Lucius and Malifaux Child

[Adran]

Issue commands and Prompt are worded in similar ways (following the January errata) 

and in Aarons rough summery of the errata for prompt there is this 1 line

• Colette: Prompt is now once per turn per model.

Now this isn't the rules, but I feel confident that this model may only be targeted by this action once per turn means it doesn't matter the source of the action, just the name of the action. And followign that I am happy that reading Issue commands "Target friendly Minion model which has not been targeted by this Action this Turn... as a way of writing this can onl;y be targteded bythis action once per turn. 

[Myyrä]

9 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

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.

There is no way to know what "this Action" is supposed to mean with absolute certainty. I just think that the closest mechanic whose workings we do know for certain is the once per turn actions, and there "this Action" means the complete opposite of what you are trying to sell.

[Myyrä]

9 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

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.

There is no way to know what "this Action" is supposed to mean with absolute certainty. I just think that the closest mechanic whose workings we do know for certain is the once per turn actions, and there "this Action" means the complete opposite of what you are trying to sell.

[Myyrä]

12 minutes ago, Adran said:

Issue commands and Prompt are worded in similar ways (following the January errata) 

and in Aarons rough summery of the errata for prompt there is this 1 line

• Colette: Prompt is now once per turn per model.

Now this isn't the rules, but I feel confident that this model may only be targeted by this action once per turn means it doesn't matter the source of the action, just the name of the action. And followign that I am happy that reading Issue commands "Target friendly Minion model which has not been targeted by this Action this Turn... as a way of writing this can onl;y be targteded bythis action once per turn. 

Is the once per turn per model there per acting model or target model? I read that oneliner differently than you do.

[trikk]

22 hours ago, Myyrä said:

Is the once per turn per model there per acting model or target model? I read that oneliner differently than you do.

I agree with Myyra. I think you can both Prompt and Issue Command on one model from 2 different sources. So you can Prompt a model from Colette, Prompt it using Understudy and Prompt it using Malifaux Child.

In most instances "This Action" refers to a specific action taken by a specific model. Else once per turn actions and Graves+Doppel combo don`t make sense.

If the wording would be "Target friendly Minion model which has not been targeted by Issue Command this turn" I think Ludvig and Adran would be right.

[Ludvig]

The other function where "this action" is used  is for stuff like Raspy's Overpower trigger where it says "This action may not declare Triggers." There it is (hopefully) referencing the specific casting of the action. I guess it could be assumed to also reference all castings of December's curse by the same model that turn so you can't declare triggers on subsequent curses taken with her remaining ap?

I still don't find any compelling reason to view "this action" as all instances of the action on the model. For me it has always been either "this particular casting" or "the action you are taken that can sometimes be found on other models".

 

I still can't get around that callout box: 
"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."

This clearly states that even though one model technically says the action may not be taken again other models are allowed to take the action. They can't just take other actions with the same name or anything, it clarifies that they can take the action in question. If we play with the idea that an errata came out saying "Strike that out of the book with a pen and play as if it wasn't there." Would you then say that the rest of the rules made it seem likely you could take multiple once per turn actions on different models or not? I mean if someone removed the rules that you can't charge while engaged there wouldn't remain anything saying you couldn't so I would assume you could. This seems like a similar situation but reversed.

 

In the faq under the title "Actions and abilities found across multiple factions" it references "The Lure action". Shouldn't it be "a lure action" if different lures were different actions for each model? 

"62. If a model with the Lure Action targets a model in base contact, can Lure be used to move the targeted
model, so long as it ends in base contact with the model taking the Lure Action?"

[trikk]

9 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

The other function where "this action" is used  is for stuff like Raspy's Overpower trigger where it says "This action may not declare Triggers." There it is (hopefully) referencing the specific casting of the action. I guess it could be assumed to also reference all castings of December's curse by the same model that turn so you can't declare triggers on subsequent curses taken with her remaining ap?

I still don't find any compelling reason to view "this action" as all instances of the action on the model. For me it has always been either "this particular casting" or "the action you are taken that can sometimes be found on other models".

 

I still can't get around that callout box: 
"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."

This clearly states that even though one model technically says the action may not be taken again other models are allowed to take the action. They can't just take other actions with the same name or anything, it clarifies that they can take the action in question. If we play with the idea that an errata came out saying "Strike that out of the book with a pen and play as if it wasn't there." Would you then say that the rest of the rules made it seem likely you could take multiple once per turn actions on different models or not?

 

In the faq under the title "Actions and abilities found across multiple factions" it references "The Lure action". Shouldn't it be "a lure action" if different lures were different actions for each model? 

"62. If a model with the Lure Action targets a model in base contact, can Lure be used to move the targeted
model, so long as it ends in base contact with the model taking the Lure Action?"

Oh I agree that it isn`t "in all instances" and I agree the wording is somewhat contradicting.

 

I also think Issue Command could be worded better to something like "This action can target a single model once per turn" or something and then it would be consistent with the rest.

I think while the wording is different the intention is basically the same so I would extrapolate it to both as I don`t think there is a 100% clear answer. 

 

 

[Ludvig]

Agreed. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be gamebreaking to play it your way either, I just usually err on the side of caution when things seem unclear.

[Adran]

23 hours ago, Myyrä said:

Is the once per turn per model there per acting model or target model? I read that oneliner differently than you do.

I spent a while reading all the threads could find discussing the change, and I didn't see anyone suggest actions based on your reading (such as prompting Howard, then prompting Cassandra to prompt Howard again) to get around this reduction. 

I read it as once per turn per target model, as the action isn't once per turn per acting model (and once per turn per target model per acting model feels like they might have said that as it needs lots more adding.

[trikk]

1 hour ago, Adran said:

I spent a while reading all the threads could find discussing the change, and I didn't see anyone suggest actions based on your reading (such as prompting Howard, then prompting Cassandra to prompt Howard again) to get around this reduction. 

I read it as once per turn per target model, as the action isn't once per turn per acting model (and once per turn per target model per acting model feels like they might have said that as it needs lots more adding.

But if we assume that actions that say "This action can be taken once per turn" was clarified that it means "per model" then it means that if Raspi uses Ice Pillars and Wendigo uses Ice Pillars they are not the same action because they are from a different model. So if a model was targeted by Issue Command (this action) means Issue Command on Lucius. He can also be targeted by Issue Command on Malifaux child.

 

I agree that its wonky and you have some very compelling arguments but I think its FAQ material and a mod should move the discussion to the rules forum.

[Myyrä]

1 hour ago, Adran said:

I spent a while reading all the threads could find discussing the change, and I didn't see anyone suggest actions based on your reading (such as prompting Howard, then prompting Cassandra to prompt Howard again) to get around this reduction.

Did you see anyone of note saying it couldn't be done?

[Adran]

8 minutes ago, trikk said:

But if we assume that actions that say "This action can be taken once per turn" was clarified that it means "per model" then it means that if Raspi uses Ice Pillars and Wendigo uses Ice Pillars they are not the same action because they are from a different model. So if a model was targeted by Issue Command (this action) means Issue Command on Lucius. He can also be targeted by Issue Command on Malifaux child.

 

I agree that its wonky and you have some very compelling arguments but I think its FAQ material and a mod should move the discussion to the rules forum.

I don't make your original assumption.

The rule book is the starting place for rules. Its not there to clarify the cards, its the other way round. So the rule book is not clarifying what "Ice pillars" does, "ice pillars" is phrased to conform to what the rule book says.

I don't think something has to be in the rules forum to make it to the FAQ so its probably not worth moving the thread. 

And @Myrra No I didn't see anyone say it couldn't be done. Its not proof people read it my way, its just an absence of people reading it your way, and talking about using it that way. 

 

 

 

 

[trikk]

3 minutes ago, Adran said:

I don't make your original assumption.

The rule book is the starting place for rules. Its not there to clarify the cards, its the other way round. So the rule book is not clarifying what "Ice pillars" does, "ice pillars" is phrased to conform to what the rule book says.

Still. If "this action can be taken once per turn" references "this action" as an action on a specific model then why do we think that "this action" in Issue Command references all Actions in the game name Issue Command?

[Adran]

3 minutes ago, trikk said:

Still. If "this action can be taken once per turn" references "this action" as an action on a specific model then why do we think that "this action" in Issue Command references all Actions in the game name Issue Command?

I don't think that "this action" just references a specific action on a specific model.

If there was some way for a model to have access to 2 actions with the same name  which were both "this action could be taken once per turn", it still wouldn't be allowed to do the action twice.  (Easiest Is both players hire the same Crossroads 7 model, and one is playing Jackdaw with Twist and turn)

[trikk]

3 minutes ago, Adran said:

I don't think that "this action" just references a specific action on a specific model.

If there was some way for a model to have access to 2 actions with the same name  which were both "this action could be taken once per turn", it still wouldn't be allowed to do the action twice.  (Easiest Is both players hire the same Crossroads 7 model, and one is playing Jackdaw with Twist and turn)

Thats a bad example because Jack (same model) would take the same action twice.

[Ludvig]

7 minutes ago, trikk said:

Thats a bad example because Jack (same model) would take the same action twice.

Not if he taked thr action from another card and actions with the same name are unique to the model.

[trikk]

2 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

Not if he taked thr action from another card and actions with the same name are unique to the model.

They are unique by the user not owner. Thats why Rapsi can cast Pillars and Wendigo can cast them. They are taken from the same card. But they have a different "user".

 

What I meant is that the Jack example doesn`t work for me because the same model is using the same action twice. In Issue Command the same model is being targeted by different actions since the models using it are different.

[Ludvig]

4 minutes ago, trikk said:

They are unique by the user not owner. Thats why Rapsi can cast Pillars and Wendigo can cast them. They are taken from the same card. But they have a different "user"

No, the exception on page 37 assumes that acrions on different models with the same name are the same acrion but says that you can take the same action as long as it is with another model. You and Myyrä argued that an identical action on a different model was in fac not the same action. By the interpretation of the rules you have been arguing for Jack Daw can borrow two different actions that just happen to share a name because the rules don't think they are the same action if they are found on different models.

[trikk]

6 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

By the interpretation of the rules you have been arguing for Jack Daw can borrow two different actions that just happen to share a name because the rules don't think they are the same action.

That`s pretty hypothetical. Are they the same or just share a name? He can`t because after he uses it the first time he can`t take it again because its the same model casting the same action.

Will O`Wisps have

Quote

This Action may only be taken once per Turn and only during this model's Activation.. A single model may only be targeted by Ever Changing Form once per Turn.

In this example its clear that it doesn`t matter if you have 3 wisps. You can only target someone once and I believe that is a wording that supports your idea.

[Adran]

20 minutes ago, trikk said:

Thats a bad example because Jack (same model) would take the same action twice.

Thats my point he would be taking different actions, that just happen to have the same name. He could copy "the Greed Spreads" (I think thats Greeds once per turn action) from 2 different places, so by your arguement they are 2 different actions, but he would be taking both. 

 

I agree that there are several different wordings out there that restrict targets, and the Wisps is clearest. But Prompt and Issue command are not as clear, and obey does something very different, 

[trikk]

2 minutes ago, Adran said:

Thats my point he would be taking different actions, that just happen to have the same name. He could copy "the Greed Spreads" (I think thats Greeds once per turn action) from 2 different places, so by your arguement they are 2 different actions, but he would be taking both. 

 

I agree that there are several different wordings out there that restrict targets, and the Wisps is clearest. But Prompt and Issue command are not as clear, and obey does something very different, 

I can agree that Wisps are the clearest and both prompt and Issue Command aren`t as clear. It they we`re we wouldn`t have a discussion. 

He could copy 2 but he can`t take the second one as (this model being Jack) took the action (Greed Spreads that does this and this) this turn.

Greed Spreads on Greed#1 and Greed Spreads on Greed#2 are not the same actions. Greed Spreads#1 on Jack is the same as Greed Spreads#2 on Jack.

[Adran]

11 minutes ago, trikk said:

I can agree that Wisps are the clearest and both prompt and Issue Command aren`t as clear. It they we`re we wouldn`t have a discussion. 

He could copy 2 but he can`t take the second one as (this model being Jack) took the action (Greed Spreads that does this and this) this turn.

Greed Spreads on Greed#1 and Greed Spreads on Greed#2 are not the same actions. Greed Spreads#1 on Jack is the same as Greed Spreads#2 on Jack.

So if you were to define "this action" your "this action" is translated as to all actions on this model with this name.(even if some of them aren't on the model at the time you take it)

1 hour ago, trikk said:

Still. If "this action can be taken once per turn" references "this action" as an action on a specific model then why do we think that "this action" in Issue Command references all Actions in the game name Issue Command?

My view is that For Jack there is a little thing that says "have you taken the Greed spreads? if so, then you can't take it again", and there is the same thing on targets of Issue command, "have you been targeted by Issue command? if so then you can't be targeted by it again". Regardless of the source of the greed spreads or the source of Issue command. 

[Ludvig]

Trikk you seem to be arguing for our interpretation that all actions with the same name are in fact the same action but when a new model takes it that model gets a special allowance to do so because of the rules box I quoted that specifically says it does. If Greed spreads on my Greed is not the same action as your greed spreads because it is on different models then it doesn't matter that Jack daw is taking two actions called the greed spreads because they have no relation since.they are on different models and just happen to share a name and effect. You can't have it both ways.

 

I think the wisps got their qording because these kinds of diacuasiona were already a thing. It's good that the game evolves, it's unfortunate they don't go back and faq old actions to have new, cleaner wordings if they are intended to qork the same way.

[Stonewall78]

Guess there really are two sides to this. Sonnia's flame wall is once per turn but the child can also count it. I think the differing question is that Lucius skill says that the skill may not be used on the same model again that turn. I would think the intent of the difference in wording is so no one also can also use the same skill on that model again that turn. Otherwise it would have just been worded once per turn.

[trikk]

1 minute ago, Stonewall78 said:

Guess there really are two sides to this. Sonnia's flame wall is once per turn but the child can also count it. I think the differing question is that Lucius skill says that the skill may not be used on the same model again that turn. I would think the intent of the difference in wording is so no one also can also use the same skill on that model again that turn. Otherwise it would have just been worded once per turn.

If it was once per turn Lucius could'nt use it twice on different models