Am I playing Changelings wrong?

[Ergonomic Cat]

So I was thinking about whether I cheated last night - I never use Changelings, but I feel like I should be, so I put them in my list.

Seamus was within 1" of a Changeling and a Mature Nephilim.  He was trying to run away, provoking disengaging strikes.

I took a strike with both the Mature and the Changeling, because the Changeling could steal the Mature's attacks.  And both of them got +Flips, since the Mature's attack gets them.

Was that correct?  I treated it as though the Changeling basically had the attack on his card whenever he needed it, but on reflection, I felt like that could be the wrong way to do it....

[exliontamer]

whoops

[Pikciwok]

You played it right. With his pathetic defense, Seamus wasn't going anywhere. The Neverborn duo would then feast on his putrid flesh with min. 4 damage attacks. 

EDIT: Nope, see @Redline's post

[Ergonomic Cat]

18 hours ago, Pikciwok said:

You played it right. With his pathetic defense, Seamus wasn't going anywhere. The Neverborn duo would then feast on his putrid flesh with min. 4 damage attacks. 

Ok.  My big concern was that the Changelings shouldn't have made the disengaging strikes, because they don't *have* a melee, except that they do, whenever they want.

[Redline]

From the FAQ:
 

Quote

116) The Changeling’s Copycat Ability allows them to take the Attacks of other models; how does this affect their engagement range? It does not. Actions which Changelings may be able to take due to Copycat are not factored in when determing whether a model is engaged for the purposes of disengaging strikes, shooting into combat, etc.

So I guess Changeling is not able to make any disengaging strikes.

[Ergonomic Cat]

36 minutes ago, Redline said:

From the FAQ:
 

So I guess Changeling is not able to make any disengaging strikes.

Man, I even checked the FAQ and completely missed it. 

[exliontamer]

2 hours ago, Redline said:

116) The Changeling’s Copycat Ability allows them to take the Attacks of other models; how does this affect their engagement range? It does not. Actions which Changelings may be able to take due to Copycat are not factored in when determing whether a model is engaged for the purposes of disengaging strikes, shooting into combat, etc.

This seems pretty inconsistent with the rules as written...but since they have ruled it this way I guess I can't argue with it.

[Ludvig]

10 hours ago, exliontamer said:

This seems pretty inconsistent with the rules as written...but since they have ruled it this way I guess I can't argue with it.

I find it reasonable. You take one of your  actions as a disengaging strike when someone tries to leave your engagement range. Since changelings don't have any attacks of their own they don't have an engagement range. Since you are never in their engagement range they can never take disengaging strikes. The changelings don't "have" any attack, the may take attacks from other models though. If their ability was worded in such a way that the attacks were considered printed on the changleing's card the faq answer would have been different.

Main rulebook on engagements: 

"Every model has an “engagement range” equal to the distance of its longest range Close () Attack."

[exliontamer]

7 hours ago, Ludvig said:

"Every model has an “engagement range” equal to the distance of its longest range Close () Attack."

Right, but it says NOTHING about that attack being printed on their card. Copycat reads "This model may take (1) Attack Actions printed on any model or Upgrade within Aura 3 which does not list a model by name." So for a Changeling its longest Close Attack can vary. Sometimes it has none, sometimes it'll have access to several. If there is a model with a Close Attack in Aura 3, and another or the same model within that Attack's engagement, strictly rules as written, Changeling should then have an Engagement Range and be able to take Disengaging Strikes. Apparently this isn't what Wyrd intended, so they should errata the Engagement rule to read "on their card" or errata the Changeling to read "These actions may not be taken as Disengaging Strikes." As it stands the FAQ is a very sloppy interpretation, if that's what they originally intended it makes more sense to errata than to FAQ.

[Ludvig]

11 minutes ago, exliontamer said:

Right, but it says NOTHING about that attack being printed on their card. Copycat reads "This model may take (1) Attack Actions printed on any model or Upgrade within Aura 3 which does not list a model by name." So for a Changeling its longest Close Attack can vary. Sometimes it has none, sometimes it'll have access to several. If there is a model with a Close Attack in Aura 3, and another or the same model within that Attack's engagement, strictly rules as written, Changeling should then have an Engagement Range and be able to take Disengaging Strikes. Apparently this isn't what Wyrd intended, so they should errata the Engagement rule to read "on their card" or errata the Changeling to read "These actions may not be taken as Disengaging Strikes." As it stands the FAQ is a very sloppy interpretation, if that's what they originally intended it makes more sense to errata than to FAQ.

It doesn't HAVE any attacks. It may take attacks printed on other models but you really only possess attacks on your own card or upgrades. The FAQ is brimming with "clarifications" that are actually erratas. People don't like having to buy new cards because one word was missing or something.

[exliontamer]

56 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

People don't like having to buy new cards because one word was missing or something.

Heh, well this is a silly statement considering Wyrd has specifically released errata for dozens of cards just to add a characteristic or something minor. But I get your point.

[thatlatinspeakingguy]

No offense guys, but I don't agree with the statement that this is some kind of pseudo-errata. To take disengaging strike you must be engaging your opponent in the first place. Changeling is not engaging him, so his ability can not trigger and he can not take an attack action printed on another model. I see that the difference between having an action and taking it is not clear for you, but it is more intuitive to take it for granted than to postulate the opposite - THAT would truly deserve a clarification imo.

[exliontamer]

1 hour ago, thatlatinspeakingguy said:

Changeling is not engaging him

Again, if you read the rules for Engagement literally in the rulebook then Changelings almost certainly are engaging anyone who is within their own engagement range of that Changeling. I understand Wyrd's position, and yours, but as written the rules don't agree. Have a quick re-read.

[Adran]

Engagement

Every model has an “engagement range” equal to the distance of its longest range
Close () Attack. Models are engaged with each other if either model is within the
engagement range of the other and at least one of the models has LoS to the other.

I don't have the copycat text to hand to put into here, but it is along the lines of being able to take (1) actions printed on other cards. It doesn't give it the action, so when it isn't taking an action, it doesn't have those actions. It does not have an engagement range, so whilst it can engage enemy models (by being inside their engagement range), it never reaches the criteria for a disengaging strike. 

Disengaging
If a model wishes to leave an enemy model’s
engagement range with a Walk Action, it must
declare that it wishes to do so before moving

 

Likewise, you can't "chain" copycat along a group of changelings to allow one to copy an action more than 3" from the owner of the action just  because its within 3" of a changling that is within 3" of the original action. 

[Ludvig]

12 hours ago, exliontamer said:

Again, if you read the rules for Engagement literally in the rulebook then Changelings almost certainly are engaging anyone who is within their own engagement range of that Changeling. I understand Wyrd's position, and yours, but as written the rules don't agree. Have a quick re-read.

This is true and that latin spekaing guy was sloppy in his wording. What triggers a disengaging strike isn't being engaged though, it's being within the opponent's range on one or more of their close attack. If you are reaching them with your close attack but they don't have one or have a shorter range, then you can walk away freely but you are still engaged so you can't charge or shoot etc.