you handle FORCE PUSH with moving an opponent in a straight line, the card many times is just useless. Because in many occasions you can't really push them far away in a straight line because of obstacles or enemies surronding you. But your suggestion/solution sounds really cool and I will definately propose it when we play tomomrrow again to our group.
The other debate always was around the damage taken, as a FORCE PUSH per se doesn't cause any damage logic wise. So you have to push somebody into something or someone. So the question would it make sense like this "Move an adjacent character for X spaces until he is adjacent to another character or obstacle. After movement he takes X damage."?
Comments (10)
umondy said
at 7:23 am on Feb 18, 2017
This deck definately has some cool cards and I really would like to playtest it in the future. It looks like the deck will be much stronger in Team play than in 1on1 though but I don't think that's necessary a bad thing.
A SECOND LOOK... That's a pretty cool card, I would like it even more if the defender has to discard his defense card. Would make it much more valuable and since Kit only has one of it I don't think this would overpower him. But it would add another tactical element to the match.
FORCE PUSH: I would preffer that card to be more standard like, push your opponent in a straight line until he hits something/body and he receives the damage. Makes much more sence from a logical standpoint.
Is RICOCHET meant to harm ONLY somebody Fisto could attack at range or can it also be somebody adjacent AND does it have to be somebody else as the attacker or could he also hit the attacker with his DD?
Right now I'm not sure if I would rather have two GET BACK cards than two RICHOCHET...
Freaky Mutant Man said
at 11:41 pm on Feb 18, 2017
(This update just now adjusted wording and attack values on REVENGE for clarity and balance, and added card draw to JEDI RESOLVE. As of this comment, the deck has still yet to be tested out.)
Thanks for the feedback!
With SECOND LOOK, I'm intending it as a way to feel out the opponent's defense; with the reusable nature of the card, I want to avoid it being that damaging to the opponent; if I were to implement that effect, I'd probably prevent SECOND LOOK from being reusable.
FORCE PUSH functions exactly like Yoda and Dooku's FORCE PUSH cards (and is in the middle damage-wise between the two); I want to see how it plays out with the rest of Fisto's kit before making changes to it, and if I were to implement a card like you're suggesting (and it sounds like a good card idea, just not sure if I want to give it to Fisto), I'd probably call it something like FORCE TOSS to distinguish it from the established effect of PUSH in the base game.
RICOCHET can damage a character adjacent to Fisto, just like ranged characters can attack adjacent characters, and it can be applied to the attacker; the attacker is, barring shenanigans from other custom decks (like the Smash Bros set's Samus deck), always a valid target for the effect by virtue of the attacker having to be in position to attack Fisto in the first place.
(As an aside, FORCE PUSH and RICOCHET are borrowed from the Geektopia Kit Fisto deck, which this deck started off as an alternate take on, but then I dropped the NAUTOLEAN INSIGHT concept from the deck entirely; I'd like to see if I could make a similar effect work, but I don't really have ideas, so...)
GET BACK might be better to have as a two-of, yeah, though I do want Nahdar to be fragile; what this deck might need is a way to force the opponent to attack Nahdar instead of Fisto, in order for JEDI RESOLVE to consistently work in a standard 1v1 (REVENGE being more of a back-up in team games). Again, haven't tested the deck out yet, so we'll see how it works.
umondy said
at 5:57 am on Dec 23, 2017
Did you have the cahnce to play test it yet and how was your experience?
umondy said
at 2:32 pm on Mar 11, 2017
The thing with FORCE PUSH is that it also sucks in the base game. That's the reason everybody I know plays it like I suggested, regardless of the wording. But of course, that's up to your liking.
I'm curios how your play testing went.
Roman F said
at 9:02 am on Mar 1, 2018
IMO, Fisto needs a bread-and-butter 3x attack. It could be JEDI RESOLVE as an A8 perhaps, and drop either SECOND LOOK or PINCER AMBUSH or GET BACK NADHAR. If you do keep GET BACK NAHDAR, I suggest reworking it a bit. Keep the Fisto 6 movement the same in both cases. I would remove the empty space between the two "if then" statements. Just, "Move Fisto up to 6 spaces. If Nadhar is alive, move him next to Fisto and Nadhar recovers 2 damage. If Nadhar is destroyed, Fisto recovers 2 damage." You could up to 3 damage to make him more powerful, up to you.
Both these guys can't be sitting around waiting for the other to die. Another way to go with JEDI RESOLVE is A6/A9 against minors. He would struggle to kill majors without Nadhar though.
Here's an idea for REVENGE to make it a little more original: Make it an A3 no action, A4 if an ally is destroyed, A5 if Fisto is destroyed. A5 no action is really tough. What's fun about this, though, is it lets them team up to make up to 4 attacks in a single turn, more teamwork, plus it better sets up STRENGTH PREVAILS. It's an old card from a version of Qui & Obi from either Moonsylver or PD Magnus, that I had a lot of fun with. Obi-Wan's Fury was A3 no action, but A6 if Qui was destroyed, which was just devastating. Just food for thought, REVENGE is certainly fine the way it is, even if I don't like that card name for a Jedi.
umondy said
at 2:15 pm on Mar 1, 2018
All legit points and very good ideas. As FMM is still around the community it would be awsome if he maybe would change some things. Otherwise I porbably will create my own version soon as I like to change the letter to smaller ones etc...cosmetic stuff.
I like the idea with 3x JEDI RESOLVE, throwing out A SECOND LOOK... I also like the A6/A9 idea.
I would keep PINCER AMBUSH as I think the card is cool and reinforces the team play between the two and I like GET BACK NADHAR with your suggested changes. So he also keeps enough movement in his deck.
The REVENGE idea sounds fun and original but very powerful to have it twice in the deck. Maybe we should do what Lucas did and change the name to RETURN instead of REVENGE ;)
What is your take on the FORCE PUSH problem? Would you rather change it to pushing him in a straight line until he hits an obstacle or leave it as it is?
Roman F said
at 2:37 pm on Mar 1, 2018
As far as the A6/A9 for minors, it probably means Fisto will get up and into the battle and more likely get killed first, freeing up Nadhar to finish the fight. It's sort of opposite the usual but I think it will work. Or, you could give Nadhar the minor-killing ability and leave Fisto with the death-powerup.
It's funny you should ask about FORCE PUSH, I just emailed the Geektopia guys today about how I think we should change how we play FORCE PUSH. Here's what I wrote:
FORCE PUSH allows you to move a character "to any empty space" but I think we should play it as "any number of spaces". The change is, I don't think we should allow it to break movement rules and let you move over or through obstacles and enemies. It is a Negative Play Experience when it happens to you. If you can't get to a spot without going through an enemy, then you shouldn't be able to get to that spot with FORCE PUSH. On the Geonosis map, for example, I don't want to be able to set up a [killbox] by placing 2 characters to the right of the obstacle, just one space apart, then just FORCE PUSH someone into it. That's a cheap way to play the game. It's even worse on the Kamino Platform.
umondy said
at 5:09 am on Mar 2, 2018
The FORCE PUSH problems bothered my like forever as so many cards also have different kind of wordings on it. So in theory one needs to clean up all decks he plans to use with one way to word those cards and than set up house rules how to handle FORCE PUSH or include the rule already n the card text if it is not to wordy.
I like your suggested solution to it because I always felt if you handle FORCE PUSH with moving an opponent in a straight line, the card many times is just useless. Because in many occasions you can't really push them far away in a straight line because of obstacles or enemies surronding you. But your suggestion/solution sounds really cool and I will definately propose it when we play tomomrrow again to our group.
umondy said
at 5:28 am on Mar 2, 2018
The other debate always was around the damage taken, as a FORCE PUSH per se doesn't cause any damage logic wise. So you have to push somebody into something or someone. So the question would it make sense like this "Move an adjacent character for X spaces until he is adjacent to another character or obstacle. After movement he takes X damage."?
umondy said
at 5:29 am on Mar 2, 2018
I like the idea to do it "opposite of usual" and will probably tweak and "fix" the deck and see how it looks after that to get a feel for it.
You don't have permission to comment on this page.