Kbonn

They are clearly legal.

sure thing. So i have typically found that while expensive, the emissary provides a lot of benefit for his cost. Ditto asura, Both of these models can lay down areas where you will be able to place zombies in and advanced location, which can be very threatening when you have reva able to attack through them. Asura also allows your zombies to make a debuff attack from 10" away from the model they want to debuff, which makes them extra annoying.

I just find that good players can find creative ways to deny you the third point once you reveal you have it.

Get better at the game in general would be my advice. The notion that Bete is the auto take and that Asura and Emissary are the point sink is backwards. Vendetta is also a good choice, though it likely means you are playing for 9 instead of 10 points.

Whodares is correct. The action is not listed as a (0) action, so sensei cannot copy it.

The idea would be getting a lot out of take back the night for card draw, and the shikome and goryo can all charge as a 1 actions out of activation with fury of yomi if the target has poison or adversary.

I suspect you'd have better luck with something like this.... Yan lo: awakening, follow footsteps, (wronged spirits can be added if you take onryo) Soul porter Rogue Necromancy: take back the night. little gasser little gasser shikome shikome goryo 4-5ss minion (onryo, belle, etc..) You can also swap out the goryo for sebastion.

Lol, what makes you think wyrd doesn't do this already? Do you just want you to show you their entire process so you can judge if it is "valid". I have to agree with loki, the OP seems to feel very entitled. If you are so concerned about wyrd listening to certain folks (who generally try to provide evidence themselves to wyrd) why do you just try to make a better argument instead of just accusing wyrd's game devs of not doing their jobs. During GG2018 open playtest I made several arguments to Aaron about certain balance issues. This is why we have the matched schemes to strats instead of one "always". This is why we have the balance between killing and not killing schemes. I spelled out my issues, and used Math to show the change between GG2017 and early GG2018 to back up my point. You can get what you want. It just takes effort on your part, and for you to be right.

If you are taking Asura and the Emissary, I'd consider Maniacal laugh for the 3rd upgrade.

This is not correct. Target is being used in two ways. One to describe the choice being made by the action player. In another way to describe the model that will suffer the effects of the action. These two things are not the same. You cannot rationally claim that I targeted model X, if I targeted model Y and, through a random process, Model X suffered the effects. These are simply game terms being used to describe "missing". If I(a person in real life) try to shoot person A, but miss, and hit Person B, who was fighting with person A. Did I "target" person B? Or did person B simply suffer the effects of my action? Trying to appeal to the real world only makes your argument weaker, not stronger. Your only avenue to being correct is to argue that MLH wording refers to any and all version of what "target" could mean, even though I think it is obvious that it does not. The entire reason why we have the randomization rules is to in game terms describe how likely you are to MISS YOUR TARGET. We know from both real news stories and TV shows/Movies that shooting the wrong target in this way is a pretty common event.

@santaclaws01 Your bolded portion doesn't seem relevant to me. MLH wording never states that the model can't end up becoming a target somehow, simply that it may not be targeted.

She hardly give free activation control, she generates 1 mindless zombie a turn. She doesn't directly do damage at all. She is an amazing support piece. It buffs all weak rezzer models so that their cheap activations can always do something meaningful (debuff enemy models, or do a decent attack to things close to them). I could see an argument for making some of her abilities part of an upgrade instead of all coming stock, but how many times has wyrd missed that in the other direction? There is no comparison to riders. They fill a completely different role. That is to say, they are incredibly good, but I am not sure you are complaining about the important part. Lampads are solid models that require planning and work to make them worth their cost. (however, kentauri certainly help with this).

I don't have all the relevant wording currently to cut and paste, but I will do my best to make the case with what I have. 1) Actions: This is what I believe MLH is referring to. Unless I am within the 3" I cannot choose a model with Dark protection as a target at this step. Similar to needing LOS to the model that would be the target (unless the action specifically has an exception for LOS). 2) Randomizing projectiles: As you can see here, randomizing into combat allows models that could not be targeted at the declaration of the attack. Both Range and LOS are given here as explicitly not mattering. I would put forward that this is because you aren't targeting the model, but it becomes the target through another process that directly tells you it works even if you couldn't legally make the declaration at the initiation of the action. This is the closest ruling we'd have to MLH, and I think it follows the same logic. You could even argue it directly answers the question (excepting range, specifically), since you need to be "in range" of 3" to target a models using MLH.

Hold on. There is a difference between "targetting" a model, IE a declared action. And randomization resulting in the model "becoming a target". MLH states that the model cannot be "targetted" not that it cannot become a target.

almost like any perceived issues are more about certain masters than factions as a whole.

This seems pretty silly. how are you hitting that often if you are dumping your hand. File this one under "technically possible", but also useless.

You are not reading the rule book rules correctly. End of turn points are all scored at the same time. No upgrade is required for this.

This entire plan relies on the hamelin player not being very good at malifaux or possibly just new to hamelin. The hamelin player will have numerous options to negate this from working and ensure it won't work, for the cost of like 1 card.

Eh, it is a free flowing conversation, there are bound to be mistakes. I always mostly find listening to others discuss options helps me consider those same options more completely.

Couple of points after listening: McCabe: I would always run him with cloak, promises, and loot bag to start now (I also almost always play the emissary). Yan lo's Follow footsteps does not get you +3 chi if you opponent scores (strat(1vp), scheme 1(1vp) and scheme 2(1vp)) at the end of the turn. All end of turn vp is scored at the same step, so it is still only one instance of gaining VP.

Well, Yan lo just changed a lot with the wave 5 upgrades coming out. I would strongly recommend the shadow emissary for Yan lo. As for another master, Shen long is a pretty good compliment for any master, asami could also work for this.

Mei killing things is hardly 100%, esp if your cards aren't the best. Yas has 12 wounds, and betty is def 6 with stone options, so if Duncan's hand is better, mei isn't going to kill betty. But w/e, Derrek clearly made the right choice, but I don't find mei locking models down as somehow "unusual".

lol, "Derrek Used Mei in an unusually defensive manner going defensive and Venting Steam" wtf? how is unusual?

lol

Take McCabe and the emissary + TCW. McCabe takes 3 non BAdge upgrades, and then TCW lets him swap for one. So now you have two, and the emissary can keep being throw it, using nimble and then handing it to someone else.