Turbodog

Yeah, it's all or nothing.

+1 agree with Jonas. It's all or nothing.

Step 1: Take the hit to the face.

Step 2: Reduce by model hit's armor.

Step 3: Transfer remaining wounds (all of them) down protect chain. Do not transfer effects, just wounds.

*Step 3b: Repeat step 3 if more than one model in chain to transfer wounds...you can stop at any point.

Step 4: Absorb wounds on final model. If this is Hoffman, you may do a damage prevention flip by burning a soul stone.

I think there is nothing wrong with taking Sue with the Ortegas.

The Convict Gunslinger is another mercenary option that works well with them and is a little cheaper - especially if all you want is paired high Cb gunfighter pistols. (although both Convict Gunslinger and Sue offer much more than just this)

You can also marry the Convict Gunsligner into the clan with Granny Ortega, which you can't do with Sue. (not sure if you ever take Abuela...)

Does anathema apply to whenever a model generates a terrifying effect or just to it's general terrifying.

Example: aSeamus' Splatterpunk ability.

Hi, again, Allandrel. =)

My friends and I have some different interpretations of targeting with regard to a few game and model rules (but it doesn't sound like those apply to your list of concerns so I'll leave them out of this discussion.) I only bring it up because there are many situations where things can be unclear, especially when trying out new models or even the entire new game! So I guess I'm saying...you're in good company.

Anyhow...

That's part of what I'm trying to get a handle on. Part of what I want to make sure that I understand is if targeting restrictions are an absolute effect or if you can get around them through effects like pulses and blasts, and it looks like the general principle favors the latter.

Correct sir! I am not aware of any pulse, aura, or blast that is considered a targeting ability regardless if it is generated by a spell or an action or is simply a talent on the model. So pulse away and throw those blast counters all over Hamelin!

The rules for Blasts make a pretty clear distinction between the "target" and "other models touched by the (blast)."

Yes, for (all?) blast damage abilities in the game you target a model (either target of the initial Cb-->Df duel or target of the spell). And resolve that attack. If you couldn't target the model with this initial attack for some reason - then the entire thing will fail at this point.

After resolving the attack against the target, an additional effect is to place blast templates according to the rules you cited. The model originally attacked is not affected by these. Other models can be if they are unfortunate enough to be under the template. This is an excellent way to deal damage to models that are hard to target - like Hamelin, Pandora, and several Irresistable or Pitiful models.

Ah good! Specific questions:

For example, an Insignificant model cannot target Hamelin the Plagued with a blast, but could it target a model near him and have the blast affect Hamelin as well?

<slightly changed wording> The Insignificant model cannot target Hamelin the Plagued with an attack that generates blasts. The Insignificant model can target a rat near Hamelin the Plagued with an attack that generates blasts. If this attack is successful, it is possible that Hamelin could be under a blast marker and take damage.

Can a model affected by Hamelin's Inevitable Truth could freely use auras and pulses?

The model CAN freely use any aura or pulse because auras and pulses are not targeted effects.

Can a (non-Bullied) model affected by Hamelin's Inevitable Truth target Hamelin with blasts, and freely affect additional models with the attack? (Obviously a Bullied model affected by Inevitable Truth cannot use blasts that require a target.)

A model affected by Inevitable Truth could (must) target Hamelin when it attacks and it is possible that such an attack could generate blasts. If the model successfully attacks Hamelin, then it could place blast counters as normal. Other models may find themselves under the blast templates and take damage.

Hope this helps!

There's no reason why Immune to Influence and Stubborn would differ in which situations they normally apply in:

Immune to Influence: This model is immune to Wp Duels when it is the defender.

Stubborn: This model receives +2 Wp in Duels where it is the defender.

You are correct. They both apply in exactly the same situations.

And Terrifying is not an attack, nor does it require a Resist Duel, so the model making the Morale Duel is not a defender, so neither ability would apply to that duel.

True statement also. Skipping ahead...

What I'm trying to understand is why ItI and Stubborn apparently apply to Resist Duels, but NOT to other Simple Duels forced by attacks.

It's because even though the rules manual says there are two kinds of duels - simple and opposed - there are really three. Simple, Opposed, and Magic (my term). When targeted magic is happening, several special circumstances come into play that only apply in this case. For example, the casting flip actually sets the resist duels target number. Usually in a simple due, the target number is fixed. Usually if your opponent has some say about the target number, it is an opposed duel. But it's of course very different because the casting and resist flips are not made simultaneously. None of this is earthshattering news...but it gives background as to why you need to consider it a different situation only for resisted magic. I would have preferred if the Wyrd actually called out these three types of duels (instead of just two) but I understand they wanted to try to keep things simpler.

So since magic resist duels already have several special rules - they have a variable target number, you lose on a tie... Just consider this one more special exception they have: Everytime you make a magic resist duel, you are considered the defender and any pertinent abilities apply - like Stubborn (if it's a Wp resist duel).

I'll use Hamelin the Plagued's Understand the Soulless and Haunting Melody to illustrate this:

A) Understand the Soulless: The affected model is the defender against the Understand the Soulless attack. The effect forces a Wp Resist Duel, a Simple Wp Duel.

Understand the Soulless is a spell with a Rst: Wp. As such, the target model must make a Wp resist duel (magic) if the spell is successfully cast. Since this is a magic resist duel, several special rules apply including that the model is considered a defender and that the model will lose on a tie.

Haunting Melody: The affected model is the defender against the Pipes attack. The effect forces a Wp>attacker's combat total, a Simple Wp Duel.

Haunting Melody is a trigger that forces a model to do something. This is the trickiest part to learn (in my opinion) about Malifaux. There are several abilities on several different model cards that force a model to make a simple duel. When this happens, the model being forced to act is NOT considered a defender. Think of it as because it's acting or because there aren't attackers and defenders in simple duels (magic duels exception!).

So for the attack itself (which targets defense) you are considered a defender. But then IF you get hurt and the trigger goes off, you will not be a defender against any simple flips you are forced to make.

Clear as mud?

My understanding is that ItI/Stubborn apply to the Resist Duel because the affected model is the defender in the attack being resolved, and thus is treated as the defender throughout the attack, even though Simple Duels do not normally have a defender.

Exactly. The magic resist duels are a special exception.

The same principle would logically apply to any other Simple Duel forced by an attack.

Ah, that would be logical - but it is not how this game's rules are played. Again, I stress to simply consider magic duels (casting and resist) as their own category. Any other simple duel that is forced upon a model due to text on another model's card is NOT one in which they are the defender (unless it specifically states it as such of course).

So why do ItI/Stubborn apply to the Simple Wp Duel forced by Understand the Soulless, but not the Simple Wp Duel forced by Haunting Melody? I cannot find ANY rule singling out Resist Duels in this fashion.

It's because magic resist duels are special. I'm sorry I can not quote you a page number or source errata that specifically spells this out, as I am without my rules book at hand. But I hope this helps.

There has to be some downside.

silly me, I figured that since you sacrifice the trap after the action - that was the downside.

Thanks, Kadeton. You're awesome.

The part I had missed is that clamp on is an action. That's what makes it different from, say, the wp-->wp duel to get out of a pine box - since that's not an action.

In any case, I'm good now. Thanks!

On that note...gotta remember to put the traps with Lady J so that she can give them more Cb!

Not that I don't believe you, Ausplosions - but how do you know that?

I mean, I like that interpretation. That way I'm treated as the attacker and win ties. And it'll be hard enough flipping from a 4... Just didn't see any obvious contextual clue in the description that I use my Cb and opponent uses his Wk. (And I could see a reasonable interpretation that I use my Wk and opponent is trying to get away with his Cb).

Hrm, actually that makes it a pretty "underdog" type of duel doesn't it? A lot of models I'd like to stop with this have a Wk above 4...

Anyone proxied this? Does the clamp on attack work well?

When a clockwork trap uses it's clamp down action, it says for the trap and the opposing model to make a Cb-->Wk duel.

Who's Cb and who's Wk?

Is it the Trap's Cb and the opponent's Wk

or is it the opponent's Cb and the trap's Wk?

I can't tell from the wording in the book (it's not clear to me which is supposed to be the attacking model and which is the defending model.)

This is a pretty old thread that was pulled up.

It was my understanding that a stitched (or anything) can only reactivate one time per turn. So while DnD can kick in over and over again to keep the stitched on the board until the end of the turn, it can, in fact, only activate a maximum of two times (normal activation + 1 reactivate maximum).

-Turbodog

So I have been running the Hoff recently and machine puppet is a great ability but has raised some questions that I am hoping you might all be able to help me answer.

The first question is what abilities does the weapon retain?

The weapon retains all of it's text and abilities from it's host card except for its Cb value and suit. In addition, the weapon gains critical strike if it did not have it previously.

I know it says that it becomes cb6 of rams with critical strike but:

So you answered you own question.

• does it keep traits such as paired on the weapon?

Yes

• does it keep its other triggers as well as critical strike or are they replaced?

Yes. Remember you can only ever select one trigger though.

The other question is who is doing the attack, having looked at other threads it seems that it is the model not the Hoff so he can't use soul stones, is that correct?

The puppetted model is considered the attacker. Think of it as similar to casting obey on a model, forcing it to make an attack. So you are correct, unless the puppetted model has Use Soulstone, it can't use soulstones for the attack.

If it is, how does that work with the schemes and strategys? Does it count for Grudge as it is not the master attacking in melee? Does it also mean that Hoffman is not framed for murder?

It would count for Grudge.

You could not be framed for murder by doing it.

Of additional note...and I find most players miss this...if you machine puppet you kill something during Hoffman's activation (even though he does not do the killing) - as such, you're not protected by Hoffman's anti-pulse ability dampening. In other words, when you machine puppet against an ice gamin it will actually explode and hurt your crew. (vs. if the same model kills it in the same way on its own activation when Hoffman's dampening is up and running).

Happy puppeting.

The last three posts give a strong argument, and point out why it is easy for players to read the cards as written and rule the way they did. I can see their point.

But a consequence of this is that the Riders' abilities would end at the end closing phase. This makes the dead rider and pale rider in particular underperform if they don't get initiative and activate first the following turn since they would have NO purpose abilities yet.

It also causes issues, in that the abilities gained under rider purposes could be dispelled as effects.

I think there is a need, in order to justify the cost of the models, and possibly to fulfill the design intent (I didn't design them), for Riders to never be "purposeless" and to not allow the abilities gained by purposes to be dispelled.

As a result, Nix and Tograth posted their answer - which seems to solve both these problems. But it does make Purposes follow a different set of rules from basically all other abilities in terms of RAW.

Perhaps a good fix would be to errata the Purposes to include the additional wording:

Abilities gained from *** Purpose/Stage can not be removed. Abilities gained from *** Purpose/Stage do not end at the end closing phase.

This would make them like how Jack Daw was erratta'd so that Undying can't be removed (making him unkillable). And how many abilities list that they do not end at the end closing phase.

This was a quick thought - so the wording may cause other problems. I'm not a game designer, just a player. I'll leave it to others to consider how best to word things.

Edit:

I think this keeps the abilities gained as effects - so they would not be able to be assimilated, although the overall purpose would. If it's important to be the other way around - different wording is likely needed. Like I said, not a professional game designer.

---------- Post added at 10:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:32 AM ----------

Another comparable example is the Slate Ridge Mauler's Enrage, which means it gains Hard to Kill and +2 Cb when it has 4wds or less. This is exactly the same as the Dead Rider's Unnatural purpose ability in that at a certain number of wounds, you apply an effect. If aHoffman turned a Slate Ridge Mauler on 4wd into a construct, Lazarus could not assimilate Hard to Kill but could assimilate Enrage and apply the effects based on his own Wds.

At least that's how it reads RAW...

Wait...does this mean my witchling stalker can dispel the "Hard to Kill" effect gained by the bear when it is at 4 wds or less? And/or the +cb?

OK, it works like this..

He can gain extra Armor, but that never modifies his Patchwork Armor. So things that Ignore Armor will still Ignore the extra Armor.

Eg he gets +2 Armor from an effect. He would remove 3Dg when hit. If a hit Ignored Armor, it would Ignore the +2 Armor as that don't increase his Patchwork Armor but remains a seperate modifier, but wouldn't ignore the +1 Patchwork Armor, so he could remove 1Dg from the total.

Thanks, Ratty! Is it possible to put this in the model clarifications faq for the reinforced patchwork armor ability? I think this is something that (as shown by this thread) can be misinterpreted easily at first glance.

Once again, super thanks for posting on this. If you get a chance, if you could look at the thread below about what Lazarus can assimilate from riders' purposes that would be ... well ... awesome!

So what am I missing then. If you are leaving The Hoff out of LoS behind of the Peacekeeper; what's the point of doing the protection chain?

Just starting a C. Hoffman crew: with these being the minis I have so far.

Guild Crew - 50 - Scrap

C. Hoffman

--

6 Pool

Mobile Toolkit [4ss]

• Guardian
  [7ss]
  
  
• Hunter
  [6ss]
  
  
• Hunter
  [6ss]
  
  
• Peacekeeper
  [9ss]
  
  
• Warden
  [5ss]
  
  
• Warden
  [5ss]
  
  
• Watcher
  [3ss]
  
  
• Watcher
  [3ss]
  
  
• Santana/Santiago
  [3ss]
  
  

Should I be considering anything else besides Clockwork Traps?

Wow. 50 SS Hoffman crew. That's a lot more SS than I usually play with.

In fact, I can't even make your crew's math add up to a 50 ss list. Espeically considering that Santana/Santiago is a 7 ss model, not a 3 ss...

Anyway, I'd definitely at least consider Hoff's two other BIG construct ride options: The Pale Rider and the Mechanical Rider. The Pale Rider definitely at least. It's so good.

Also, you can take two guardians. You should, especially with more "big targets" to protect. I'd drop a Hunter and lose a ss to take a second Guardian instead.

A 50 ss list for me might look like:

C. Hoffman -- 5 Pool

Mobile Toolkit [4ss]

• Guardian [7ss]
  
• Guardian [7 ss]
  
• Pale Rider [9ss]
  
• Peacekeeper [9ss]
  
• Warden [5ss]
  
• Warden [5ss]
  
• Watcher [3ss]
  

I haven't played with the clockwork traps at all, either. And I'm not a fan of two wardens and a peacekeeper all in my list (not enough cards and too many chances to want to relentless discard). I might consider the following for more activations:

C. Hoffman -- 4 Pool

Mobile Toolkit [4ss]

• Guardian [7ss]
  
• Guardian [7 ss]
  
• Pale Rider [9ss]
  
• Peacekeeper [9ss]
  
• Warden [5ss]
  
• Watcher [3ss]
  
• Clockwork Trap [2 ss]
  
• Clockwork Trap [2 ss]
  
• Clockwork Trap [2 ss]
  

Thanks for that Togarth. A clarifying question:

Can Lazarus assimilate Bulletproof?

based on what you said I'm guessing yes

No one else weighing in? I'd like a little more than one post saying it stacks and one saying it doesn't.

Q: Does reinforced patchwork armor stack with armor from other sources?

I believe the rule is:

When things ignore line of sight, they also ignore cover.

But I'm not a rules marshal, just a player, so don't quote me on that.

Pale rider and Laz cannot be hired into the same crew which is why I never mentioned it.

Interestingly, while you can't hire the pale rider with Lazarus in crew, I don't see any reason why avatar Leveticus can't summon him after manifesting. So you can have Pale Rider and Lazarus both working together for Levi.

---------- Post added at 06:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:58 PM ----------

Exactly

Exactly what, exactly?

Hrm...interesting.

So if Lazarus assimilates Armor +3 from something nearby he is treated as Armor +4 or Armor +6 vs. blasts?

What happens if after assimilating this armor, the Large Steampunk Arachnid hits him and tries to reduce his armor?

Just clarifying before I start using my new Lazarus model.

Does Lazarus' armor stack with other armor?

My first thought was "no" because Reinforced Patchwork Armor says: "This armor cannot be modified or ignored"

But then I saw Lazarus had Evasive 2 - which grants armor +2 vs. Blasts.

So is stacking armor not the same as modifying it?

Does Lazarus get:

Armor +1 vs. blasts (He ALWAYS gets the unmodifiable patchwork armor)

Armor +2 vs. blasts (He chooses to use the evasive armor instead)

Armor +3 vs. blasts (The Evasive and Patchwork armors can stack)

Here are some example situations that will help clarify this for me. Please let me know how to resolve each.

Example 1: Pale Rider at start of turn

Turn 2 ends with the Pale Rider activating last and adjusting his stage to Stage 2: Reveling in Death, giving him Armor +1 and the Rapid Fire ability. Its then the end closing phase. Turn 3 starts and I do not get initiative. Another model attacks the Pale Rider before he activates. Does he still have armor +1 for this attack?

Example 2: Lazarus early assimilate from Mechanical Rider

At the start of the game, Lazarus has picked up two scrap counters and is near the Mechanical Rider, who has not activated yet. Being turn 1, the mechanical rider is in Powering Up Stage and has (+1) Nimble and Pass Through. Can Lazarus assimilate the +1 Nimble from the Mechanical Rider?

Example 3: Lazarus assimilates a purpose

At the start of the game, Lazarus has two scrap counters and is near the Dead Rider. Can Lazarus assimilate Unnatural Purpose gaining all the text below that ability? As such, the NEXT time Lazarus activates, he checks his wounds and gains the appropriate abilities below. So on turn two, if he has taken no damage before he activates, he gains Pass Through and Scout. On turn three after taking damage to reduce his wounds to five, he gains Fast and Terrifying. I realize he cannot adjust his purpose without also assimilating Adjust Purpose spell, but could he do what I said?

Example 4: Could Lazarus assimilate the Mechanical Rider's Power Cycle which would set itself based on the turn? This is a similar idea to Example 3 above.

A few questions re: Rider Purposes

Question 1: Do the riders keep the abilities under their purposes turn to turn?

In other words, does the fast (+1) and terrifying that the dead rider gets from his purpose end at the closing phase of each turn like other effects and not come back until after he activates the following turn?

Note: Since each purpose is worded differently, this question may need to be answered separately for each rider.

Note 2: This question was asked previously in this forum with mixed results. I just wanted to make sure I was playing with the most up to date ruling.

Question 2: Are the purposes considered talents and the abilities they grant considered effects or are the purposes not talents and the abilities they grant considered talents or something else entirely? I'm wondering this because I'm considering what Lazarus can actually assimilate.

In other words, can Lazarus assimilate the (+1) fast from the dead rider when it is active on him due to his current wound level? Or is it an effect so he can't assimilate it?

Also, could Lazarus just assimilate the entire dead rider Purpose, so that you check Lazarus' wounds when he activates and he gains abilities based on that...

Clarification would help.

It's a sacrifice if they "do their thing". Assuming their thing means the clamp on paralyze trick.

Kadeton, I hate this too. But thanks to your information, I think I understand it now.

Models seem to "check state" whenever they are hit by an attack*. If a model with slow to die is about to check its state, it sees that "oh I'm at 0 wds - let me do my slow to die" which temporarily postpones its death. If it hits an opponent, it will cause the opponent to suddenly "check its state". For Seamus, he'll get hit by this attack, be forced to instantly check his state and realize he's dead before the DM actually realizes it's dead and heals him. For Executioners, its at this point that the first executioner is able to realize it is dead and activate slow to die.

This would work out okay for the executioner example, if the second slow to die hit forced the second executioner to check its state again and then realize it is dead. But apparently when Ex 1 hits Ex 2 doing no wounds (since it has none at this point) it doesn't check its state. For some reason, you don't check state because you did no wounds? Ex 2 (at zero wounds) does not realize it is dead yet and so instead Ex 1 proceeds to try to get out of its slow to die and dies.

Now that one of the executioners has died, the other can heal and we're good. I'd be happier if Ex 2 has to check its state after the Ex 1 slow to die hit, realizes it is at 0 wounds with no options (can only use slow to die once...) and dies. Then Ex 1 would heal fully and we're done; instead of this odd The Defending Executioner wins scenario.

*so the star means that a hit does not force a check of state, but a hit that does damage forces a check of state.

Anyway, I guess I understand how to play now...which was the original point. RIP Seamus. We knew ye well!

Do people not like Lazarus in a Levi crew? I was warming up to the idea of an alternate scavenger on the board for when Levi dies so that SPAs still drop scrap.