Brundali Rail Heist Spoilers, Speculation, and Discussion

Magetorment · Post by **Magetorment** » Fri May 08, 2015 9:12 pm

Spoiler season for the new set is in full swing and the new mechanics have been unveiled! What does the future hold for Furoticon? What wonderful new art awaits us? What beautiful new lovers have yet to be revealed? What amazing new cards are just around the corner and what amazing decks can be made from them?

So let the speculations begin! What do you all think is coming? What questions do you have about the new characters, settings, and mechanics? What wild new decks or combos do you already see?

Currently Revealed Cards 015/137

captainbozo · Post by **captainbozo** » Sun May 10, 2015 10:42 pm

I speculate that Dame Tulatu is absolutely the cutest dog we've had so far, and I want everything to do with that last picture on today's spoiler. Murrr~

Kaia_Cougar · Post by **Kaia_Cougar** » Tue May 12, 2015 8:18 pm

Card gender breakdown by Number (assumes gender parity is preserved):

#1-27

#28

or

#29-54

#55-56

or

#57-81

#82-84

or

#85-108

#109-112

or dual gender

I've gotten really good at this when populating my card spreadsheet with new spoilers...

Triss · Post by **Triss** » Wed May 13, 2015 9:03 am

Kaia_Cougar wrote:Card gender breakdown by Number (assumes gender parity is preserved):

#1-27
#28 or
#29-54
#55-56 or
#57-81
#82-84 or
#85-108
#109-112 or dual gender

I've gotten really good at this when populating my card spreadsheet with new spoilers...

So the interesting thing about this is that if it's true that leaves one dual gender card for each of four decks possibly? Four two gender decks with one dual gender power card each? but this doesn't take account of special havens or answer what 113 to 137 are. At least four owners.

What else?

As for combos, Asyarhi and Wahid. Helpful Archivist, gently carress, pass the buck ect assorted other herm and male cards to lock down your opponents side, make them temporarily generous and increase their pleasure output in the event someone does manage to get a wall of furries up before you get them out. Then again, if they hit the table you might not need anything else.

polkakitty · Post by **polkakitty** » Wed May 13, 2015 7:35 pm

Triss wrote:So the interesting thing about this is that if it's true that leaves one dual gender card for each of four decks possibly? Four two gender decks with one dual gender power card each? but this doesn't take account of special havens or answer what 113 to 137 are. At least four owners.

Owners have always actually used a separate numbering scheme. The owner cards that came with the very first set of starter decks were *1 to *4, and for each set, the owner cards have just counted up from there, without any maximum number listed. The last owner in Caramel is *39, so presumably, the first owner in Brundali should be numbered *40, and shouldn't count as part of the 137 regular cards.

I do wonder what characters will get to be Owners, though. Brothel Madam Darla and Brundali himself seem like prime candidates.

I never really paid much attention to this before, but so far in every set that's had dual-gender cards, the gender combinations have been listed in the same order:

,

, and

. Some sets haven't had every combination in them, but if there's at least 1 card with any 2 genders, there's always been at least 1 card with the other 2 genders as well (for instance, Di'Ahla's Awakening has

,

, and

, in that order. I don't think there would ever be a set with

and

as the only gender combinations.)

The interesting thing about the numbers we know for Brundali is that it's actually Asyari and Wahid that's setting the upper limit for the number of single-gender cards. There must be at least 27 cards of each single gender because Yang is #27, and there cannot be 29 or more of any single gender because if there were, Otherkind cards would reach up to 116, and Asyari and Wahid's spot at #115 would have to be an Otherkind card. So the number of cards of each single gender must be either 27 or 28, and the last single-gender card must be either 108 or 112 (which was what Kaia was showing with his breakdown of the numbers.)

So we know there is at least one

card, and we can reasonably assume that there is at least one

card. There may or may not be any

,

, or

cards (but if there are,

and

are all numbered before Asyari and Wahid and

and

are all numbered after it,) and with Asyari and Wahid at #115, there are either 2 or 6 dual-gender cards numbered before it. Theoretically, there could be 2 more

cards that are listed alphabetically before Asyari and Wahid, but I doubt that there would be. I think it's much more likely that there are either 1 each or 3 each of

and

cards listed before it. After the dual-gender cards, there might be one or two 3- or 4-gender cards, then special Havens, then a multiple of 4 Home Havens (there have always been an equal number of each, but the exact number has actually varied a lot: Tanglebrook has 3 variations of each Home Haven, while Fortune, despite having the greatest number of cards of any set apart from 1st Vanilla, only has 1 of each.)

(EDIT: I just found there's actually an inconsistency in the forum: the tooltips for the

,

, and

symbols say "Otherkin" instead of "Otherkind", even though the tooltips for

and

do correctly use "Otherkind".)

Magetorment · Post by **Magetorment** » Wed May 13, 2015 7:53 pm

My my, color me impressed. Digging into the numbers like that using just five cards. Now I'm starting to see how fans are able to extrapolate so much from so little. I'm not going to tell you how right or wrong those numbers are, but I'm impressed with your efforts none the less.

So, why don't we shift the gears of the conversion a bit? Of the revealed characters, who are you most excited to see more of?

Kaia_Cougar · Post by **Kaia_Cougar** » Wed May 13, 2015 8:32 pm

Triss wrote:
Kaia_Cougar wrote:Card gender breakdown by Number (assumes gender parity is preserved):

#1-27
#28 or
#29-54
#55-56 or
#57-81
#82-84 or
#85-108
#109-112 or dual gender

I've gotten really good at this when populating my card spreadsheet with new spoilers...
So the interesting thing about this is that if it's true that leaves one dual gender card for each of four decks possibly? Four two gender decks with one dual gender power card each? but this doesn't take account of special havens or answer what 113 to 137 are. At least four owners.

What else?

As for combos, Asyarhi and Wahid. Helpful Archivist, gently carress, pass the buck ect assorted other herm and male cards to lock down your opponents side, make them temporarily generous and increase their pleasure output in the event someone does manage to get a wall of furries up before you get them out. Then again, if they hit the table you might not need anything else.

I cannot yet speculate how many dual genders there are. I just know that 109-112 might or might not be dual genders, depending on if #28 is male or female.

Magetorment wrote:My my, color me impressed. Digging into the numbers like that using just five cards. Now I'm starting to see how fans are able to extrapolate so much from so little. I'm not going to tell you how right or wrong those numbers are, but I'm impressed with your efforts none the less.

So, why don't we shift the gears of the conversion a bit? Of the revealed characters, who are you most excited to see more of?

Why thank you. ^.^ I made a color coded spreadsheet with rarity symbols that allows me to input how many of each card I have, and also displays a "total" field for any cards that are reprinted by comparing card names in other rows. Though to be honest, I was able to predict so much for two reasons: 1.) Yang is so far down on males, and males always start at #1 2.) A dual gender card was shown, which let me find the maximum number of cards per gender.

I used to be able to predict the size of the dual-gender block with some accuracy, using the fact that dual genders have always been in the same order and same number per combo after Triskelion. However, Vell's End threw that into doubt by giving 4 to

but only 2 to

and

Oh, and Lemah is adorable. So adorable.

Drex · Post by **Drex** » Sat May 16, 2015 3:14 am

Keep in mind when reading this that I am not talking about males as the gender mechanic of Furoticon. I am talking about males as in the character depicted on the card art itself.

Is it just me or is there a seemingly low number of physically male characters that identify as male in the last few sets? Especially if they happen to be gay as well. The Caramel set only seems to have one male who identifies as male, physically is male, and is gay. That is Boy Toy.

These new spoilers are seeming to keep up with that trend with nearly all the spoilers so far featuring several herm or female characters with only a few physically male characters. Of the sexually explicit spoilers revealed so far, 2 of them have male characters in them. Only one has a suggestion of a gay character. The husky character and the tiger are having sex but the husky later is feeling up a herm, suggesting he is not exclusively gay. The tiger so far is the only character in all the spoilers shown to *possibly* be gay.

Sure it's early in the spoiler season, so it could just be that they're saving the male art for later. I don't know why they would do that, but it's definitely concerning as it stands now that there seems to be a heavy emphasis on herms and females at the moment.

Also males feel very under represented on box art as well. All of the previous sets you can purchase right now depict no males except one. The Strawberry big box is the only one that has a male character on it. Physical males that identify as male, in general seem to be getting less representation in terms of actual card art.

It also seems weird to me from a business stand point. I think anyone that has followed Furo as long as I have would agree that males are the most popular gender when it comes to sales. The wolves of tanglebrook did extremely well and the males of 1st vanilla were the first to sell out. Males, either gay or as pin ups, seem to be the most popular selling cards in the game yet they seem to be getting less of those in each set. Literally 2 male cards in Caramel fit that description I just gave. 7 in Fortune and 6 in DA. Any box set with males depicted on the front seem to sell the best as well yet only the Strawberry big box has male art in the last 4 sets?

Anyway, just an observation, call it what you will. I personally think gay males are vastly under represented in the last few sets and for a game that is suppose to be all about equality in gender/preference, it doesn't feel that way to me.

captainbozo · Post by **captainbozo** » Sat May 16, 2015 12:27 pm

First I would like to thank you for your feedback, Drex, because it's always important to see what people think about sets as they are released.

I don't agree with "physical males that identify as male". With the exception of Caramel, I'm pretty sure that all of the males in the last few sets are physically male.

If you are not counting Caramel and Sebastien, though, then yes, there has been less M/M card art than usual. Keep in mind, that two of the last 3 sets were minisets, so there are less opportunities. Most of the male cards in the set are solo art, and can't be classified in any particular direction. Caramel in particular had more SFW art than usual, showing known characters in relaxed settings, and had some great gay art (I am a big fan of Dicks Everywhere myself~).

Additionally, I could say that early Furoticon had a lot more M/M than M/F, ESPECIALLY in Strawberry, where almost every male interaction seemed to be M/M. Grizzwald the Hedonist is the only male card in that set that has M/F art, in fact. I, personally, felt that the amount of gay interaction in that set was pretty unbalanced, but that leads into my final point.

My intention for my post is to state that the game is trying to cater to everyone, and the amount of art in any one particular area will fluxuate. There will be sets with more M/M than others, and sets with a lot of M/F, and F/F, and so on. But if you don't like what you see, then PLEASE speak up! Furoticon's developers do read what goes on in the community, and we do keep all of the discussion in mind, so thank you again for your feedback.

Drex · Post by **Drex** » Sat May 16, 2015 1:44 pm

I typed this up on mobile so excuse any spelling mistakes!

I know early sets have had lots of males. That's not the issue. Justifying a lack of obviously male characters and gay interactions in the last several sets by saying they had time to shine previously doesn't work. Things change, and right now it seems the change is less males more of everything else. My concern is their representation now and going forward.

First vanilla was fine. Same with Trisk and even second vanilla. That's when things seem to slightly shift. Then you get to where we are now. Every adult spoiler so far has females and herms in them. With just two of them having males in them but with herms and females literally surrounding them.

Also it seems that if it's males, they need to be clothed and just doing something. There are plenty of male art that is G rated in the last few sets. It almost feels like they're ashamed of males and just cover them up. That's not to say I don't want some G rated cards. It adds flavor and makes the game not entirely about porn. It just seems the scales are tipping in favor of adult interactions not including males and definitely not including strictly gay males. The spoilers have a good example where the husky character is with the tiger. Then later is fooling around with a herm. That means he's not gay, he's some other preference, don't really know the term for it honestly.

So basically what in getting at is it's concerning that the last few sets and especially the spoilers so far show a huge shift in the direction of herms and females. Herms seems to especially be getting a lot more common. A lot of people don't and never will own cards from previous sets. Justifying the lack of adult rated male art and gay art by saying it's in old sets doesn't work. Take a perspective of a new player who has never touched the game. If he picked up a Caramel set, and was in to guys, he will be very disappointed because there is almost no gay interaction. Dicks Everywhere and the solo pin up of boy toy is it. Dicks everywhere could have herms on it for all we know too because you can't see their top half. They might be fooled by Caramel himself but the reality is he's not physically male.

Every set needs an equal balance because a new player needs to be able to pick up any set and appreciate the art for whatever preference they happen to be. When you throw in tons of herms and females in to the male cards, you heavily restrict what a gay male would find appealing.

To be honest, and this is going to be the most controversial thing I'll say about this probably. I think allowing any character to be in any gender is a bad idea. It's great you want everyone equal, the problem is the vast majority of people that buy cards just for the art are not going to like what they see if they are told they are buying a male deck and seeing a bunch of other genders. Same with female or herm. If the female deck has tons of physically male characters, the customer is going to feel ripped off because they didn't buy a female deck to see males. They bought it to see females. It's great you guys want to be all inclusive, but it shouldn't be done in a way that can hurt sales. Tons of people but the cards just because it has porn. They will never actually play the game. When you start getting all complex on gender identity you make those people feel like they can't buy what they want to see.

Tsumi · Post by **Tsumi** » Sat May 16, 2015 3:08 pm

Not even looking at the individual cards and the art depicted there, there is a pattern of display type art being non-male-centric. Lets take a look at the starter boxes(still available for sale) for the last few sets, newer to older:

Risqué Resolutions: FtM trans character art
Seductive Snowbunnies: 2 Female characters
Strength in Fellowship: 3 Female Characters
Grand Conductors: female form depicted with Herm character
Adventure Time!: Female character
Glutton's Paradise: Female form depicted with otherkin character
Bound and Determined: Female form depicted with two herm characters
Pain and Pleasure: Female form depicted with herm/female characters
Welcome Freshmen: Female character
Graduates and Gangbangs: two male characters

Not counting the Trans* character, we have to go back rather far to have Male art be a focal on starter decks. The art has been extremely female orientated for some time now, and people are starting to take notice. Speaking as a proxy, when new people start looking at the game, and they look for the deck/art that appeals to them, but when there clearly isn't any (cuz gay male furs want gay male art), they walk away. The Wolves deck sold out easily, part in that it was wolves, and part in that it was mostly gay art. The Male deck from 1st vanilla sold out in the same fashion due to it being appealing to that audience.

If the intention of the game is to cater to everyone, then clearly the last 4 sets and the current previews of the next have failed this. There is clearly a female/herm-form favor in the art.

Magetorment · Post by **Magetorment** » Sat May 16, 2015 3:34 pm

Drex, as always you feedback is appreciated. We always love hearing back from the fans good or bad, and we try to take the time to read everything people have to say even if we don't always reply to it.

But in this case I'm going to have to disagree with you on a few points. Let me start by saying we are still early into the spoiler season, with only 38 pieces of art spoiled for a 137 card set. Meaning we still have 99 more cards to go. Have no fear, there are exclusively gay males in this set and bisexual males in gay scenes. Have no fear, the boys are coming (giggidy). The reason you're not seeing any yet is because we are presently covering the main characters and the central plot line of the set. For mechanics reasons the main characters are paired up in duel gendered pairs, meaning none of the pairs are strictly homosexual in the traditional sense. Again, homosexual characters are in this set, but they're not a main character so you haven't seen them yet.

I would also like to note that Furoticon takes a very progressive stance on both gender identity and sexuality. As Seppel has stated several times in the past, we believe there is a fluidity to both sexuality and gender identification. Furoticon takes place in a world where non-traditional genders (herms, etc) are relatively common. As such most characters will fall into a gray area of preference, rather than full exclusion. We put in exclusionary homosexual and lesbian characters, and strictly straight characters, but for both philosophical and mechanical reasons we cannot make them the norm.

Regarding our stance on trans characters: I do apologize if this is offensive or unappealing to some, but it is one we stand by 100%. At present Caramel is the only character in Male or Female that is not physically male or female, and the response we received to Caramel was overwhelmingly positive.

As to Tsumi's point, bear in mind most of the sets have had a duel-gender focus to them, and in the case of the Strawberry boxes all four genders. For reasons of game mechanics most of those decks are duel gender, and are likely to include some degree of female bodied characters, be it herm or female. With that said you do have a point that it has been a while since we have done more masculine otherkind on promotional art. This is an issue that we will address in future sets. However we still stand by Caramel as a male card 100% and consider the Risque Resolutions to be an all male deck.

Drex · Post by **Drex** » Sat May 16, 2015 5:11 pm

The reason you're not seeing any yet is because we are presently covering the main characters and the central plot line of the set.

So you are basically proving my point here. There are a ton of herm/female characters in the main plot of the story so far yet there are just two males so far? Isn't that exactly my issue that males are taking a back seat to the other genders? You're basically saying that males are there but not important. Also since there are so few important males, that means there will be less male art in the game in general vs the other genders. How exactly is this comment suppose to prove me wrong?

As for the starter deck art, even if we add the Caramel box, that's 2/10 boxes depicting "male" characters. 6/10 of the decks have the male gender in them (two have all 4 genders) but only 2/10 display males on the box. How is this in any way equal?

Then we look at the Caramel set and see nearly no males in same sex adult situations except boy toy and caramel. Caramel being the gray area, it's easiest to just not include him in the debate honestly. You say he's male, I say not so much, but who are either of us to say what's right. The point is that if you exclude him from the cards and only talk about physical males with other physical males, there is only 1 card in all of Caramel that actually shows this. So either you're lacking in physical males, or lacking in gay males. In either case, it's simply not equal.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against bi males either. The problem is they are almost always being depicted with females/herms and very rarely being depicted with other guys or just alone.

Anyway, I just thought I'd point out this observation. You can say I'm wrong all you like, but the facts are there. Only 2 Caramel cards depict physical males in adult situations, I think it was 7 in Fortune, and 6 in DA. 15 cards out of 333 cards over 3 sets have physical males in adult situations either alone or with other physical males. That's about 4% of the cards of those sets. Considering males have proven to be the best selling cards in the game, it kind of boggles my mind that the number is so low and so far Heist has not made it look any better for the dudes.

captainbozo · Post by **captainbozo** » Sat May 16, 2015 5:34 pm

Thank you for your contribution, Drex. You're right, if one considers Caramel to not be physically male, then there are very few adult situations with Male/Male interactions in the Caramel set.

And your stance makes sense, if I was looking for porn with physically male on physically male individuals, then I would be disappointed by the turn out in Caramel's art as well.

We appreciate the feedback, and we will continue to move forward with production keeping your feedback in mind. I personally intend to bring up this issue in the next developer meeting.

polkakitty · Post by **polkakitty** » Sat May 16, 2015 6:03 pm

Magetorment wrote:For mechanics reasons the main characters are paired up in duel gendered pairs, meaning none of the pairs are strictly homosexual in the traditional sense.

I think the question may actually be whether this is necessarily a good idea, or at least whether it's a good idea for every set to be arranged this way. I mean, there hasn't actually been a full-size single-gender starter deck since 1st Vanilla, even in the Vanilla sets, which are pretty much the designated place for new players to start, so if you give them a starter deck without enough Home Havens to make an effective single-gender deck (which would include any of the minidecks,) you're kind of forcing their first attempt at creating their own deck to be multi-gender. That's making things more complicated than they need to be, so I'm not sure it's a good choice just in terms of design. And since part of the purpose of the starter decks is to introduce the main characters of each set, I think the rest of the set largely has to follow where the starter decks go.

Also, when people are looking for a deck with a specific focus, "where are all the gay male cards" does seem to be the most common question they ask, judging from the forums and the comments on the front page. And Wolves of Tanglebrook, despite officially being Male/Otherkind, was purely a gay male deck in terms of art, and was promoted as such (for instance, the Wolf portfolio released as part of the Offbeatr campaign was classified as "Gay M/M".) As far as I can tell, the reasoning there seems to have been that Otherkind has mythical creatures in it, and the Alphus were enough in tune with magical and spiritual powers that they could count. But that seems to be before it was really pinned down what Otherkind was supposed to be. Still, even now, it has been established that, say, Glisten is considered Otherkind because sadism is more important to him then the gender of either him or any prospective partner. Because of things like that, I think there can still be Otherkind characters that are physically entirely male, and that are in relationships with physically male characters, but that isn't obvious to anyone who isn't already familiar with the game, and in any case, Otherkind includes so many other things that collecting Otherkind cards just to use in male-themed decks isn't really viable.

As for gay male characters in Brundali, well, we do know that there are Bokeh and Tsou. So far we've only seen one G-rated picture of them, but one has to assume we'll see a lot more of them once the heist actually begins (the spoilers that have been released so far have all focused on the day before the heist, which I guess fits in with the buildup that any heist movie would need.) And they were actually the characters that I wanted to see more of, because I just want to cuddle the big fluffy raccoon

I do think it's good for game mechanics to be spread across more than one gender, like what was done with Conductors, Adventurers, Fellowships, and (in terms of support cards, at least) Gluttons, since that means if you want a deck focusing on a specific theme or fetish, you aren't locked into one gender. I think the ideal case would probably be to always have in print both some starter decks focusing on specialized mechanics like the ones Fortune introduced, which would probably be multi-gender just because of the mechanics being so, but would mostly be intended for people who have been playing for at least long enough that finding other cards to use with them wouldn't be an issue, and some single-gender starter decks, including decks with art focused on relationships that are M/M, either M/F or F/F, and H/something (I suspect there are more people who are attracted to both herms and females than to both herms and males, but I'm sure by this point Seppel knows much more about that than I do.)

I feel like we're going into uncharted territory with all the herms in Furoticon. I mean, I like them, but as far as I'm aware, there's never been any actual research done about interest in the idea of herms and how, if at all, it correlates with people's gender and "official" sexual orientation. I've actually always kind of wished Kathy Gerbasi's Anthropomorphic Research Project would ask about those kinds of things, and I honestly think they're in a uniquely suitable position to investigate that, since, more than any other subculture I've ever seen, furry fandom has a combination of interest in herms, diversity of sexualities, and people who are secure enough about their sexuality that they won't just automatically deny having any interest in anything that's considered weird. But apparently they'd rather spend their time asking stupid questions like "would you become 0% human if you could?" (I think what they really meant was "would you be your fursona in real life if you could", and when they describe their results, they seem to be assuming that's what people interpreted the question as meaning. But I'm pretty sure a lot of furries, including myself, would look at that and think "well, I might want to really be a furry, but I wouldn't want to be a real-life animal, and furry characters, by definition, shouldn't count as being 0% human because they have human attributes.")

(But then, there was one year when I actually participated in that survey, and answered every question about my sexual interests completely honestly, and then that was the first year that, when they published their results, they made a comment about how they'd deleted some obviously fake entries sent in by trolls. So ever since then, I just haven't been able to take any research projects like that seriously.)

Drex · Post by **Drex** » Sat May 16, 2015 6:45 pm

Good post Polka, I agree with the more single gender decks. Also agree that mechanics should be spread out so that you're not stuck with one gender in order to play the way you want, only to a point though. I do want each gender to have its own unique feel, but things like keywords should be for all genders.

As for herms, I'm honestly not in to them. I have nothing against them either, I just don't want to see them dominate the game like they seem to be lately.

Anyway, liked the post, don't have much else to say about the topic. Hopefully we'll see a bit more equal representation in the future. ^^

Draj · Post by **Draj** » Mon May 18, 2015 7:14 pm

Drex wrote: Anyway, liked the post, don't have much else to say about the topic. Hopefully we'll see a bit more equal representation in the future. ^^

As long as you keep in mind "equal representation" is only 25%, not 50.
And if you throw on "exclusively gay", well, that quarters (or worse) the potential pool if representation is truely equal.

Drex · Post by **Drex** » Mon May 18, 2015 11:18 pm

Not sure where the 50% is coming from, but yeah, I want all genders to be equally represented in both adult and non-adult situations. The past few days I realized exclusively gay is probably a bit much. I really mostly meant, art that will appeal to people that happen to be gay. With that in mind, that would technically exclude anything with Caramel in it since he is not physically male, which is sort of what someone gay is interested in. Anyway, if I were to reword it, I would say more pictures that cater to a gay audience. Either pin ups, or gay situations are fine, even if the character is later depicted in other art with females or herms. The main issue I had, and what it really boils down to, is that the last few sets had less male on male or just male solo adult art than any other gender.

Using the same criteria on the other genders you get a huge boost to something like 28 cards featuring female/female or female solo and 32 herm/herm or herm solo pictures in the last 3 sets. This is compared to the 15 that males got in the last 3 sets.

The character really doesn't need to be strictly gay, I just would like to see more cards with m/m situations, or solo male pin ups, especially in the male gender of the game. The most recent spoilers have at least done that pretty well so far but that doesn't represent the full set, so we will have to wait and see how evenly balanced it turns out to be.

All in all, the more I thought about it, the more I felt I could narrow down exactly what was bugging me and it really is 3 things.

1. Not an equal amount of male/male adult situations vs f/f or h/h
2. Not an equal amount of solo male adult situations vs solo f or solo h.
3. Lack of male representation on box art and other products outside of just card art.

Bring those in line with the females/herms going forward, that's all I'm asking. I just want the Furo team to realize that this situation really is happening and that it needs to be fixed if they really want to be inclusive and equal.

Magetorment · Post by **Magetorment** » Mon May 18, 2015 11:32 pm

Well in that case Drex I'm happy to report that this set won't disappoint in that regard. Of the male cards in this set, only 2 of them feature non-male characters in the art.

Also new cards added to the spoiler. In addition to the new mechanics Shy is getting some love. We have four more old mechanics making a comeback in a big way. What could they be?

Drex · Post by **Drex** » Tue May 19, 2015 12:02 am

Magetorment wrote:Well in that case Drex I'm happy to report that this set won't disappoint in that regard. Of the male cards in this set, only 2 of them feature non-male characters in the art.

Also new cards added to the spoiler. In addition to the new mechanics Shy is getting some love. We have four more old mechanics making a comeback in a big way. What could they be?

I saw that. The shy mechanics seem interesting. I sort of always felt shy wasn't that great of a mechanic in the past. Glad to see it's getting some new uses. As for the art, that's good to hear! I like the art with Fresh Cadet in it that has been shown so far. He's cute.

His mechanics are interesting but I kind of wonder if it will work the way it seems to be intended. I don't really see people swinging with more than one fur while he's out, so they only giving him a little boost. A 10 SP 3/2/4/2 doesn't seem all that threatening. Especially when you compare it to renegade, that seems to heavily counter Fresh Cadet's ability. It could be used as a way to slow people down from swinging with a lot of furs though I suppose. For his cost I guess he doesn't seem too bad.

Officer Bandjar on the other hand seems way more powerful for the same cost. He's also common for some reason? He's got more initial PEs, isn't restricted to only putting out (but gets a bonus for swinging), and has 5 more SP than Fresh Cadet who is uncommon.

Just my thoughts anyway. I didn't play test this set, so I can't say for sure if Fresh Cadet's ability really is that good or not. People would intentionally be buffing him by swinging with more than one, so it seems like the wise bet is to just swing with one.

Taz · Post by **Taz** » Tue May 19, 2015 12:46 am

Maybe if they're playing Renegades (or one of the two weird solo evasion Adventurer cards from FAV), then it would be expected for your opponent to swing with only one Furre (and the latter obviously makes Cadet a non-issue anyway). In most cases, however, this would massively slow down the rate of pleasure they're dealing to you or your harem each turn.

Consider, for instance, that you actually are playing against an Officer Bandjar deck. You see Eager Cadet on the other side, so you decide to swing alone with, for example, an [card]Endowed Equine[/card], reasoning that you can take out the Cadet in two turns at minimal cost to your Equine. Your opponent subsequently puts out with the Cadet . . . as well as with [card]Sebastian, Boy Toy[/card] and [card]Waterboy[/card]. Now three Furres are pleasuring your one and you can only pleasure one of theirs. Sure, because Equine's stamina is just that massive, you could indeed take out Cadet in two turns that way, but afterwards he's threatened to be outlasted by Sebastian! Meanwhile, your opponent is still putting pressure on you with Bandjar and/or whatever else they might have up their sleeve. You're giving them time to set up, and the value that provides is all one could ask of any Shy Furre!

By the way, there's at least one Renegade in the set I'd recommend for the Male mirror match.

Roshiyu · Post by **Roshiyu** » Sat Jun 06, 2015 12:43 pm

By the way, there's at least one Renegade in the set I'd recommend for the Male mirror match.

I think I know exactly which one your talking about. :P

Magetorment · Post by **Magetorment** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 12:20 am

I bet you do Roshiyu. In fact I'm tempted to make that the next spoiler, but we have a few more single characters to reveal before going into those.

But to restart the chat and speculation, I'm going to give you all some numbers to play with.
We have 137 cards, not counting the new owners.
# 1-28

# 29-56

# 57-84

# 85-112

# 113-124 Dual
# 125-137 Havens

So kudos to Kaia for getting all those numbers right.

On top of that 4 old cards are getting reprinted. That's right, 4 cards we haven't seen in a long long time are coming back with a fresh coat of paint.

polkakitty · Post by **polkakitty** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 1:55 pm

With Bandjar and Meilianhari (

) at #113, Asyari and Wahid (

) at #115, and Tsou and Bokeh (

) at #118, it looks like the order of the multi-gender cards actually was different for this set. Anyway, I guess we're on track to have 2 of each combination. A question could be raised about whether the other 6 multi-gender cards will all be connected to each other in some way (like the $ANGRY $SPECIES cycle in Tanglebrook.) However, unlike Tanglebrook, the setting for Brundali doesn't really seem to have a culture specific to each gender combination that one can come from, so I think it's more likely that the other 2-gender cards will provide support for decks that use the new mechanics, along the lines of cards like [card]Looking for Love[/card], [card]Dinner and a Show[/card], and [card]Nightmare Orb[/card].

Magetorment wrote:On top of that 4 old cards are getting reprinted.

Based on the first picture in this post, I will guess that one of them is [card]Skeleton Key[/card].

Kaycat · Post by **Kaycat** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 2:27 pm

Because I am a hopeful person, and Mage said they hadn't been printed in a long time, I guess based on almost nothing at all thet the four reprints are the double home havens from first and second vanilla.

Astrid Varelse · Post by **Astrid Varelse** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 2:49 pm

Although I personally can't think of any examples... I wonder if any of the cards between 125-137 are gender-less non-havens...

As it stand however 4 of them are home havens... So that means there are 13 cards left.
Assuming 2 of each dual-gender cards, that means at least 6 of those cards will be dual-gender havens, then at least 1 dedicated AP haven. So that leaves 6 more... Dual + AP?

Additionally, I assume there will not be any tokens cards given that I don't think any of the revealed cards mention tokens.

polkakitty · Post by **polkakitty** » Mon Jun 08, 2015 6:07 am

BlackDragonIV wrote:Assuming 2 of each dual-gender cards, that means at least 6 of those cards will be dual-gender havens, then at least 1 dedicated AP haven.

Not necessarily, Strawberry had multi-gender cards but no multi-gender Havens. But come to think of it, when Fortune came out, I kind of wished there were

and

equivalents to [card]Boilerworks[/card], [card]Linzin's Domain[/card], [card]Sagewood Glen[/card], and [card]Spinner's Gate[/card]. Considering that Brundali has

and

starter decks, it's not inconceivable that there might be dual Havens with a similar gimmick to support those genders (each of the starter decks for Fortune had the appropriate dual-gender Haven in it.)

cuddles · Post by **cuddles** » Wed Jun 10, 2015 9:04 am

I feel that Plumeria has low stamina for her cost. Let's say you have a great hand and get her out turn three. Turn four she can now get a dream counter after swinging. Without cards that give dream counters to other cards, I see Plumeria getting two counters tops before going to the couch. Just wondering if anyone else feels the same way, or can think of a way to keep her out longer.

Draconis · Post by **Draconis** » Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:48 am

3 FP and 10 AP for 15 SP and her stats are actually pretty well balanced. Especially since she is Feisty and helps Generate a ton of AP if managed well with her.

I feel her SP is pretty balanced, to be honest. Given how much AP she is capable of generating. She's basically her own Non home haven card, though one is encouraged to swing or put out with her in order to benefit. Even if she makes it through 3 sessions in bed with barely any Stamina left, that's still 3 extra Ap you have which is huge.

Bear in mind as also stated, there are cards that can exhaust her without even entering bed. So once you have the AP where you want it, you can use that solution to gain benefit from her skill.

As for cards that aid her Stamina and help keep her in the scene, there are cards that do help according to the spoiler listings.

The following Female cards help regain SP, as females are infamous for turtling.

Sweet Dreams, Warm Hearts, Cuddle Puddle, Bathhouse Beauty, meditative Rest, Mikka, Patron Linetta, Pleasure Hunter, The Breath of Life, Sukouri's Mask, Suspension Bondage, Unlatch, and so on.

Then there is Bound for Labor, an Otherkin card, but is basically designed in mind for Female/Otherkin decks which boosts max SP. And to get that card into the scene you just need one otherkin GP. So a multi gender haven could take care of that.

There are definitely cards that not only heal her Sp, and works well with her mechanics, but cards that also boost Max SP as well. Bound for Labor for example as one of them.

Given that there are so many options for Females to regenerate their SP through these cards, it's one of the reasons why I feel her SP is sufficient. Especially given the strength of her skill and how much AP it can lead to. Herms for example have nowhere near the level of options of max sp or Stamina Regen outside of Tantric really, compared to females.

Females however, have a derth of choices that enable them to keep going and going and going until their lover is a puddle of goo.

polkakitty · Post by **polkakitty** » Mon Jun 15, 2015 1:08 am

So, anyone have any thoughts about the newly revealed checklist for Brundali? There are a lot of things in it that you'd probably expect, like a new Thrust variation (Unexpected Thrust) and cards for both of the individual characters in each of the dual-gender team-up cards, but what really stood out to me were actually Barren Beach, Gleaming Grasslands, Pallid Peaks, and Whispering Woods. They're obviously in some sort of cycle, and their names more or less correspond to Outskirts, Moorlands, Heights, and Forests, respectively. I think they might give you the effect of a Home Haven with an additional bonus (like [card]Balshik[/card]/[card]Panaway[/card]/[card]Rizah's Station[/card]/[card]Vanai Valley[/card]) or each of them might have a gender-specific skill to use (like [card]Gushing Geyser[/card]/[card]Hardwood Forest[/card]/[card]Shenanigan Swamp[/card]/[card]Slippery Sinkhole[/card]).

Astrid Varelse · Post by **Astrid Varelse** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 11:17 am

3 new cards! Really interested in Chief Tsou... So many free activated skills, thank god for the limit of 10

Also, they're already on my card list

Magetorment · Post by **Magetorment** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 5:25 pm

We're getting close to the end of spoiler season, and as the full list will be posted before the launch at Anthrocon. But you're all here because you want to see the new cards now. So here's another little nugget of knowledge just for you folks keeping an eye on this thread. With the launch of Brundali Rail Heist 7 more species will have enough representation to make species-specific decks. You've all already seen the Jackle and Coyote cards, be we have bats, bears, kangaroo, snake, and even a new taur character!

The next on the to-do list is wrapping up the unspoiled single-character cards of the couples and the havens two-parter. There's so many choices I can't decide, so I'm going to let all of you. Which would you rather see revealed next? The last of the main characters? The cycle Polka pointed out? Or the rest of the havens?

Astrid Varelse · Post by **Astrid Varelse** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 7:38 pm

Magetorment wrote:Which would you rather see revealed next? The last of the main characters? The cycle Polka pointed out? Or the rest of the havens?

I think it's high-time to switch it up with some Haven time!

cuddles · Post by **cuddles** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 9:55 pm

The havens have my vote, and the raccoon token too.

Drex · Post by **Drex** » Wed Jun 24, 2015 1:02 pm

Not a fan of the new double GP havens. Their costs are not balanced at all to one another. Losing 5 SP for example is kind of sucky but if it's a tournament with the mini decks and 25 life, it's 1/5 of your life...that's huge. The second worst is probably Whispering Woods which misplaces 2. In a standard deck that's 1/20 of the deck and in a mini deck tournament that's 1/10 of the deck. Now we get in to the ones that are better than the others. Pallid Peaks is probably slightly worse than Barren Beach, but they're pretty much neck and neck for the best of the bunch. The main reason is that you really lose nothing for playing either of them. If you plan your next turn to not draw, Barren Beach is the best because you not only lose nothing, but the other player doesn't get to see your cards. Pallid Peaks on the other hand you have to let them reorder the top 4 cards. The thing is, if you built your deck well, all this really does is gives the other player a slight advantage of knowing which cards are coming next.

All in all, the male version is the worst. I thought most people agreed that the 5 SP cost was too high to be paired with a 10 AP cost, but I guess not lol. The female version makes you misplace, but you can possibly use that to your advantage if done right. The herm version gives the other player a minor advantage for a few draws. The otherkind version has almost no negatives if used properly. Even if not, you miss out on essentially one turn of draws because the turn you play the card, you're unlikely to be drawing that same turn anyway because of lack of AP.

Anyway, that's just my thoughts. I think the costs weren't very well thought out in terms of balance. Sure they fit the flavor of that gender, but there are obvious good ones and obvious weak ones.

Taz · Post by **Taz** » Wed Jun 24, 2015 3:01 pm

Read the cards carefully. Especially Barren Beach, which explicitly says "reveal your hand." Can't exactly show your opponent your cards any better than that. Unless you play it with an otherwise empty hand, in which case, I hope you have a use for all that AP you're not going to be drawing with next turn, as Barren Beach not only locks you out of drawing the turn you play it, it locks you out "until the end of your next turn"! The only especially clever ploys I see are with Pallid Peaks and combining it with, as Mage mentioned, [card]Spread and Begging[/card], or perhaps another shuffle card like [card]Mesa[/card] or [card]Longshaft Library[/card].

Admittedly, Pallid Peaks was difficult to balance. Initially it made you discard a card, which made it absolutely worthless unless you intended to exploit that somehow, because you know what else costs two cards and generates

? Two [card]Heights[/card]. At least this way, if you're playing Herm Aggro and you don't have a way to reshuffle your deck, the loss of tempo you'd get from playing Pallid Peaks could be potentially devastating . . . of course, then again, so could not having that GP available in the first place! That's the beauty of these cards is that they're supposed to be a difficult play (and potentially devastating in a mirror-match)! But as Mage said, the initial double Havens are still extremely good cards (in spite of your insistence to the contrary), and the -5

cost all around was not at all an appropriate cost for some of them . . . [card]Inner Forests[/card], anyone?

ADD: By the way, Mage, if you're still reading, I don't think the Owner cards have been spoiled yet! Do you think now would be a good time to do so?

Astrid Varelse · Post by **Astrid Varelse** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:46 pm

I'm going to go off on a limb and say that the Brundali Rail Heist starter deck includes 2-booster each...

So if I were to purchase The Heist Starter Set I would effectively get 3 decks and 9 boosters, correct? (Total of 210 cards)

Post by **Seppel** » Sat Jun 27, 2015 12:48 pm

BlackDragonIV wrote:I'm going to go off on a limb and say that the Brundali Rail Heist starter deck includes 2-booster each...

So if I were to purchase The Heist Starter Set I would effectively get 3 decks and 9 boosters, correct? (Total of 210 cards)

Each Heist starter deck contains a 40-card deck, so the starter set would give you 3 decks and 3 boosters. (a little over 150 cards)

Astrid Varelse · Post by **Astrid Varelse** » Sat Jun 27, 2015 4:30 pm

Seppel wrote:Each Heist starter deck contains a 40-card deck, so the starter set would give you 3 decks and 3 boosters. (a little over 150 cards)

Huh? That's a shame... Back when I got my Fortune at Vell's End cards, each deck was a 40 cards deck which came with 2 boosters... -- Or atleast I got 2 boosters included with both decks.

Post by **Seppel** » Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:11 pm

BlackDragonIV wrote:
Seppel wrote:Each Heist starter deck contains a 40-card deck, so the starter set would give you 3 decks and 3 boosters. (a little over 150 cards)
Huh? That's a shame... Back when I got my Fortune at Vell's End cards, each deck was a 40 cards deck which came with 2 boosters... -- Or atleast I got 2 boosters included with both decks.

I... have no idea how that happened! Congratulations on your free cards!

Astrid Varelse · Post by **Astrid Varelse** » Wed Jul 01, 2015 9:57 am

Oh no! Dickbitch Molly's Training is missing the colon after hir skills cost.

Also -- How does Raishi work with cards such as [card]Overflow[/card]? (Alter target player)

Tegome · Post by **Tegome** » Wed Jul 01, 2015 12:53 pm

I'm not sure how it'd work technically (you gain control of it, and attach it to a Furre or not) but the Eternal Rules ensure the end result is the same: An alteration that is not altering anything is put onto its owner's couch. An alteration that is altering something that it can't alter is put onto its owner's couch. So whether you attach it to a Furre or leave it hanging in limbo (since Raishi doesn't allow you to attach an alteration to a player) you'll ultimately just be eliminating Overflow.

Taz · Post by **Taz** » Wed Jul 01, 2015 8:24 pm

Actually Tegome, you'd . . . huh.

I think Raishi needs a ruling/errata to clarify that rules rules text is supposed to say "If it's an Alteration that can alter a Furre".

Drex · Post by **Drex** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 12:07 am

Sounds like it was just a mistake in wording, but if we follow the card text literally, I would go with Tegome's ruling on it. If you took that particular alteration, Raishi doesn't allow you to attach it to a player. So since there is no valid target for the alteration you took, it'll just go to the couch.

polkakitty · Post by **polkakitty** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:06 pm

I think Tegome is definitely right about what would happen if you could use Raishi's skill to attach an Alteration to a Furre when it can't alter a Furre, but since that gives you the option of getting rid of any Alteration that doesn't alter Furres, I think we do need a ruling on whether you can do that. For instance, if [card]Annex Party[/card] is attached to one of your Havens, it will still make you lose

even if you control it, so it does actually matter whether you can attach it to a Furre and use the Eternal Rules to remove it from the scene entirely. (Drex may also have a point about there not being a valid target, unless there was a Furre that was also a Haven, which I don't think there ever will be.)

Tegome · Post by **Tegome** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 7:58 pm

There's precedent in [c]Jealousy[/c] allowing you to gain control of an Alteration and attach it to whatever. Raishi doesn't use that verbiage, and only allows attachment to Furres. So you steal Overflow, attach it to a Furre, Eternal Rules say NOPE, and Overflow is couched.

Taz: Yeah, starting to agree with you on the addendum. That'd only slightly nerf Raishi by making hir ineffective against the four player-altering cards. "My Raishi orgasms, and I gain control of your Overflow... which remains altering you. Welp." ...The best thing to do would just errata Raishi and give hir Jealousy's wording: "If it's an Alteration, attach it to something it can be attached to."

Astrid Varelse · Post by **Astrid Varelse** » Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:46 pm

So when can we expect more detailed rules on keywords such as Renegade and Meddler over on the Furoticon Wiki?

Regardless... 4 days, 4 genders, are we in for a gender countdown for release?

~tail wags uncontrollably~

Post by **Seppel** » Mon Jul 06, 2015 9:44 am

Kink, Renegade, Meddler, and Feisty have been added to the list of keywords!

Astrid Varelse · Post by **Astrid Varelse** » Mon Jul 06, 2015 9:22 pm

For Tolingale, is she multi-orgasmic in addition to the skills of the target Furre, or does multi-orgasmic replace the skills?

(I understand she'll copy PEs, Def. Type and Gender)

Magetorment · Post by **Magetorment** » Mon Jul 06, 2015 10:49 pm

She's multi-O in addition to any other skills.