Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Black blood pustule can damage a target with black blood, triggering black blood. With a stone for a mask trigger, you can do it twice with one action. Do that with both actions, and you have a total of 4 black blood pulses. You deal four to an ally, but four to enemies as well.
  3. how is it 4 damage? What am I missing in my sleep-deprived state?
  4. Today
  5. Don't forget that anything within 6" of Von Schtook loses any benefits from upgrades. So while that'd be good for picking off loners, it doesn't help going into the main bubble.
  6. Nope, not being able to black joker on the Fly With Me flips and damage tracks is pretty rad, and they have combat finesse and Regen +2, which is tankier than Hayreddin with his Df 6 and stone use. Honestly, he needs the BFJ and I need the card draw, and I don't want to put it on the Shaman because he'll lose the upgrade if/when he has to replace a mature. Hayreddin is the only not-reach-2" meleer I have, and he needs that BFJ to stay alive. Hayreddin is used to splat-bat people into the floor. He's got a better damage track than Nekima, essentially. Also he's our only summoner in Keyword. 2/3/4, plus Necrotic Decay for +2 damage, and because he took damage from the Necrotic Decay trigger, he provokes black blood, dealing an extra point of damage for effectively 4+1/5+1/6+1. to top it off, he has Blade Rush now, for a potential 4+1+1/5+1+1/6+1+1 damage track, all for a single AP. Finally, he has mask trigger for double-Pustule, for a potential 4 AoE undodgeable damage in a 2 inch pulse, not including his own Blood for Blood. Watching a model who thinks its safe with high stats, or serene countenance, or take the hit, but just eating 4 damage with no resist, is super clean. Or worse, multiple models in the radius.
  7. I'm going just link directly to the listing once it's ready. I just got everything photographed and packed up. Now I have to look up the retail names of each set and mini.
  8. My bad, I read that as swapping the upgrade to Hayreddin the first time. Ignore me xD
  9. I'm not saying it isnt nuts, and it would go onto another minion in the list. But is IR (and the minion-specific Mobile Warrior) not better suited to a Mature?
  10. Ancient pacts on minions is nuts (for the extra card draw). I'd not dismiss it lightly!
  11. The rulebook mentions "placed into the conflict" only in that single context. Stitched is the only model that I can find that even mentions the 'conflict'. Wyrd could have said "and adds it into the conflict" on the ability and cleared it all up, but I don't think their ability writing is that precise. I'd see these two definitions as identical (changing adds and place) I don't think Malifaux rules are so precise that we can differentiate between 'adding' into the conflict meaning part of the multiple cards, and 'placing' into the conflict as being the final card. Especially as this is the only instance of a model placing a card into the conflict, and accepting your/Solkan's interpretation gives such a bizarre outcome.
  12. Do you find yourself not putting IR on Hayreddin, and instead putting it onto a Mature to make it more of a tarpit/annoyance? The AP can go onto the BBS to keep the +2 to Initiative flips. Also, what are you usually bringing Hayreddin for?
  13. @Maniacal_cackle the difference with The Old Ways is that it's well written. It clearly states that you can only use it when you have no fate modifiers, and it says that you flip the card from the discard pile instead of the date deck. Fiendish Gamble, on the other hand, specifically states that you use your removed cars instead of flipping, without specifying what they mean by flip. If we presume that wyrd has thought the writing through (which I doubt, fiendish gamble was added as a late change) the fact that Fiendish Gamble doesn't say you can only use it when you have no fate modifiers implies that it can be used with fate modifiers. Placed into the conflict is consistently defined as the card you use in your final dual total, nowhere in the rules have I found a different use for the term. Since it's the exact same wording in every instance, including Fiendish Gamble, I read it as a rules term. Unlike flip where I will agree that there are several different uses.
  14. To further stoke those rumors, they were originally included in the Black Friday sale, and then snatched back out of the list. The plot thickens...
  15. @Angelshard, as in the rules forum, I disagree that it works that way, but one thing is certain: Wyrd definitely needs to have a look at the model and see if it is working the way they intend! It is of course useful to know how people have been playing it (if all the people saying Stitched are overpowered have been playing it one way... That's pretty telling!)
  16. I think it reasonable to think that 'a flip' is one instance and can involve several cards... But Fiendish Gamble doesn't replace 'a flip.' It says "when this model would flip a card". Those are two different things (a 'flip' being the instance of flipping several cards, while 'flipping a card' is the act of flipping an individual card). The 'clearly defined' argument in this instance (and many others) is a claim I find a bit dodgy. Malifaux rarely clearly defines terms (it doesn't use a glossary like many games do). You can also look at this page 8 text: You're clearly able to 'add' multiple cards to a conflict, but only one of them is 'placed' into the conflict in this case. However, given the wild variation in the use of terms already in this thread and the rules in this regard, I don't think it safe to draw the conclusion that just because Fiendish Gamble says 'place' it means specifically 'replace all the other cards that might have been flipped.' It seems more likely to me that under such an interpretation, it just stops you from using Fiendish Gamble at all when fate modifiers are applied (as you don't flip a card when modifiers are present, you flip multiple cards. The conditions of the ability are not met). This isn't necessarily how it works (there is also the option of it simply doesn't work with multi-card flips, but I'd answer that by: The Stitched has to decide if they are flipping from outside the game or the deck when they actually go to flip the card. Same as with The Old Ways. The step where you flip the card (step B of duels) is when you have to make the decision. You could also argue the decision has to be made in Step A ("If either player has any effects that resolve before performing a duel, they resolve now"), but same result. Since cards are flipped at the same time as the opponent in duels, you presumably have to decide before they flip. There's probably lots of ways to interpret this one, but I'd think that if you can use it in a mutli card flip, you have to use it before you know what any of the cards are (you flip all the cards simultaneously presumably, so your decision has to be made before you see any cards).
  17. @Maniacal_cackle I agree that fiendish gamble is way too good. It wasn't until I sat down to look at all the consequences of making GYL an attack action that I realised all the things you can get around with fiendish gamble (if you read the rules as I do). Stitched can pretty much ignore any effect that would put it at a minus flip, both offensively and defensively once per activation.
  18. I believe the relevant definition here is from page 9 under fate modifiers. "For each Fate Modifier on a flip, one additional card is revealed (so a + flip would reveal two cards, as would a - flip). When multiple cards are revealed as a result of Fate Modifiers, only one card is placed into the Conflict and the others are discarded." As I read it a flip can be several cards. But the flip is still one instance and therefore replaced by fiendish gamble. I also find think the most important term for this discussion is" placed into the conflict". This is clearly defined as the card that is used for the final dual total and fiendish gamble says that this is the card that you take from the removed cards. If we try to create a situation where the gamble only replaces one card you have the problem that there's no timing on the flip. When does the stitched decide if it wants to use fiendish gamble? Can it wait until the opponent has flipped all his cards? Does it have to be the first card it flips or can it be a subsequent card?
  19. Unfortunately Wild Ones are some of the few models not to get M3E cards yet, presumably due to McCabe no longer having Guild stuff in his hiring pool. Rumor has it that something will be done with them later, maybe as Explorers Society stuff, but only time will tell.
  20. I've put that in the rules forum, and there is one answer so far which doesn't really make sense to me. If that is how Fiendish Gamble works, that makes Stitched even more ridiculous. I'm curious if that is how everyone has been playing it? Being able to turn a successful melee attack into an automatic-ish four damage is far more nuts than Gamble Your Life.
  21. I'm sorry if this is something that has already been discussed (I did try to look everywhere for an answer before posting) but do the Rollins / Iggy Pup / Cherri Bomb set of models have 3e cards anywhere? I can't find them in the special edition folder of TT (I looked in the Guild as well... just on the off chance) and I looked on Wargame Vault as well. Sorry again if this has been covered somewhere else... but I just got back into the game and the Wild Ones are my favorite set of models and I don't want to have to use the horse rider McCabe card if I can avoid it... Thanks in advance for any help cracking this nut.
  22. Where are you getting this part from? "Flip a card" appears twice in the rules (initiative flips) and 3 times on cards (McTavish, Stitched, Prospector). "Flips a card" is used twice (for soulstone use). And flips is clearly used generically/with different meanings at different times (otherwise flipping five cards to generate a scheme pool on page 42 would result in one scheme being selected). There's at least a noun (a flip is required) and a verb (flip a card) version of the word 'flip' that is used, so trying to pin it all down to one meaning seems contrary to the way the word is used. You seem to be referring to the noun ("flip a card is the process of..."), but Stitched use it as the verb version ("would flip a card"). It seems like it would be more accurate to say "a flip is the process of... and flipping a card is the act of revealing the top card of your deck for the purposes of determining a card for the conflict") Additionally, the rules provide for what happens when multiple cards are trying to enter a conflict (you pick the lowest or your choice of cards, and select one of them). Ultimately it could be just one of yet another set of ambiguities (the rulebook mentions 'flip' 116 times, without a clear definition), and people may have to play using their own judgement until an answer is reached.
  23. Transmortis have H2W, Armor AND extra Wds; min damage 2 won't be enough unless is paired with Analyze Weakness. I'd avoid Willie, he is very glassy and cost 7... that's a free student for Transmortis. And armor+2 models may also backfire, they have analyze weakness and built in Armor Piercing in the Student of Steel. It's an OOK, but maybe Joss with Diesel Engine and something to give him Focused? He can get double positive and severe 6 or even 7 with Irreductible damage; enough to make most Transmortis models think twice before going near of him.
  24. Yesterday
  25. Short version: Yes. As specified, Fiendish Gamble completely side steps the Flip process and none of the Fate Modifier rules get applied. Long version: I think what happened is that there weren't enough people paying attention to all of the changes being made at the end of the open beta. In M2E, the words 'flip a card' were the source of much anguish because it was ambiguous whether that meant 'reveal a card from the top of the deck' or 'perform the process called a Flip'. During the transition from M2E to M3E, the wording of Flips and Fate Modifiers got mostly, but not entirely, rewritten to the point where 'flip a card' means 'perform the flip process where you will be revealing one or more cards, and choosing one of them'. The editing in Flips and and Fate Modifiers left a few zombies and incomplete changes behind. Flips: where the first two paragraphs (and Fate Modifiers) all claim that a Flip results in one or more cards being revealed, one chosen and added to the Conflict and the rest discarded, so that there's only one flipped card; and the last paragraph can mislead some into thinking that a flip flips more than one card. It's just a left over paragraph from before the rewrite that only survived because it was still 'technically' accurate and no one wanted to rewrite it to something like "Sometimes an effect will instruct a player to 'reflip' a card. When this occurs, the player discards the originally flipped card and reveals a new card from their Fate Deck to replace it." More importantly, the Flips description implies that Fate Modifiers is going to try to add multiple cards to the Conflict, and Flips sorts that out. Instead, Fate Modifiers says: So the second paragraph of Flips should have been rewritten to "If multiple cards are revealed as the result of Fate Modifiers, one one card is placed into the Conflict; the others are discarded" so that the two descriptions at least match. For better or for worse, "flip a card" is the process of revealing one or more cards from the deck, choosing one, discarding the rest, and putting the chosen one in the conflict. Then, if you're called upon to reflip that card, you discard the flipped card and "flip a card" again. So where does that leave Fiendish Gamble? That is specified as 'When this model would perform a flip, ignore the process specified in the book, choose a removed card and put in the Conflict. And your flip is done.' Because the process it specifies isn't at all compatible with replacing just part of the Flips process. I assume that it's entirely possible that people were playing Fiendish Gamble as effectively "When this model would reveal a card, it may instead choose a card its controller has removed from the game instead" as part of the Flips process, because that's what the current wording of Fiendish Gamble would do if you were trying to fit it into the way the process was described in M2E. 🤷‍♀️ Disclaimer: Jacob Lynch's Trump Card ability was a missed casualty of the Flip rules rewrite. Trump Cards should have been rewritten as 'After an enemy model reveals an Ace as part of a flip, it gains a Briance Token.' or something similar.
  26. I know I may be playing against my kids lol. I couldn’t pass it up for $75.00. There’s a strong Malifaux group here so hoping one will join TOS.
  27. Neat find. Good luck locating players though...
  28. nice! I only know a couple of local players who play it, and I am still trying to get a deal like the one you got, so I can join them.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information