Mr_Smigs

Slows stack, but do not resolve. The EFFECT of Slow (-1 AP) doesn't occur until the model activates.

whoa...

so, if a model is hit with "Slow" ... it's not an effect until activation?

so if a model has slow from a spell/ability, and is popped with Spellbreaker, it will not lose slow?

ok... so if an effect would remove Fast, Slow, Reactivate, or Paralysis... does it remove ALL of the same named effect? (as it "resolves" that effect with cancelation)

because the other thread has said, no. and claims the 1-for-1 exchange in the rule book justifies it.... this isn't really addressed, and so is kinda unclear...

how many wounds do each of the gremlins have? can you just hide back and spam black plague to kill 'em?

A model is Slow, it just doesn't have any actual influence on the model's AP count until its activation.

A model is only assigned AP during its activation, therefore although it is Slow the -1 AP won't take effect until that point.

so... if the model is slow, before it's activation,

why does it get multiple stacks of slow?

(Alps special rule not included)

that's what I thought...

but not how it's being explained.

it appears that it's actually,

+1 - 1 = +1 -1 until activation, at which point it finally becomes 0...

pgbsamurai

Think of it as a buffer. The effects don't happen until there's a reason to clear that buffer. (hell, use slips of paper with the effect names written on them)

So, 17 Slows on a model before its activation? Sure, we'll use that as an example.

When that model activates ONE of them affects it, the rest are thrown away.

The model has Fast normally? One Slow takes the Fast effect away for that turn, another makes the model Slow for that turn, the rest are thrown away. Fast returns to the buffer, waiting for the next time the buffer is cleared, in order to add the effect the next time the model is activated.

The model was given Fast for that turn? One Slow counteracts Fast, they're both discarded. Another gives the model Slow for its activation, the rest are discarded.

Spellbreaker allows the model to discard two effects, before its activation? Two instances of Slow are removed from the buffer, the rest affect the model as normal.

The general rule is: Things don't affect a model until there's a reason to. If there's an effect that decreases Df it makes no sense to deal with it until it's being attacked. If something affects AP it doesn't matter, until AP's are being used. Etc...

What stacking means in the case is: 17 Slows reduces the model to 0 AP. That's what this system doesn't allow. That's the sort of ongoing affect that doesn't stack. (Specifically Slow never stacks, and that's been discussed quite a bit on these forums.) As "the stack" isn't created until it's necessary, it doesn't matter how many specific instances were added, until it's time to activate. That's how it looks like things are being added to the model before it activates. It's waiting for the model, and not resolved, until it's time to resolve it.

The Stacking Examples on the page make a lot of sense, and clear it up pretty well. A hard copy of the book is a good idea.

appearantly, a model isn't actually slow until their activation...

same with paralysis... (although that leaves me wondering about all the "can't take any actions, or triggers" part of paralysis...)

cool, thanks for the heads up... i have a student of conflict, but i didn't think the Fast could apply to both viks...

can it? or is it not considered a spell?

yep... googled it... got a link that requires an admin password...

The only reason slow "stacks" in the other conversation is because you are dealing with Alps which have wording on their cards stating that state that if a model could be effected by slow multiple times the Alp effect goes off. Normally Slow does not "stack".

whoa.... who mentioned alps here?

or in my other question about slow for that matter.

i'm asking purely about the application of the effects.

Page 34 of RM specifically states, "Action modifiers with the same name do not stack."

which i've been told is different than effects waiting resolution

1. Model A is Paralyzed. Model B then gives Model A Reactivate which cancels out Paralyzed and Reactivate, putting Model A back in it's normal state. Then Model C give Model A Paralyzed again.

2. Model A is Paralyzed. Model A "activates", thereby resolving the Paralyzed effect. (Model A doesn't actually activate, you just nominate Model A as your model to activate, and then it passes back to your opponent to activate a model. See this thread.) Then Model B Paralyzes Model A and Paralyze is resovled in the next turn.

and I thought similar back to Slow, but appearantly not.

what about fast,

if Chompy gets Fast, and attacks 4 times (melee expert, fast, 2 ap) does the dreamer get 0?

Stacking refers to when the effects are resolved. They don't stack, they wait to be resolved. There is a world of difference.

ok, there are multiple ones "waiting to be resolved..."

since the collection of "waiting to be resolved" stuff is resoved on activation (according to the Slow/Fast commentary)

why, oh why, does all the paralysis (another AP modifier) resolve outside of the activation?

How does Slow interact with the Dreamer and Chompy's AP management?

If one has slow, are they down to just 2 AP between the two of them?

What about Paralysis?

If you are under paralysis

do you have to test for the Alp's slowing effect?

Action modifiers don't stack with themselves. Only 1 paralysis applies.

but they do "stack" according to the Slow stuff discussed elsewhere, they just don't all resolve...

but since

When you would activate a Paralyzed model you forfeit (skip) its activation. Skip it. It does not get one.

if you SKIP your activation,

you don't get one.

you don't resolve the effects.

which means the stack would remain (since the other discussion says Slow and the like resolves during the activation)

Code people are weird

code people make the world easier to understand without having to understand the culture behind the words.

When you would activate a Paralyzed model you forfeit (skip) its activation. Skip it. It does not get one.

so... if a model has Paralyzed and Slow, what happens?

so...

basically, this means that if a model has multiple instances of "slow"

and we Obey it to have them Shrug it Off,

they'll most likely still be Slow because there are mulple "slow" counters on them waiting to resolve

and despite them all being the same named effect,

each is treated as a different effect,

and thus only some of them will be removed.

correct?

If multiple events place Paralysis on a target,

when their activation rolls around, are all the (-all) counters resolved at once,

or does one activation have to pass for each Paralysis?

Only addressing Shrug Off as everything else was quite well explained in the ruling and explanation we were given a page ago. Coupled with the rules, and the example, it makes solid, logical sense.

First, as explained, the AP is lost at the model's activation. That would mean that Shrug Off wouldn't affect that. Second, why would you send an AP to try to gain an AP, coming out even in AP, and down in cards?

hypothetically,

if you had a way to generate multiple suits on each casting and needed to burn off multiple negative effects.

additionally, because this clarification would carry over to other similar events,

such as a model being hit with Paralysis multiple times.. (Like Miranda spamming Covering Fire from a beast gunslinger)

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/undead/sku-down/14485

tho, i'd look for a different model on top...

or,

http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/undead/sku-down/02696

and get a pack o' gw skeletons to carry it...

As for the new Toy box. All we can do it proxy and see what happens. Lots of cool new toys out there to try.

no offense meant...

but when someone says "well, the problem is, you didn't buy the right models..." it makes a game really hard to promote...

I may be a little old school here, but I've always felt that the first book should set the standard all the others have to live up to...

I've seen alot of players leave games (not just Wargames) because of power-creep because they invested in the first release thinking it had staying power... only to find that wasn't the case...

while I can see the point of playing against an un-fun list with a fun player to work on strategies... as soon as someone starts saying I have to invest more into a game, that's when I start wondering about the game's balance and design intent...

I get it,

the company's job is to make money..... so I can't fault them for wanting to design models that certain player types are encouraged to buy...

but those models just seem to become a flag to me of "this is not the kind of player I enjoy playing with..."

And I know others who've made similar comments about other games... Examples including the Mage Hunter Strike Force, Haley Turtle, and Blightwater in Warmachine/Hordes... or Chaos (certain builds), Ellisian Drop Troops, and Imperial Guard Leaf-Blower in 40k... I've even had people ask me not to run my Cutter in Infinity at under 300 points...

So...

looking at the vikis, i realized they have that nifty power to apply a spell that affects one to both...

so why not utilize that with something like healing spells...

which lead to the idea...

• Freikorpmann
  [4ss]
  
  
• Freikorps Librarian
  [7ss]
  
  
• Freikorps Specialist
  [5ss]
  
  
• Ronin
  [5ss]
  
  
• Ronin
  [5ss]
  
  

tho... haven't played either yet, so I'm wondering if anyone's tried this...

and I debate dropping a Ronin or Freikorpman for some stones to burn... (Tho I could always cull souls in the middle of the match...)

sigh.. if these were written like function calls, it'd be so much easier to figure out...

Alp calls Apply_Slow(Target) which returns a bool (yes or no)


Apply_Slow(Target)

{  Target Makes WP check. 

    If WP check is False,  model gains Slow_Talent until end of next activation,  

      and Return "yes"

   If WP check is True, return "no"

}


If yes is returned, Alp applies Damage as do other Alps in the area.

If yes is returned, Model is checked for Slow_Talent already.

Alp calls Apply_Slow(Target) which returns a bool (yes or no)


Apply_Slow(Target)

{  Target Makes WP check. 

    If WP check is False,  

       Model is checked for Fast_Talent, 

       If Model has Fast_Talent then Fast_Talent is removed, 

       Return [[COLOR=DarkRed]waiting on ruling[COLOR=Black]][/COLOR][/COLOR]

       Model is Checked for Slow_Talent, 

       If model has Slow_Talent, return yes.

       Else Model gains Slow_Talent, Return Yes.

   If WP check is True, return "no"

}


If yes is returned, Alp applies Damage as do other Alps in the area.

it ain't the prettiest code in the world, but it's easy to follow.

ok, so back to shrug off...

if the excess is thrown away after the activation starts,

how many rams are needed to shrug off the slow?

if they're an ongoing effect, they would be ignored after the first.

if they're an instant effect, then they stack with other sources.

the definition between the two is important because if the Slow is "ongoing" then RAW, you ignore multiple instances, and thus a fast model will never suffer slow as they are not resolved until activation.

if they are instant effects, then the first application of Slow removes fast at the application (not the activation), and others can stack after (as you explain) but this means the "effect" of slow is applied immediately...

which brings us back to "if fast is removed because of slow, immediately, then does Spellbreaker bring back a removed effect"?

got a hard copy.

the example doesn't help, as it says the model immediately loses fast, and will get the -1ap on its activation,

lilith "loses" fast, not "will lose at her next activation"

implying the application of Fast/Slow is immediate, not a stack that hangs around.

That explains a lot.... the diagrams and examples do help create the total understanding of the rules.

I guess i'm just confused about page 20's Stacking effects where it says an ongoing effect does not stack,

and that we should ignore additional applications of the same named effect to that model...

since, SLOW is not applied immediately (it waits until the model activates) doesn't that make it an Ongoing Effect?

similarly, since "action modifiers with the same name do not stack" (page 34) doesn't that also mean that you can't have multiples of the same action modifying effect?

why does it say the effects are removed in addition to canceling out?

for that matter

why does it say a model cannot be affected by both Fast and Slow at the same time,

when the explanation given above basically says "the model has both fast and slow until it activates"