sharpobjects

Why dont you try for starters that "arise my sweets" states summon one Belle Minion  - Big book page 123

Is Molly a minion?

lol

I cannot find anywhere in the book that states that effects from a single Attack Action are resolved seperately. Meaning that each damage is resolved before the next damage is resolved. This is important when checking to see if the model is killed and or interrupting that check with a defenders ability that kicks in after suffering damage. 

Page 33 #5 Determine Success we learn that if the Attacker suceeds in the duel then you proceed to the Attack Actions results, which in this case is a damage flip. 

Page 37 under Resolve Effects states that after a duel is completed, the model performs the Actions effects. The most common effects are dealing damage. 

Page 50 under Blasts we do have a sentence that states in situations where the order that models suffer damage matters, the Attacker may determine the order in which the affected model resolve the blast effects. 

Page 51 under pulses it doesnt say anything about the attacker resolving the order of the effects so that would default to the defender since he controls the models. 

I was always of the opinion that each model damaged in succession would be resolved before the next one suffered damage. So in the case of the OP the Flesh Construct was the target of Wong's attack and suffered damage. Before this thread I would have said that Malevolence would have the first chance to kick in here. Then the blast markers are placed and the next model suffers damage from the blast and Malevolence would have a chance to kick in there. Then the pulses are resolved and once again Malevolence would have a chance to kick in there.

After each model was damaged by Wongs effects of the Attack Action you would remove any models that were reduced to zero wounds one by one. Allowiing for Malevolence to kick in before removal. 

But after going through the book and re-reading everything I dont see where it states that we would do it that way when facing an Attack Action that issues multiple effects like Wong's. The rules state you resolve the Attack Actions effects after you have determined the Attacker won the duel, step 5. It would seem you would resolve all of Wongs effects, then Lost Love's ability kicks in and then you remove any models that were at zero wounds.

The one thing that has been resolved with regards to the OP is that the Malelolence ability will happen after models suffer damage but before being removed from play. That includes Lost Love himself. That point is clear and I hope the OP understands that. Targeting Lost love and reducing him to zero wounds will not stop Ikiryo from coming out just before you would remove Lost Love from the table, for example.

So to sum up, do you resolve all of the effects of an Attack Action against all of the models that would be affected before checking for defenders abilities like Malevolence or do you resolve each effect on a model, then check for abilities and then check to see if its killed and then move onto the next model and so on.    

Yes, its pretty easy to do. IF you don't cheat a single flip during the rest of your activation.

 

That may not be the most effective way to play his crew though.

And IF you dont play against an opponent that has models with Actions or Abilities that can remove cards from your hand before you activate Mr. Lynch

Just to Echo what Dirial and Adran have stated.

Malifaux gives you some guidance on how to define terrain on page 60 & 61. They give examples but you are free to define any piece of terrain as you and your opponent see fit. The only exception is at a tournament where the Tournament Organzer has the ultimate authority if something is called into question by a player. 

So make it as complex or easy going as you want it. 

I am more of the same opinion as Dirial on how I define my terrain before a game. 

The main thing is that both players agree to the definition of each piece of terrain before the game starts. 

The effects from Wongs Attack Action would be resolved as far as what models would suffer damage from the initial hit to the blasts as well as the pulse. Once all the models suffer the damage from Wongs Attack Action then the Malevolence ability would kick in for the defender.

This would happen before any models are removed from the board that would be killed from all the damage resulting from the effects of Wong's Attack Action. So even if lost love was going to suffer enough damage to kill him, the Malevolence ability would kick in at the "suffering" before killed and removed. So Ikiryo would be able to come out if the Kirai player wished for that to happen and could pay the one card or one soulstone cost.

Then any models that would be killed from the damage they suffered would be removed. 

Page 46

General Timing:

Most Abilities grant a passive effect, some of which have their effect when a model suffers damage or is killed. 

In the scenario presented in this thread we have an ability that grants an effect that kicks in when a friendly undead or living model suffers damage within the Aura. You suffer damage and then check to see if you are killed. Before checking to see if you are killed the Malevolence ability kicks in first. 

Nomally the acting model resolves its abilities first but in this case Wong is using an Attack Action which is not an ability. Next you would resolve the defenders ability which in this case is Malevolence. 

I just had a flash back of M1E Executioner vs. Executioner. /shiver

In the future I really think M3E is going to be the best Malifaux yet. We cleaned up a ton of us stuff when compared to M1E but after 2 years there are still a few things left that can be made clearer or rules changed for certain things to function better. It's still a great game  

I answered too quickly in my above reply.

Even though the steps as you referenced are listed in the book they are actually counter productive if followed in that order. If Flank or Corner deployment is selected you would need to wait for the first player to deploy in order to find out which diagnal the center line would be. If you choose the centerline before deployment then you limit the deployment options for the crew. 

Unless that was done on purpose. 

We like to allow the player deploying first to pick which corner they want to deploy there by forcing the other player to deploy in the opposite corner and that would then set the center line. 

When look at page 64-65 it explains how you flip for the deployment zone but doesnt explain how you determine the centerline, which angle will be used in other words. As mentioned above we use the winner of the deployment flip for deploy crews step to determine that. 

The reason I think the centerline is established on step 8 is explained on page 64

Deployment Zones

These are the areas in which each crew may place its models at the start of the game. While players will know what the options for each deployment area are, they will not commit to one just yet. That happens during the Deploy Crews Step.

So for example with Corner deployment, you do not commit to the left or right corner until the deploy crews step. After the first player commits to a corner during the deploy crews step then the center line would be established.

With standard and close deployment step 4 would be correct that these two deployment types do determine the center line. But with Flank and Corner the center line cannot be determined until step 8.  

How about a simpler scenario:

 

A model on top of an elevation is pushed just off the edge, but another model is on the lower level and their bases would overlap. Does the pushed model not fall?

 

In the above scenario, is the answer different if the push would carry the model past the lower model's base to the other side? At what point does the model fall and take damage (and possibly die) - when it leaves the edge of the elevation, or when it clears the lower model's base?

Page 43 of the big book. 

The pushed model cannot pass through impassible objects, such as other models or walls or climb. 

As soon as the model leaves the edge that is supporting the model it falls and drops straight down. I dont see a push scenario that would have a model move off a ledge and continue moving in thin air so that it would get passed the model that is directly below the ledge in question. 

The model would drop/fall and in the scenario presented in this thread it would fall on top of the model directly below it occupying the space on the lower elevation. That is not permitted in the rules so the model would have to stop at the edge of the higher elevation regardless if it had more movement left to push. 

Furthermore if we discuss exact heights of elevation for example; There is a Ht 2 model on a lower elevation in base contact with the terrain. The ledge is Ht 1 and there is another model on top but 2 inches away from the ledge. The model on top is pushed by another model 4 inches toward the Ht 2 model on the lower elevation. In this example you would not even be able to fall because you would come into contact with the Ht 2 model standing on the lower elevation which is only Ht 1. The pushed model would have to stop at the edge of the ledge. 

If the same example as above is used but we change the elevation height to Ht 3 instead of Ht 1 then I still contend the pushed model has to stop at the edge because it would fall directly on top of the model below it if it were to continue its push and that would be contrary to the rules. 

And just to throw out the slightly silly question I'm sure someone has into the mix, how much fall damage do you calculate? The full height to the ground or just to the top of the model?

 

 

Page 42 of the big book

Models moving off elevations and falling suffer no damage if the fall was 2 inches or less. if the fall was more than 2 inches then the model suffers 1 damage per 1 inch, or fraction thereof, fallen. 

Page 43 of the big book

A model cannot move through or over another models base.

You cannot move on top of another model. You cannot fall on top of another model.

Actually, we never set the Centerline unless the Strategy calls for it. 

This

You would not be allowed to fall of the ledge with the teddy if it would force the Teddy to overlap any of the target model when after he completed the push from Peekaboo. The Teddy would have to stop at the ledge. 

It's no different of the models were on the ground level and you would push the target in any direction but then be unable to push Teddy into btb with the target becaue there was blocking terrain in the way that prevented the Teddy from going into btb with the target. The Teddy would push towards the target and stop when he hit the impassible terrain for example. 

In this case since ending a move overlapping a model is illegal then the Teddy pushes towards the target and stops just before ending his move that would force him to fall off the ledge and land on top of the model. 

I have always maintained that Kirai's Df/Wp trigger forced the spirit within 2 inches of Kirai to be come the new target. As it states in her ability " as if it had been the target instead of this model, including any triggers". I have always had the opinion that her ability was written as such to not only pass damage off to the friendly spirit but to also circumvent attacks that required the attacker to target a model with a specific conditon, characteristic, etc.

After rereading the ability over and over and consulting page 37 of the big book "resolve effects" section I am not so sure now. Her ability Of Pity and Wind states; After an Attack Action succeeds against this model, target friendly spirit within 2 inches and LOS suffers the effects of the Action as if it had been the target instead of this model, including any triggers.  

When the attacker initially targeted Kiriai she met the attackers targeting requirements or else that attack would have failed before even beginning the duel. If the Attack Action says target enemy leader or target a soul stone user or target a model with burning, if Kirai didnt meet any of these requirements then she would not be able to be targeted to begin with. 

So she meets the targeting requirement and then we begin the opposed duel. Kirai triggers her Of Pity and Wind during the duel which the attacker suceeded. On page 37 it states that after the duel is completed, the model performs the Actions effects. The most common effects are dealing damage. The spirit now suffers the effects of the duel as if it had been the original target. I dont think we go backwards and now check to see if the spirit is a legal target with regards to the initial targeting of a model at the beginning of the opposed duel.

The duel that legaly targeted Kirai now passes the effects of the Action onto the spirit. Whatever damage or effect Kirai would have taken because she is a leader, a soul stone user, a model with a certain condition, that effect is now passed onto the spirit. The spirit will suffer the effects as if it had the certain condition or characteristic, etc. 

So if you discarded Vengenence Bullets then the positive twist to damage and +1 damage will apply against the spirit. The spirit will also suffer the effects from Bigger Hat Than You, etc. I also believe that in the example of trigger happy that the friendy spirit will suffer the effects of that trigger since Kirai's ability states "including any triggers". If the spirit is still alive then the Convict Gunslinger will shoot at the spirit. If the spirit died from the initial attack then the trigger happy trigger will fizzle. 

The main issue is, after the duel succeeds and we are at the resolve the effects of the action stage, do we go back and now check to see if the spirit could be a legal target of the already succeeded action? Or do we just resolve the effects of the Action against the spirit including any triggers regardless if the spirit could have been initially targeted with the original Action to begin with?

It is up to Justin and hopefully we can get an official resolution in the near future. 

Haha big talk from Mr. 3rd place ;D

 

I dont like Yuckysucko. For 7 stones I'd rather take a Lieberryin.

Joe didnt you date a Yuckysucko? I think that's where the animosity came from 

Coryphee Duet can't be hired either but its an enforcer. 

I had a couple questions with regards to Fate Decks. 1. In official tournaments, do you need a Fate Deck, or is a poker deck with two easily differentiated Jokers okay? 2. Are the faction-specific Fate Decks going to be re-released anytime soon?

The 2015 Gaining Grounds tournament rules states;

Well at least the thread cleared up a few things. 

Some of the issues raised were in response to typos.

As for the rest, well at least we voiced our opinion with regards to our disagreement with the direction Malifaux is going at this years Gen Con tournament.

I do like that Justin is open minded to making changes next year if called for.  

There is another thread that was started today that has relevance to this one. 

http://wyrd-games.net/community/topic/108414-gen-con-avatar-tournament/

I for one applaud the number of tournaments and styles offered at gen con this year!  It will be fun for people who are currently into the game.

 

It seems to me you -have- heard of an enforcer brawl, I don't know what is confusing.

 

Hardcore tournaments are happening all over the country... and enforcer brawls... it seems to me that people will be observing Malifaux as it is often played.

 

Someone else is running the tournaments so don't worry about specifics, just sign up and have fun!

The Enforcer Brawl posted under the download section for alternate tournament formats is hiring one enforcer and attaching one legal upgrade to the model.

http://wyrd-games.net/community/files/download/170-alternate-m2e-tournament-formats/

It doesnt say anything about 25SS. Which leads us to believe that the 25SS Enforcer Brawl(s) at Gen Con must be something entirely different or the orginal format has been adjusted in some way. We are asking for an explanation.

I really think Wyrd dropped the ball with regards to the Gen Con tournament this year. 

 

As in previous years the Avatar Tournament is a series of Qualifiers followed by a 3 round 8 person single elimination Finals. With the relative format being the same what is the problem? The Qualifiers. The Qualifiers are the problem. 

 

The Qualifiers:

1x Three Round 50ss Gaining Ground Tournament with top 4 qualifying.(8 hours)

2x Three/Four Round 20ss Henchman Hardcore Tournament with only the winner qualifying.(3/4 hours)

2x Two Round Enforcer Brawl with only the winner qualifying. (4/6 hours)

 

The Problems:

1) Representation

As many people in the past have noted Gen Con isn't actually a competition event it's a sales event first and foremost, it's where you get to see everything the gaming industry has to offer. If you do some simple math you will see that Malifaux tournament Qualifiers are on the schedule for 25 hours. Eight of those hours are spent playing the game the way it was designed to be played. The other Seventeen are spin off formats that are unbalanced/untested. If a random passerby walks by they have a 68% chance to see the game being played in a way that it was not intended. 

 

For instance, let's pretend you were interested in Malifaux at Gen Con and walked over to see 6 people around a table with a model each(Enforcer Brawl). The good news is the game is cheap to get into the bad news is you need 5 friends to play. Let's further pretend you ask some questions only to be told that this official tournament doesn't represent the actual game. I know I want to do a demo now.  

 

2) Competition

Malifaux is designed to be and is most balanced at 50ss Master led games. Fully half of the competitors in the Finals will having not qualified playing Malifaux proper. I am not saying that the other formats are not fun/interesting, but I will say that they are not balanced in any way. As an aside I fully believe qualifying for the Finals through Enforcer Brawl or Henchman Hardcore is much harder than through a gaining grounds tournament. This is due to the fact that these formats are much more luck based and have one qualifying spot. 

 

3) Descriptions

a) What in the hell is a 25ss Enforcer Brawl? It's certainly nothing I have ever heard of. I am assuming they just mean a standard Enforcer Brawl as outlined in the "Alternate M2E Formats" document.

Why is one Enforcer Brawl 4 hours while the other is 6? Why is one Henchman Hardcore 4 hours while the other is 3? Why aren't they consistent?

c) Why does the Finals say that it is fixed crew? That can't be right can it?

d) Why aren't the Enforcer Brawls more fleshed out? As in how are they being run? Let's say 32 people sign up what is the format? It's 2 rounds so does that mean 4 tables of 8 with the best 2 from each table qualifying for the second round table of 8? 

 

I just don't understand why it looks like zero forethought was put into Gen Con by Wyrd. I get that it's a more laid back event, but as I've said the lineup presented doesn't represent Malifaux or Wyrd as a whole. 

 

Suggestions:

While there is still time change the qualifiers. 

2x  Three Round 50ss Gaining Ground Tournament with top 3 qualifying.(8 hours)

1x Three/Four Round 20ss Henchman Hardcore Tournament with only the winner qualifying.(4 hours)

1x Two Round Enforcer Brawl with only the winner qualifying. (4 hours)

 

This keeps the odd formats as qualifying events, but doesn't put them front and center. 

 

I'd say this is just my 2 cents, but no one I've talked to has been happy with the event schedule at Gen Con. Normally I'd say I'm happy to volunteer to help Wyrd run some of the tournaments or Demo Malifaux or their other games, but as it stands I'm not sure I want to go at all.

I like the fact that Wyrd is having the fun Henchmen Hardcore format and possibly the Enforcer Brawl format (although i don't know what a 25ss Enforcer Brawl is) at Gen Con this year. I think players are going to have a lot of fun playing in them. I recently ran a Henchmen Hardcore format for 16 players and an Enforcer Brawl format for 8 players a few weeks ago. 

http://wyrd-games.net/community/topic/107550-henchmen-hardcore-enforcer-brawl-games-plus-mt-prospect-il/

These formats have very little to do with the 50SS Master lead standard Malifaux Gaining Grounds tournament game. It is of my opinion that none of the winners of these formats should be allowed a spot in the Avatar on Sunday. Hand the winners of those events some nice prizes and call it a day. 

There should also be two 50SS standard tournaments on two seperate days, usually Friday morning and Saturday morning. In my opinon the top 4 from each of those two events play each other on Sunday. 

I also dont understand why it's posted that the Saturday qualifier is fixed faction and the Sunday Avatar is fixed list? That has never been done before. I do not agree with the fixed list but whatever the reason it is being used then use that same format for the Saturday qualifier. Why would you qualify in the top 4 on Saturday using fixed faction allowing you to tailor your list each round for the strategy and schemes and then on Sunday your not allowed to do that?

Sunday's tournament is a 50SS event. Those playing in that event should have qualified by playing in that format. 

You could take the top 2 people from each of the Hardcore Henchmen format games and let them play on Sunday to determine the #1 Hardcore Henchmen player. You can do the same for the Enforcer Brawl. 

These events having very few people can be run at the same time on Sunday. You need maybe 8 tables total to run the Avatar, Hardcore Henchmen top player and Enforcer Brawl top player. 

Let each format stand on its own on Sunday. 

That's pretty much what I'm talking about. Something like:

 

In case of a rules dispute:

1) Play it as written/roll a die/rock, paper, scissors.

2) Finish the game.

3) Friendly debate.

4) Check the FAQ

5) Ask the Wyrd forums.

 

What I want to see is an official method for resolving rules disputes that takes sportsmanship into account AND highlights the work Wyrd and the community do to keep the game balanced and fun. Most players don't know about the FAQ. I'm one of about four people in my area (out of the forty to sixty who play) who posts on the forums at all. Players, especially new players, need to know about and feel comfortable accessing these resources.

#1 should be, each player flips a card from their deck to determine which players interpretation will be used for the duration of the game. The player with the highest value card chooses. 

This is not a dice game. We use a deck of cards. 

I agree completely with #2 - #5.

Thanks to everyone that came out and played. We had a nice turn out. I look forward to seeing these two events at Adepticon 2016!

Hardcore Henchmen Results

1^st Place – John Hartigan – Guild (5-0)

List(s) Played

Francisco/Santiago/Lawyer/Austringer (3 Rounds)

Francisco/Papa Loco/Lawyer/Austringer (2 Rounds)

2^nd Place – Sean Overton – Gremlins (4-1)

List Played

Old Major/Gracie/Piglet/Piglet (5 Rounds)

3^rd Place – Victor Szafranski – Gremlins (3-2)

List Played

Trixiebelle/Rafael/Francois/Slop Hauler (5 Rounds)

4^th Place – Brendan Schultz – Guild (3-2)

List(s) Played

Ryle/Hunter/Hunter/Brutal Effigy (3 Rounds)

Sirdar/Hunter/Hunter/Brutal Effigy (2 Rounds)

Other lists played:

Guild - Ryle/Francisco/Austringer/Austringer

Guild - Ryle/Warden/Warden/Hunter

Gremlins - Francois/Rami/Pere/Raphael

Gremlins - Francois/Raphael/Pigapult/Stuffed Piglet

Neverborn - Bad Juju/Waldgeist/Waldgeist/Silurid

Neverborn - Nekima/Young Nephilim/Young Nephilim/Black Blood Shaman

Neverborn - Bad Juju/Silurid/Waldgeist/Gupp

Outcast - Hannah/Lazarus/Librarian/Rat

Outcast - Ana No Zako/Convict/Ronin/Ronin

Ten Thunder - Ototo/Rail Worker/Archer/Torakage

Painting Contest – Brian Wolf – Pere Ravage

Enforcer Brawl Results

1^st Place – Victor Szafranski (Yin the Penangalan)

Other Enforcers played in the event:

Mature Nephilim/Teddy/Teddy/Lazarus/Bishop/Doppelganger/Gracie

Last /bump.

Should be a nice turn out based on e-mail responses.  

See you guys Sunday 

In a team game 2 v 2 both players sitting across from you are your opponents. The ability was not written with the team game in mind or else it would have added an (s) to the end of the word player. It is not impossible to accomplish in a 2 v 2 format, you just have to hire and or summon more Belle's to remove 2-3 cards out of both opponents hands and force them into a dilema of holding onto their good cards or playing them. The grave spirit also helps as well.

It is a very powerful ability in the team game when your hiring 70SS between the 2 players. It would be way too easy to remove a hand from one opposing player with two players using lure on the same opponent as well as using a grave spirit to force another discard. It is better to error on making it difficult than making it too easy for multiple models with ceasless advance to gain reactivate. Especially when they put the ability on a damn good 4SS model. 

Gaining Ground 2015

Conversions & Proxies

Original sculpts and conversions are allowed if the Organizer deems them to be accurate representations of the models portrayed. If using a model that was converted with manufactured pieces, no more than 33% of the finished model may be built using other game companies’ models, while the rest must be either wholly or a combination of original sculpt or Wyrd manufactured pieces, as determined by the Organizer. If a model has an officially released (non-beta) stat card available, but no model is yet released, the player may field a conversion, but it must be easily identifiable, as per the Organizer’s discretion.

Besides using the above as a guideline in making your conversion, the main point to be aware of is it is always per the tournament organizers discretion. The best course of action is to email a photo of the conversion to the TO prior to the event seeking their approval.

Updated restriction #2