Therril_83

I can understand your reasoning too, it is quite similar to one of my gaming group, and I don't really object to it, I just don't see either way supported by the rules. I can't find solid argument in the rules book that says either that a blast does inherit the trait from it's source, nor one that truly says it doesn't. It's somewhat of a dark corner of the rules as far as I can read it. I just find blasts being described more as their own damage source than as a child source. It does relate to the damage flip, yes, but it does not relate to the source of the damage flip as I see it. I'm really fishing for someone to come with either a really solid argument, or a marshal's badge..

I reasoned out this way of looking at it, please comment if you think it hits the spot or if it's way off in some way. If you separate things into "Source of Damage" (henceforth SoD) and "Damage Type" (DT), you could in this case argue that when an effect causes enough damage to generate blasts, the damage from those blasts have a new SoD but they inherit the same DT. an example: Rasputina casts December's Curse on a target. When it does damage, SoD is a ranged strike spell, triggering Bulletproof, and DT is magical so also triggering Magical resistance. If the damage was high enough, it results in Blast Markers coming into effect. When they do damage, the damage's SoD is Blast, so triggers Evasive (but not Bulletproof), but it inherits the DT of December's Curse being a spell so is still magical and triggers Magical Resistance.

A question came up in our game a few days ago. short version: does blast markers inherit the types of the ability that caused them? examples: If I shoot with a gun that triggers a blast, will that damage retain it's Ranged Strike-type aswell as being blasts, and therefore being reduced both by Bulletproof and Evasive talents? Same thing with a Melee Strike that causes a blast, will that trigger effects that only trigger from taking melee damage, ex Black Blood?

Gonna have to agree a bit with Gensuke that this is a bit of a poor write in the rules. Why is it that these fellows are "placed" as totally new models because they died, but a buried model is "placed" as it was when they left the board? I suppose the argument is that it's the manner of their removal from play that dictates how they return, but I still say it's confusing. I reckon it would have been easier to understand if they had been said to be summoned instead.

Feel free to suggest a better word to describe the pose, I simply don't know a better way to say it, and I mean nothing bad by it. Would it have been better if I called the pose feminin? Wouldn't that be degrading to women reading these forums instead? In swedish I know a few words better used, but I just don't in english and I wanted to explain the reason behind the conversion.

With risk of being lynched for political incorrectness, the reason I did the swap was because that young nephilim looked so gay to begin with, and I wanted to accentuate it even further. The Mature Nephilim doesn't at all look gay so no, he's not getting those wings. The Mature has another story to it though. I find that every time I bring him to a game, he dies, and I find myself exclaiming "You killed my Mature Neph! You bastard!" which has made me name him Kenny. So he's getting orange clothing to fit that name. But I'm not modelling any hood or anything Edit: also, the Cherub and Young Neph are supposed to get some grass on their bases aswell, I just felt like I hadn't posted anything in a while and wanted to get them up

I have changed to using Picasa.com for uploading my images, but so far I haven't found out how to link images as thumbnails so I'm linking them in fullsize for the time being. Had a few laughs about the stance of the second Young Nephilim with some friends, and decided to switch wings on him and the cherub to drive home the joke Malifaux Cherub: Young Nephilim: Next up is Mature Nephilim and Lilith..

Any more thoughts on this?

Also remember that when placing (as with summoning) you have to place it so that it is entirely within range. So you can't have very large forests if you want to use the Waldgeists ability.

Again, he can not stop being a construct, he can just ignore effects targeting them. A subtle, but quite noteworthy difference.

No, you misunderstood me. Reason I am not actually quoting the rule is because I don't have neither book nor card here. What happens is, the trapper makes an ordinary ranged strike targeting Ramos. Nothing special here, nothing specifically targeting constructs. But because Ramos is a construct, an effect takes place targeting the trapper, giving him . Ramos can not stop being a construct, and there is nothing targeting him other than a perfectly ordinary ranged strike.

Me and a friend were discussing a rule the other day, and since I ordered a model where this might be an issue I thought better to get it cleared before I start using that model. I tried searching both on the forum and using Googles "site:"-option but I couldn't find anything related, so I hope this is a new one. If you have an ability that affects you when a construct is involved, but you don't actually target that construct, can it be negated via Perfect Machine? The example that brought it up is a Freikorps Trapper vs Ramos. The Trapper get's on damage when targeting beasts or constructs with his rifle. My friend argued that because he needs to target a construct, and Ramos can ignore being a construct, the trapper can't get the bonus. But I read it more as this is an effect on the trapper that doesn't target Ramos in any way, therefore Ramos cannot ignore it. I don't read it as Ramos stops being a construct, he can just chose to ignore certain effects that happen to target them, and the Trapper's effect targets the Trapper himself, not Ramos. Anyone care discuss?

Two more tots completed. Mature is primed and ready for some paint, but due to holidays and stuff he probably wont be finished quickly Tot #2 Tot #3

Another Nephilim finished, this time a Young one.

And the first little guy is done. I'm quite happy with it, would perhaps have put the grass patches a little differently but other than that I'm satisfied. As for being bloody, I think a bloody mess can look really cool if executed very well. If executed poorly I think it just looks really bad. And since I can't do it good, I prefer to keep away from it. As simple as that (I might try something on Lilith's sword though..)

I am quite new to Malifaux so don't take me too serious, I'm merely adding thoughts here. In Magic The Gathering, it is a very clear distinction between "owning player" and "controlling player". Owning player can never change, but controlling can. The question of this topic would be answered by "your models" being "owning players" and therefore Obey wouldn't work since it only changes the controlling player. That's how I would argue until someone convinced me otherwise I think.

A small WIP on the first terror..

A great link, thank you. One can never get too many guides to modeling I might add also, that I've been playing warhammer fantasy for about 14 years, on-and-off, but I'm completely new to Malifaux. Only one practice game so far, and I can already see myself spending alot of time on this game.

After luring you in with the title, I'm going to show you my latest vacation photos!! ..or not. But I thought I'd show a bit of a WIP on my Lilith crew, which has so far only gotten some basing done. This is my first real paintlog, and I thought I'd see if I can use this to keep myself motivated and produce some paint on them aswell. And for any viewer ofcourse, feel free to come with C&C on any and all things. On to some photos: They are a bit blurry, I know, but I think the basing atleast comes through. And my gf did give me some pointers on how her camera works so hopefully the next batch of pics will improve Lilith Mature Nephilim Young Nephilims Terror Tots