23nsky

I guess the best way would likely be the aura VS pulse argument (thats where my 'hole-in-the-middle' headspace comes from). So which of these two describes the "Within" mechanic? A pulse? Or an Aura?

The problem there is that wording still seems to cover the area around the model - leaving a hole-in-the-middle where the model itself is. Like I said, it the Within distance is 0-6" (for example) the this distance happens from where the model's base ends and extends outwards. If the model were to be affected themselves, the measurement would need to start from before the edge of the base for it to count as being offically 'within'. Hence my confusion (and that of some of my club members).

I feel we need some official clarity on this one as there is a LOT of arguments to both sides of "does Within count yourself, or Not?" I think the issue boils down to where is the 'Within' measured from. I.e.: - if its from the center of the model (which I doubt it is), then technically it should be measured LESS than the total distance (since you need to compensate for the 15mm border from the mini's base - if its from the edge of the model (which I assume everyone does), that would give the total amount. HOWEVER, this would then prevent the model targeting itself as I assume within is measured from 0" (i.e.: where the base starts). If the later case were to exist, than the only mathmatical way the model could target itself is if the 'within' takes a negative value into account (i.e.: if the within range is 6", then for the model to target itself, the total Within distance would need be -0.1" to 6" for the model to be able to affect itself). I realize this is getting complicated but I am doing the best to state the confusion of the argument for clarity sake. The simple version of the question is this - could one of the offical Malifaux Rule Designers give a solid clarification on this question? Does Within count yourself, even if the measurement starts from the edge of the miniture's base? Not looking for answer by popular consensus. A single answer from a ruling official would finish this rule confusion for good.

I'm almost positive I'm reading this wrong, but I can't seem to shake it. Jakob Lynch has two triggers for his Holdout Pistol. Malifaux Roulette and Pip the Ace. I know the rules state you can only ever have one trigger activate with each attack, but I am curious about something here. If Malifaux Roulette draws a Ram's card from your opponent's hand (which deals 3/4/6 damage), does this trigger Pip the Ace which requires' a Ram to be triggered? I'm sure its not the case, although if it is it does make the Ram reveal in Roulette certainly more potent. I think the reason I say this is that increasing your damage flip on a 2/3/4 attack seems a little underplayed, compared to a 3/4/6 flip. Clarity please.

Darn. Well cheers though for clearing it up!

Looking at this and wondering, if this was used on an Undead model, would that essentially Paralyze them? The way it reads is thus: "If an affected model activates within 3” of any Undead model, it can only take movement Actions until it is at least 3” away from any Undead model. If an affected model cannot be moved without the movement ending within 3” of an Undead model it Passes." If used on an undead model, since the target itself is Undead, it can never move 3" away from itself. Thus it must pass and give up its action (essentially paralyzing them - without the extra effects that Paralyze causes). Do I have this right?

Was looking at this and wondered about something. Seamus' action reads: (0) No Escape: Target a model within 6”. This model may immediately Charge target if target is moved using a movement effect. No Escape ends when this model Charges this turn or at the Start Closing Phase. I realize the design of this is usually to have Seamus affect a target with it, have a Belle "Lure" the target towards her, and let Seamus make (essentially) a (0) Charge on the target. However, I was wondering what counts as a movement effect? Does walking or charging count? If so, is it technically possible for Seamus to use this to "Charge" his allies and get a free 8" move? For example, could I do this: 1) Seamus uses "No Escape" on a Belle 5" away from himself. His activation ends. 2) The Belle walks 4+2" (ty "Belles of the Ball" ability!) to move 6". 3) Seamus charges after the Belle, also moving 6" (remaining 5" away from her) I assume, given how the ability is worded, Seamus charges AFTER the target has moved. Or do I have that wrong?

He is a Beliber (justin Beiber fan), and supports Rebecca Black career (because both are Souless children that he refuses to sacrifice to live again, even though his opponent begs him to sacrifice them!)

Noticed something I thought I'd check.Nicodem has a trigger on his cane/ decay spell that says: "After killing a living or Undead defender with a Cane Strike or Decay, place a number of Mindless Zombies equal to the defender’s base size in base contact with the defender before it is removed from play. Defender does not generate Corpse Counters." Then, on the Steampunk Abomination card, it says: Warped: When this model is killed, you choose whether it generates 1 Corpse or Scrap Counter. Does this mean, if Nicodem kills a Steampunk Abomination with the trigger, that a Mindless Zombie is created AND the Steampunk Abomination must produce a Scrap Counter (given they cannot generate a Corpse Counter).Or, though I don't think it does, does it mean the dead Steampunk produces NEITHER a corpse or Scrap counter?

Ok. I'm Seamus. I'm going to be up against Leveticus and I feel stumped on what to use. Mostly because my opponent has boasted quite loudly at Leveticus being nigh impossible to kill, which I will admit has pysched me out (hence me wanting some advice to re-raise my confidence to be able to take him on). This opponent seems always eager to bring: - Rusty Alice - x4 Steampunk Abominations - 1-2 Canine Remains (to produce a second hollow waif) - He also rants about his love for an Undead Rider, and the Desolation Engines I feel at a loss. His SPA's just produce scrap so Leveticus can raise new SPA's while preventing me raising new belles, while his SPA's can kill my forces to produce even MORE SPA's. Leveticus' spells ignore the defense on spirits and armor AND Hard to Wound. And killing him seems somewhat fruitless unless I can also take down the x2 Hollow Waif's in the same go. I have at my disposal: - Avatar Seamus - Copy Cat Killer - Grave Spirit - Necromantic Machine - x3 Rotten Belles - Madam Sybelle - Molly - Rouge Necromancy - x3 Punk Zombies - Sebastian - x4 NightWraths - x5 Canine Remains - x3 Drowned - x3 Autopsies - Bette Noir - x3 Necropunks - x3 Crooligans - x2 Hanged - Flesh Construct - Kill Joy - Desperate Mercenary Any advice on what to take and why it would be in my benefit to do so to take Leveticus down?

Ok. So I'm starting to really get into understanding my Avatar. Have a few questions to really get to learn his full potential though, so lets see if I can get some answers: 1) If an enemy fails a Morale Check against Seamus' Terrifying while within Melee Range of Seamus', can Seamus make a disengaging strike against the fleeing victim? 2) If Seamus succeeds his Disengaging strike on the fleeing enemy, does the enemy end its movement at the edge of Seamus' melee range instead of falling back double its Walk? 3) If Seamus succeeds his Disengaging strike on a fleeing enemy, AND it ends its movement due to the Disengaging strike stopping it from running, does it still count as having fallen back - requiring to spend its next activation to rally? 4) If Seamus has reduced his WP to 1 with "Succumb to Darkness", can he still use "Gargantuan Growth" and reduce his WP to 0? 5) If a model starts within range of multiple models with Terrifying, does it need to make a Morale Checks against each model? (i.e.: if a target is within the Melee range of x3 models with Terrifying, does the model need to make x3 separate Morale Checks - one for each model?) 6) If the model mentioned in question "3" fails its first Morale Check, making it fall back, does it still need to make a Morale check for the other two Terrifying models (so that Seamus can heal 1 WD for each failed Morale Check)?

I'm pretty sure I have this right, but felt no harm double checking: Since this trigger is tied into her WP, it triggers whenever she attempts and WP-duel and she flips a crow. If that is the case, then doesn't this mean this triggers whenever Molly casts "Whispered Secret", "The Shocking Truth", and "Terrible Secret" as all Spells cause the target to take a WP duel AND require a crow in their casting to be flipped? Even in writing this I am somewhat unsure. The trigger is tied into Molly's WP, and spells are cast with CA. That being said the wording does seem to imply that if Molly wins an opposed WP duel (which the above spells are) she deals 2 Wd's to the target. If its not then I can only assume its effect is for when Molly uses Terrifying (via the Gorgon's Tear) or to resist a WP duel cast at her. Which is still good. So can someone please clarify this for me.

Nice. Cheers Ratty! Love your work btw. Printed out and laminated your Scheme cards last week. Will be using them this Sunday for my first few Seamus games

Just confirming that I do have this right. Seamus (Avatar of Dread) causes Terrifying to ANYTHING that is an enemy and doesn't have Anathema. This includes Constructs, Spirits, Living Units with "Terror Immune", etc... Is that right? Just want to be sure of this.

Yes I'm being lazy to read the rule book. Just want to know, if Molly if a Henchman and her Master already has a totem active and alive, can she still use her spell to summon a Necromantic Machine? I question this because I understand a crew can only have one Totem - even if a new one can be summoned. Of course I realize its useful if Molly is leading the crew, in which case she can constantly resummon her totem when it falls, but naturally I wonder if its valid if she's not the "Master". Also, can she use it if her Master is Totem-less (i.e.: if the initial totem dies, can Molly summon the Necromatic Machine to be a new totem?)