so_diogenes

TT has easy access to focus+2 to negate the penalty to attacking him.

Pretty sure the reward is building a community of folks with whom you get to play a game that you love, which you don't need an official program to do. If you like the game so much that you want to build a community around it, do it. If you just want free stuff, maybe don't.

In GG17 I was playing a tournament with Arcanists and was at the top table for the final round. I had a Silent One as my frame for murder target. She got killed on turn 3 by my Resser opponent's Archie (a henchman, would have been a full 3 VP) and I just failed to announce it or give myself any points. I lost 5-3 and wound up in 4th place when I should have won 6-5 and won the tournament as the match containing the next 2 players tied.

Where'd you get the info about the schemes and strats for the event? I'll be there too and I can't seem to find where they posted that

Agreed, but it's not my complaint (see sandeep thread, page 8ish I think) I was just coming up with a way to address it. In other threads (and maybe that one too) people have talked about using a cheat sheet to mark off which of his actions have been taken via beacon both for when they're playing against and as a Sandeep crew.

Instead of adding the to arcane storm or making it so that actions taken by beacon can't declare triggers, what about making it so only tactical actions or only attack actions could be used by beacon? It seems like a common complaint is that people can't keep track of what sandeep players models can do, I think this could simplify that a bit.

I completely agree that it isn't much of a limiting factor. In my limited experience playing Sandeep it was never an issue to me (I play Neverborn almost exclusively now except the occasional practice game as another faction), I was just trying to clarify what @WWHSD said based on my interpretation. I'm kind of coming in during a heated discussion and not really trying to derail it, but having played Sandeep I think it could alleviate some concerns people have to reduce the range of Beacon without taking much away from Sandeep himself who I don't believe is particularly OP on his own.

I don't think he complained at all, I think he just was emphasizing that Someone else purported that he was claiming 12" was close which he clarifiied as

He's saying if a table is sufficiently covered with terrain, it is very unlikely that there is not blocking terrain over a 12" line of sight.

I believe you mean it seems.... Wyrd... I'll see myself out now.

Why is your opponent picking their models after knowing your master? You should only be declaring what faction you're each playing when you build your crew.

edited

Well that's the root of your question isn't it? Is the comma separated clause essential? I believe it is and that's why the commas are grammatically incorrect. If they meant to target when the discard happens I would hope they would have said "Flesh and metal: At the start of this model's activation it may discard a card. Then, target other friendly non-leader in 6" may take a (1) action at the end of this model's activation."

From an english perspective I don't think the second comma is correct. I've always played it to mean the discard happens at the start of the activation, then at the end of the activation a friendly non-leader model within 6" of the emissary's current position may take a (1) action. I don't think you can ignore the (at the end of this model's activation) part but maybe you can just consider the "if it does" to be equal to "then" So if you discard a card at the start of its activation a friendly non-leader model within 6" of where it ends its activation may take a (1) action

Manos == @Mason ressurectionists illuminati confirmed