paradox

Unless I miss my guess, the relevant effect of Immune vs Ignore is whether ANOTHER Spell/Talent removes an immunity or cannot be ignored. Eg; The Box Opens and Irresistable.

TBO removes immunity only. So things that are Immune are no long Immune, but things that ignore still ignore.

Irresistable cannot be ignored via a Talent. So Talents that ignore OR grant immunity still must test, but Spells that ignore or grant immunity may still ignore or be immune.

I'd still like a satisfactory answer to my issue here.

There are at least two ways to read this interaction right now, both of which are equally valid.

If I read this right, Ignore > Immune.

Ok.

Here's my difficulty then. Breach Psychosis is a Talent.

BP is immune to Talents that require a Wp duel.

BP is not immune to Wp duels, it is immune to Talents.

The Box Opens is a Talent.

Irresistable is a Talent.

Expose Fears is a Talent.

Expose Fears requires a Wp test.

TBO removes Immunity from Wp tests.

Irresistable requires a Wp test.

BP ignores Talents that require Wp tests.

BP ignores EF and Irresistable, as they are Talents that require Wp tests.

BP does not ignore TBO because it does not require Wp test.

TBO does not remove BP because BP is not immunity to Wp test, it is Immunity to Talents that require a Wp test. BP is not immune to Wp test, it is immune to Talents that require one.

BP is not an immunity of the type affected by TBO.

Therefore, Ryle may target Pandora without dueling.

We can't tell a definate difference between the terms Immune and Ignore according to the rules manual. We treat them the same. That said, it is important to us that Ryle's BP is a talent that makes him immune to "talents and spells" of a certain kind.

Actually we can. The differences are inferred in the text, and though not entirely clear, fall in line with what Ratty posted.

What really needs an actual ruling is the function of "any" in TBO vs BP brand of immunity. This is an undefined area of the rules otherwise laid out in the books and this thread.

Problem you run into is Lilitus are friendly woes. So Pandora can move her damage on to them. Honestly Pandora and Nekima are both big hitters in that list. Nekima is just a little easier to kill first.

How is this an issue?

The lilitus have Lure.

Lure is what is doing the trick.

If Pandora shuffles damage off, the Lilitus die instead.

Pandora is LOADS easier to hit than lilitus.

Ignore allows you to temporarily remove an ability from a card so you act as if it wasn't there. Eg Perdita can act as if Pandora didn't have Emotional Trauma on her card and shoot her without making a WP check.

Immune means you don't take the effects from the thing your immune to. EG. If I'm immune to Poison, I would just not take the counter.

If something can't be ignored, it would also cover immunities to it. More or less as ignore means you act as if the text wasn't there, can't be ignored means you have to use the text of the ability. So Irresistable would work against something with Breach Psychosis.

------------------------------

• So Breach psychosis vs Irresistable. Irresistable test has to be taken.
  
• Irresistable only can't be ignored by talents. Blind Justice is a Spell so can ignore it.
  
• Expose Fear can be ignored by Blind Justice as it's not an immunity it's ignoring the entire ability.
  
• Immune to influence doesn't work if your attacked so you would have to take an Irresitable check.
  
• The Box Open removes Immunity to Wp duels so Breach Psychosis doesn't work in The Box Opens bubble.
  
• Immune to Influence stops Lure as your the defender.
  
• The Box Open will remove Immune to Influence, so you could be Lured.
  
• Breach Psychosis would stop you being Lured.
  
• Breach Psychosis would be removed by The Box Opens so you could be Lured.
  

If I read this right, Ignore > Immune.

Ok.

Here's my difficulty then. Breach Psychosis is a Talent.

BP is immune to Talents that require a Wp duel.

BP is not immune to Wp duels, it is immune to Talents.

The Box Opens is a Talent.

Irresistable is a Talent.

Expose Fears is a Talent.

Expose Fears requires a Wp test.

TBO removes Immunity from Wp tests.

Irresistable requires a Wp test.

BP ignores Talents that require Wp tests.

BP ignores EF and Irresistable, as they are Talents that require Wp tests.

BP does not ignore TBO because it does not require Wp test.

TBO does not remove BP because BP is not immunity to Wp test, it is Immunity to Talents that require a Wp test. BP is not immune to Wp test, it is immune to Talents that require one.

BP is not an immunity of the type affected by TBO.

Therefore, Ryle may target Pandora without dueling.

Immune and Ignore are separate and distinct game terms, found on pg19 of the Rules Manual.

1. I can only work with what Wyrd sold me. If they sold a defective product, my misapprehension of the rules is on them. I suppose I have a 1st print, as I bought it at Gen Con last year.

2. A ruling otherwise either a) requires another reprint and some new cards, or 2) is a complete change to a core game mechanic.

So Pandora is what really makes FILTH tick vs Guild. But Justice is hard counter to that, as it will allow you to blast away at Pandora (where possible). And once The Box Opens is out of the picture, Immune to Influence models are now immune to Lure, negating the trick.

Otherwise, Blind Justice will allow you to shoot Nekima/lilitus instead.

Until an FAQ/Errata emerges to tell us anything about intent, I think that is a VERY speculative argument, especially because there are two published versions of Irresistable, neither of which mentions Spells.

Also, sloppy editting and rules writing FML. RAI should never have to be a viable rules arguement (albiet in a perfect world). Two published versions of the same Talent in the same book, however, is just plain bad form.

I am having a difficult time sorting out the intent of these rules as applied to specific instances.

Eg; Breach Psychosis is immune to Talents and Spells that require a Wp duel.

The Box Opens lose immunities to Wp duels.

Conclusion: Ryle lose Breach psychosis because it grants an immunity to Wp duels.

EXCEPT! Ryle is not immune to Wp duels, he is immune to talents and spells that require a Wp duel.

BUT! The Box Opens is a Talent, thus he is immune to it, as immunity to a Talent is not an immunity to Wp duels.

HOWEVER! Breach Psychosis is a type of immunity to Wp duesl, and The box Opens makes you lose "ANY" immunities to Wp duels, which includes Talents that grant immunity to Talents.

...ad nauseum....

----------------------------------

Eg; Breach psychosis vs Irresistable

Irresistable cannot be ignored by Talents.

BP: does not ignore, it is immune to talents; ie not affected by Irresistable. It is immune.

Conclusion; Ryle does not ignore, he is immune. Therefore he does not test Wp when targetting performers.

------------------------------

Eg; Blind Justice ignores any duels required to target.

Irresistable cannot be ignored by Talents.

Blind Justice is a spell, not a talent.

Blind Justice ignores Irresistable

-----------------------------------------

Eg; Expose Fears + The Box Opens vs Blind Justice

EF requires a Wp duel

TBO lose immunties to Wp duels

BJ ignores Wp duels

Because BJ ignores, it is not immune. No immunity to lose. BJ ignores EF and no Wp test is required. TBO has no effect on BJ. (Bowen, you are now SO screwed! )

-------------------------------------------------------

Eg; Immune to influence vs Irresistable

Immune to influence is immune to Wp duels when defender

ITI attacker is not a defender (simple duel).

ITI does not apply.

---------------------------------------

Eg; Breach Psychosis vs EF + TBO

BP is immune to Wp duels

EF requires Wp duels

BP is immune to Ef

BUT!

BP is immunity

TBO lose immunity

BP is lost

Ryle must Duel to target Pandora

(yes, I know this is the same as above)

---------------------------------------

Lure vs ITI

Lure require WP duel

ITI is immune as defender

ITI cannot be lured

-------------------------------

Lure + TBO vs ITI

TBO lose immunities

ITI is immunity

ITI is lost

Lure requires Wp duel

ITI is lost and can be lured

------------------

BP vs Lure

BP is immune to talents and spells require Wp duel

Lure is a spell requiring Wp duel

BP is immune

-----------------------------------

BP vs Lure + TBO

BP is immune

TBO lose immune

BP is lost

BP may be lured

--------------------------------

So, do these sound about right?

Though I will admit that for most strategies if I know my opponent is playing neverborn I will bring austringer spam or the family. They are just very effective anti-neverborn lists.

Would you say this is an example of balance between factions, rather than masters?

One or two other suggestions notwithstanding, the majority of discussion has centered around 1 of the 2 main suggestions.

The FILTH list does have bad match-ups and strategies that other Neverborn lists deal with better.

Such as?

And what comprises those lists?

I count at least a dozen individual posters in this thread suggesting 1 of 2 ways to face it down: Perdita/family or austringer shenanigans.

I also find it telling that A: the FILTH list is nothing about winning scenario, but killing your models if you so much as expose yourself, and 2: that the imediate solutions offered all centered around killing them back rather than trying to manipulate Strats/Schemes to counter the trick.

What prevents a Neverborn player from simply using Pandora/Nekima/lilitus in every game of a tournment, and simply ripping the guts out of the opposing list cause they can get LoS within 18"? (ie, 1/2 the board). From what I read here, you are probably better off trying to kill Nekima/lilitus ASAP, or you won't have a chance at completing objectives.

So if you are playing Single Faction in Gaining Ground, and you have Guild, and you come up agaisnt a Neverborn opponent, do you build an anti-FILTH list, or do you build to the scenario rather than a particular list your opponent may or may not take?

Blind Justice is a spell, not talent.

Gotta break away from the all Ortega list. Honestly it sucks thematically but competitive lists and theme don't always mesh.

I'm sorry, are we having a discussion about a specific list dominating others, no matter how deep the opposing bench is?

Are we also discussing who is killing whom, rather than taking objectives and winning that way?

Ah, yes, I thought so.

Pandora's ability confuses me something awful. Is there a list of abilities it DOES NOT overcome?

And that is different to other games how? Don't Warmahorde tournaments allow people to bring 2 warcasters and switch? Does Warhammer Army/Batalion Box gives you a tournament size army?

Warhammer and Warmachine are both very playable at tournament level with only 1 list for a whole event.

I have done so myself without ever really feeling handicapped.

The same may be true for Malifaux, but pretty much everyone here is saying that is not the case. Regardless of what I own, suppose I really like my one list from the faction I want to play? Or suppose I only LIKE one master from a whole faction. But the format, by consensus, dictates that I should have at least 1 master I don't like, just to be able to compete.

This is why balancing by faction doesn't seem to jive too well with conventinal tourney play. There are a number of ways a player may not want to, or be able to, play more than a single master at a given event.

That option should not be a serious handicap.

However, there are ways around that. I think trying to shoe-horn Mali into a typical tourney format is a mistake. It diminishes it's greatest asset. That assest is not it's ability to be played competatively.

I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm saying that there are better ways.

Malifaux is balanced' date=' in right conditions, faction vs. faction.[/quote']

So if I only own 1 master, and I decide to play in a tourney, what do I do when I get the scenarios I can't compete in and/or bad matches

Your claim requires I own at least 3 of 4 masters, currently availible (maybe more in the future) to stay competative.

In other words, to play a tourney, I cant just bring 1 list I like, I have to bring my whole faction. Because in Tourney play, you inevitably have topick 1 master and crew to face another.

Is it? if it were, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The point is: It doesn't even apply! The premise is thus false. It applies only to one kind of war-games and not to all miniature games or games in general.

Some miniature games are war-games. They are originally designed around pitted battles. Warhammer franchise is the best example of this.

Not all miniature games are war games. Malifaux in particular is not a wargame, but rather a faction based miniature RPG where factions strive to gain fictional advantage in fictional universe by realizing certain simplified objectives. It is a power game. It's closer to Risk, as a genre, than to Warhammer (ok, exaggerating a bit, but I'm thinking chiefly about the game philosophy).

It is not the point of the game to kill the enemy - it never was. Players who want pitted battle project their experience with other miniature games on Malifaux and take it for a game it is not.

So why must there be a tournament format again? If what you say is true, Then by logic, Mali does not lend itself well to tournament play, which is all about a race to the top, winining games by killing enemy models.

Clearly, by your logic, it lends itslf better to some other format that is not about pitting 1 player vs another, master on master, crew on crew, every round.

Yea, I guess Bowen is just a cheater. I oughtta known....

This is simply an absolutely false premise.

No it's not.

That said, I HOPE Mali doesn't TRY to be a big tourney game (though that hope seems slim). I hope they try to do something different and keep pushing to find a way to have big, competative events that are not a simple tournament. Why not asymmetrical play? Team events? Story-driven events/event-driven story?

There is no need to focus so singularly on 1 v 1, my crew v your crew, play.

Other than that's what people want, so they can metric out the results and declare X or Y the best and A or B the worst.

It's part of being a gamer.

Hmmmm....

The way my local Henchman explained it to me, The Box Opens negates the "ignore" part of Blind Justice, thus exposing you Expose Fears.

If there is a recent ruling, I'd like to know.

So far as I know, Blind Justice DOES NOT overcome The Box Opens. Pandora still hoses you on Wp checks.

1. Hamelin

BIG SPACE

2. Pandora

3. .... (none so bad I would hate them, so far)