Lucius and Malifaux Child

[Legislat]

The thing is I dont see them together at all and i wonder why. Is 1 SS  difference compared to Scribe not worth one more "Issue command" or "What lackeys are for" pet turn?

I htink the pottential is quite nice with Thralls in the pool. Thoughts?

[Ludvig]

Because pre errata the child didn't work well with him so people have discounted it and then not realised that changed possibly. There is also the fact that you can't issue command to a model that has already been targeted by it that turn so you can't get more ap from the same minion and there is a limit to how many minions you will wqnt to command.

The scribe is pretty aweome too, the defence boost and red tape are fairly powerful abilities for such a cheap model and post errata it is basically a significant minion as opposed to the insignificant peon of the child.

 

[4thstringer]

1 hour ago, Legislat said:

The thing is I dont see them together at all and i wonder why. Is 1 SS  difference compared to Scribe not worth one more "Issue command" or "What lackeys are for" pet turn?

I htink the pottential is quite nice with Thralls in the pool. Thoughts?

It certainly would be worth a try.  I agree with Ludvig that the Scribe is pretty stiff competition these days.  I would add that the scribe fits really well into the needs of a Lucius crew.

I dont see Lackeys being used often due to the suit requirement.  Issue command I'd have to read again but I don't think it would be limited in the way Ludvig is describing. 

[Ludvig]

16 minutes ago, 4thstringer said:

Issue command I'd have to read again but I don't think it would be limited in the way Ludvig is describing. 

"Target friendly minion which has not been targeted by this action this turn may..."

Doesn't leave any room for doubt.

[4thstringer]

26 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

"Target friendly minion which has not been targeted by this action this turn may..."

Doesn't leave any room for doubt.

Why doesn't it work the way "this action may only be used once per turn" does, so a copying model is able to use that ability because it isn't seen as the same instance?

[Ludvig]

3 minutes ago, 4thstringer said:

Why doesn't it work the way "this action may only be used once per turn" does, so a copying model is able to use that ability because it isn't seen as the same instance?

Because "this action may only be used once per turn" is an extremely specific exemption from the general case where every action with the same name is considered the same by the game even if it is found on different models. It is not formulated in a way that says once per turn limitations are generally to be considered on a model per model basis.

[4thstringer]

9 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

Because "this action may only be used once per turn" is an extremely specific exemption from the general case where every action with the same name is considered the same by the game even if it is found on different models. It is not formulated in a way that says once per turn limitations are generally to be considered on a model per model basis.

I don't get it.  The faq on once per turn isnt an errata, so its guiding principle, that it is a different action should apply.

[Ludvig]

10 minutes ago, 4thstringer said:

I don't get it.  The faq on once per turn isnt an errata, so its guiding principle, that it is a different action should apply.

Not sure what faq you are talking about. I am talking about the callout box in the basic rules.

Quote

Rules manual p 37:
Once Per Turn Actions
Some Actions note that they can only be taken “once per Turn.” This
only refers to the individual model. Although the model may only take
the Action once per Turn, other models may still take the Action.

 

The game never once mentions that different models have different actions with the same name but the designers thought it necessary to formulate this exception to the base rules. This text is clearly formulated on the assumption that the action found on different models is the same action so would normally be restricted but once per turn got a specific excemption from that.

It doesn't mention restrictions in general but is even using quotation marks to state which restriction doesn't transfer between models.

[solkan]

17 minutes ago, 4thstringer said:

I don't get it.  The faq on once per turn isnt an errata, so its guiding principle, that it is a different action should apply.

How is it a different action?

It's the Malifaux Child taking the action on master's card.  The text doesn't say "as if it were copied onto this card", or anything to Indicate that it should be reproduced or changed.

[4thstringer]

You're right.  That's main rules not FAQ.  My bad.  I should know better than to expect logical consistency at this point.

 

[Ludvig]

It would have been good in a way if different models had different actions. It would make Zoraida mirror matches a lot less confusing and up the power of Lucius + child and Cassandra's understudy in Colette crews since her errata. 

I've also seen an awful lot of neverborn players trying to copy Grave's push with a doppleganger, I even used to do that myself until someone pointed it out.

[Mr Janje]

Woah, why can't the Doppelganger copy Graves push sorry?

[Hatter]

2 hours ago, Mr Janje said:

Woah, why can't the Doppelganger copy Graves push sorry?

I honestly can't come up with an answer.  The ability doesn't mention Graves by name.  It is restricted to once per ally, but only by the model doing it. 

Hopefully they will enlighten us.

[Ludvig]

Sorry, I had misread the wording on Graves. There it says "this model" which is a lot more sensible. Then ai can go back to using that again.  If only more abilities were like that.

[solkan]

4 hours ago, Ludvig said:

It would have been good in a way if different models had different actions. It would make Zoraida mirror matches a lot less confusing and up the power of Lucius + child and Cassandra's understudy in Colette crews since her errata. 

I've also seen an awful lot of neverborn players trying to copy Grave's push with a doppleganger, I even used to do that myself until someone pointed it out.

Pointed out what?

Mr. Graves has an action Show You The Door which does not mention a model by name, either in its main text or in the text of its triggers.  It says "this model" on the card.

Fence Post does refer to a model by name,  but the copied action doesn't get to declare the trigger anyway.  Trigger text being part of the action text doesn't mean that the text of referenced actions are recursively part of the action text.

Edit:  Ninja'd.  

[Myyrä]

Different models have different actions, as is evident from the fact that multiple models can use once per turn action that has the same name. I have no idea what @Ludvig is thinking here.

[Ludvig]

45 minutes ago, Myyrä said:

Different models have different actions, as is evident from the fact that multiple models can use once per turn action that has the same name. I have no idea what @Ludvig is thinking here.

The multiple models can use the same once per turn action is a specific permission granted by the box on page 37. There is no general rule clarifying that all restrictions work like this. On issue command it seems clear that te model being targeted ia the one checking to see if it was already targeted just like prompt. This is not a restriction o taking the action but o who you can target which isn't covered by that callout box.

I was off my rocks on the Graves thing though, it has a very clear wording to allow for copying.

It's like how you are unable to obey a model that took an attack due to obey that turn. Doesn't matter which model or crew controlled the previous obey.

[Myyrä]

1 minute ago, Ludvig said:

The multiple models can use the same once per turn action is a specific permission granted by the box on page 37. There is no general rule clarifying that all restrictions work like this. On issue command it seems clear that te model being targeted ia the one checking to see if it was already targeted just like prompt.

It doesn't seem at all clear. There definitely isn't a general rule saying that all restrictions that aren't specifically covered by a callout box work differently. Is there any reason to assume that the callout box there is intended to give some special permission to make an exception for the rules, instead of just being there for clarification?

[Ludvig]

1 minute ago, Myyrä said:

It doesn't seem at all clear. There definitely isn't a general rule saying that all restrictions that aren't specifically covered by a callout box work differently. Is there any reason to assume that the callout box there is intended to give some special permission to make an exception for the rules, instead of just being there for clarification?

There is a big difference between a targeting restriction and a restriction on how many times per turn a model may take a particular action. Even if the box is intended to be interpreted broadly it doesn't give a carte blanche to ignore any restriction mentioning the word turn. The restriction on Issue command doesn't say you can't take the action again, it specifies the target must not have been targeted by "this action" (ssue command) this turn. I don't see anything suggesting it is this action taken by this model.

The callout box should have said that actions with the same name found on different models are not the same action if it was meant that way but it is formulated as an exception for one single wording of restrictions, even going so far as using quotation marks. 

 

[Adran]

8 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

The multiple models can use the same once per turn action is a specific permission granted by the box on page 37. There is no general rule clarifying that all restrictions work like this. On issue command it seems clear that te model being targeted ia the one checking to see if it was already targeted just like prompt. This is not a restriction o taking the action but o who you can target which isn't covered by that callout box.

I was off my rocks on the Graves thing though, it has a very clear wording to allow for copying.

It's like how you are unable to obey a model that took an attack due to obey that turn. Doesn't matter which model or crew controlled the previous obey.

The call out box basically says "once per turn" actions are once per turn per model. That's not granting any special permission. Thast just using the rule book to save space on several cards.  

But malifaux child can't issue commands to a model that has already been issued commands this turn becasue the action says it doesn't work.  I'm not sure how this isn't clear

[Myyrä]

What you guys are arguing is that "this action" in issue command means something different than it means in your normal once per turn actions.

Quote

Target friendly Minion model which has not been targeted by this Action this Turn may immediately take a (1) Action. If the target is a Guardsman or Mimic, increase this Action's range to 14.

Quote

Place a Scheme Marker in base contact with this Model. Then, place this model into base contact with target friendly model within 10" and place the target in base contact with the Scheme Marker which this Action placed. This Action may only be taken once per Turn.

What is the difference between these two? How can I know the difference without asking you?

[Adran]

33 minutes ago, Myyrä said:

What you guys are arguing is that "this action" in issue command means something different than it means in your normal once per turn actions.

What is the difference between these two? How can I know the difference without asking you?

I always can find time to answer you Myyra, so don't worry about that. 

I don't think I am making the argument that "this action" is different. I am saying that the Phrase "this action can only be taken once per turn" should be read as the phrase "this action can only be taken once per turn by this model", since that is what the rules tell me. 

That doesn't at all change "Target friendly Minion model which has not been targeted by this Action this Turn ".  If the model has been targeted by Issue commands it is no longer a legal target for Issue commands this turn.. If a model has taken an attack action caused by Obey, it is no longer a legal target for Obey from any model (during that activation) not just the model that made it attack. (so no Obeying a malifaux child to obey the model a second time for example).

I think the phrase "this action" is to save them writing the actions name each time, just like the phrase "this model" is used to save them writing the models name each time. (Granted the advantage of this model is multiple models can have the same action and the text needs to be the same).

 

 

[Ludvig]

Thank you @Adran. At least one person gets what I am saying.

[Myyrä]

10 minutes ago, Adran said:

I always can find time to answer you Myyra, so don't worry about that. 

I don't think I am making the argument that "this action" is different. I am saying that the Phrase "this action can only be taken once per turn" should be read as the phrase "this action can only be taken once per turn by this model", since that is what the rules tell me. 

That doesn't at all change "Target friendly Minion model which has not been targeted by this Action this Turn ".  If the model has been targeted by Issue commands it is no longer a legal target for Issue commands this turn.. If a model has taken an attack action caused by Obey, it is no longer a legal target for Obey from any model (during that activation) not just the model that made it attack. (so no Obeying a malifaux child to obey the model a second time for example).

Then why is Issue Command written in a way that more closely resembles once per turn actions than Obey? The rules don't explicitly tell us what it means when a model can only be targeted by an action once per turn. Wouldn't it make more sense that all actions that can do something once per turn would work similarly, especially when they essentially use the same wording?

Quote

I think the phrase "this action" is to save them writing the actions name each time, just like the phrase "this model" is used to save them writing the models name each time. (Granted the advantage of this model is multiple models can have the same action and the text needs to be the same).

That sounds to me like an opinion that is in no way backed by any facts.

2 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

Thank you @Adran. At least one person gets what I am saying.

I understand. I just don't agree.

[Ludvig]

The rules say that if you can only take an action once per turn that is on a model per model basis. That has nothing to do with the targeting restrictions on actions no matter how they are worded.

Your entire last comment sounds like opinion more than actual interpretation of the rules text. The whole "wouldn't it make more sense..." is clearly an opinion and you can't find rules text backing you. You usually go pretty hard for rules needing to actually say what they are supposed to so I don't get why you don't in this case. 

I guess you will just have to refrain from playing Lucius with the malifaux child if we face each other.