Mr_Smigs

Again, I'm not sure if it's intended to be a loophole, or if it's an oversight in the rules, but some of the rulings that have been officially recognized in the past, leads me to not take how I think things should work, as how they actually work.

once you accept the terrible truth of that statement, these forums get to be a lot more understandable...

the Rules as set down in the Manual are meant to be more just Guidelines anyways...

Not sure what ruling you are asking for' date=' Mr_Smigs. It is the same as any other ruling on the subject - spell fails, no effects are applied. Since Wounds are listed among spell effects, they are not applied if the Entropic Transformation fails (is resisted).[/quote']

ok, guess i misread...

i took that last bit as an implication that entropic wasamajigger had a ruling about him taking wounds on a fail...

yes, this whole "all or nothing" does alot...

That's exactly how it works. If Entropic Trasnformation is resisted, Levi suffers no wounds.

can you cite ruling otherwise?

It is the same for all the spells that require you to pay a Soulstone to cast, to Sacrifice a Corpse Counter or Scrap Counter or Blood Counter... if the spell is resisted for any reason, the Counters, Soulstones, Wounds, Control Cards etc. are not spent. (Action points on the other hand are lost, because you spent them beforehand in order to initiate Cast action)

I've seen this ruling brought up for just that reason, to prevent models from being Obeyed to perform actions that would require a sacrifice to summon,

where since the summon can't go off,

the sacrifice can't be done.

As per the rules on pg 13:

Since this is a SINGLE action you can't perform half an action. You perform the whole action or not at all. Therefore as outlined on pg 13

Since you can't perform the replace you are unable to perform the action.

there you go, the official ruling.

no half-actions.

the action is not successful unless it fully resolves.

the activation of the action is successful, but the resolution is not.

therefor none of the parts function.

if you look around, there are multiple rules about abilities...

and all the rulings come out the same

if any part of a spell/ability fails, the whole ability fails. (there are ones like Ashes and Dust's latest discussion where it's linked/mentioned)

That is pure awesome.

Something about Ramos just inspires this sort of thing. I must admit, when I first saw the art for aRamos, my first thought was...

It haunts me.

picture no work....

oh, almost forgot...

I love how Bishop is such an integral part of the story line that his fluff justifies the high cost of fielding him in my army every time...

... but figured I'd plague you guys with the vision anyways....

was looking at the alt ramos sculpt:

trying to figure out why it seemed so familiar...

then it dawned on me...

I like most of the art,

I like the story/setting,

I like the fate card mechanic

I like that a starter box and a tournament army are almost the same thing

I like that the local players keep it in that range (25-35 ss)

I like that the core rule book and many of the starter models stats are online for new players.

Mr. Smigs how would you suggest moderating Card Counting in tournaments. As far as I know you can't go into the players heads and check whether they have remembered what card they played 2 minutes ago. As long as it's not slowing down play, they are not looking back through their deck and they are not using external devices like paper or a Android device I don't see how you can stop card counting.

how do they regulate and identify card counting in casinos?

really, the question isn't "can we police card counting"

the question is, "does Wyrd try to discourage card counting"

you're absolutely correct. proof is difficult, if not possible.

but rules like the stacked discard pile, imply that card counting is not acceptable in the game.

this is the same discussion as linked already.

that once you say "card counting is OK" you open the door to all sorts of further discussion on it... including what tools are acceptable and why...

it goes round and round and ends no where if the people who designed the game, and support the tournaments make no official stance if it's allowed or not.

you'll get the "anyone can do it" crowd

and the "it takes training, and isn't intuitive" crowd

as well as the "card counters are jackasses" crowd

and the "if you can count cards, why can we pre-measure" group... and dozens of others...

but none are right unless a sold "yes" or "no" on the issue is handed down from above.

If you're going to quote me, do so in the correct context.

That was about looking for methods of counting cards. Don't do it on the forum.

And I also stated that "which in my own view is cheating" states a personal view and not an official view.

In other words.

Fixt.

so then...

what is the official stance of Wyrd on card counting in tournament play?

because threads like this only end up encouraging people to do it, when no official stance against it is taken.

I just keep track of special cards... eg 10+ crows when playing Seamus

which is depressing since i remember the last time this came up, it was declared by the rules guys that card counting = cheating.

Easy.

You don't do it here.

If you need to find ways to count cards, which in my own view is cheating, then you should look elsewhere on how to do so.

I'm sure you can find how-to guides for this sort of shenanigans somewhere on the internet.

The Wiki will help you with this! Point your new players to the Wiki and they shall be learned!

Seariously though, we created and work on the wiki to provide players of all levels with information, tactics, and advice on how to play and play against every model in the game. Each article gives you more then enough information to understand what a model does, how they fit into their crews, and how to use them.

So please, consider at least finding information on models and crews a solved issue as we've been working hard on this for over half a year now.

LINK: http://pullmyfinger.wikispaces.com/

ok, gotta add that to my gripes list.

the instant assumption of the online community that the entire community is online.

back in my WM days I did an unofficial survey when I was on the road, to discover that only about 1 out of every 8 players went online to research their game... (at Gen Con one year one of the press gangers did a similar questioning to find about the same result in players there...)

the rest relied on the books, and favored using their sparse free time to actually play the game or paint rather than obsess over the forums...

since then, i've always assumed the same of any game with online support...

but most of the online supporters seem to avoid even entertaining the notion that there are players who don't netdeck their lists, or read every rules query that appears on the forums...

Hardly. As said, you could give me any master, and a core of models and I'd be as confident of winning as going up against someone with all of my arcanist models that I took to the GT.

"core of models"

please, extrapolate.

what do you mean by core

Just out of interest, which faction can't win?

he didn't say faction, he said master.

the "faction balance"

as opposed to "master balance"

it's a big thing in 'faux... that the Masters are not balanced, but the factions as a whole are...

this is back to the "if you want to play the game at a tourney level, by standard tournament rules, you have to roll ALL the models...

Hardly. If someone told me I could only have 15 models for my Marcus crew I'd shrug and say OK. I have about 80ish because I'm a completionist and like having lots of toys, doesn't mean I have to have a full factions worth to be competitive, merely i have to have the competitive toys.

how is this a good thing?

it's almost as bad as "roadblocks to getting newbies into the game don't matter 'cause I own all I want..."

just because YOU will buy everything, doesn't mean it's a good thing.

but whatever. Wyrd obviously doesn't see it as a problem either... (quite the opposite, by pushing that mentality they improve their sales... can't fault them that...)

This is a feature that I love. It doesn't unbalance the game, but it does mean each player has to think about what crew to select for each game rather than just picking a 'winning' crew for all games.

this is one that chafes, alot.

makes the game a hard sell when a player asks about the viability of a list and you have to tell them they need to own all the models for their faction if they want to roll with the big dogs...

it scares away a lot of casual players who like to have a chance whenever they set down on the table, without having to make a major investment...

Original discussion here

As is obvious if you read the thread, I'm not entirely pleased with the ruling... but there it is.

what kills me there, is that word "effect" again... getting a different translation than what was given when the definition was updated a couple months ago...

but at least the ruling's consistent... so I see no point in further debate.

How long does the alpha take effect ? If until AD dies there'd be no Problem, because the models are generated afterwards.

the question there would be,

when does the model's activation end in regards to being killed...

I seem to recall a ruling that if part of an ability fizzles, the whole thing fails to go off...

but that might've been a spell-specific ruling ... (IIRC, there was never clarification on it applying to all talents)

I think we had a similar discussion on marcus Alpha'ing a master and having it cull it's own soul...

http://wyrd-games.net/forum/showthread.php?p=347802&posted=1#post347802

inspired me to ask...

are there standardized terrain dimensions?

back in my Warmachine days, there were stock templates of all the major terrain types (especially ones that were moved/generated by models, like walls)

but I don't recall ever seeing that kind of table-build mechanic in other games...

me, personally, i favor "realistic" ... massive forests, large buildings, long walls...

but then, my battle fields tend to favor one style of aggression over another because of this...

and I've even played those games where we said "if it ain't terrain, it's forest" just for the challenge...

what about y'all ... do you limit forests to 3x5 slots, or 6x8, or specific templates?

I intentionally made several very large forests while I was waiting for my Walgeists to arrive just so I could spam their abillity to move them and attack through them. At the time I was making the majority of the terrain we used. My opponents have since bought terraclips and now we play with less forest terrain which is a shame because of Lilith's avatar.

even without, when lilith goes avatar, she has a strike on a good 1/3rd of the table...

but as for "it's up to the TO" that's a terribly half-assed response.

yes, with no official ruling, it's up to the TO... but if the TO here rules one way,

then a player from here rolls to another state expecting the same, and gets ruled opposite... then problems form.

I don't think so, since the blast needs to be in base contact.. ground level, and only reach Ht3 max.

the blast doesn't need to be in base contact, it needs to be "touching" (pg 46)

place the (blast object) to be covering a portion of the target's base...

so, in theory, you could place the (blast object) to be touching the bottom of the target's base,

and the top of the lower model's volume (so the cylinder of blast would be HT 3 from the top of the bottom model, to the bottom of the top model) afflicting both with blast...

its up to you and your opponent to agree on.

alas, that doesn't work as a mentality for a tournament setting.

So basically you rule that a blast goes only up and an aura/pulse goes both up and down?

given the wording in the rules manual, YES.

a Blast is basically a "model" with a set height and a base. all models touching that volume are affected... (as defined, page 21)

an Aura or Pule are a measured distance in all directions,

measured distances have, in the past, been ruled to be 2 dimensional, and ignore height notations on the map.