Azahul

Is Alyce considered bad? I bring her OOK a bit in crews that can move friendlies and enemies around (Hamelin2, Zipp) because her Pit Traps are usually very dangerous in that sort of crew and giving her a Fly With Me or Toss in the Mud is usually enough to set her up in position to do work. Ashes I think would be fine if they just let him get rid of the summon token. You have near as much control over whether or not his reform gets disrupted as your opponent, just try and make sure you activate last that turn. If you're playing Leveticus that just means killing something before it activates, which, come on, it's Leveticus. It's your default game plan

Bishop is squishy, I'm not going to argue with that. He could maybe gain Hard to Kill to bring him in line with similar models in the Keyword. I don't think he needs anything else though. His 0" melee isn't a problem. Engaging Bishop outside his mele range does nothing when he gets 5" of free movement every turn without needing to make a flip. It sounds like you may just be playing him wrong though. He isn't a beater, he's a (expensive, admittedly) schemer who can comfortably kill any other schemer he comes across. Comparing him to Barbaros is laughable. Bishop is a hyper mobile 3 AP model, Barbaros is a centrefield tank with limited mobility who is designed to hold down a spot on the table.

I don't disagree but there is a definite trend on Wyrd's part to keep changes to a large number of cards to a minimum. There haven't been any corrections to duplicated triggers on that scale so far this edition. So realistically I think the fix is more likely to appear on those rules that wouldn't impact over a dozen other models. If anything it actually seems more likely to me that they would change the core rulebook's stance that LOS can be blocked on tangent lines, since that would let them avoid errataing any cards at all while still largely fixing the problem.

Ah, my apologies. I get the argument you're trying to make now, I wasn't quite understanding what you were getting at before. I suppose you could argue that point if you wanted to. Auras with terrain traits are a bit of a vague point in the game for a few reasons and the Hazardous rules specifically aren't well written. You might note that in the MWS they effectively house ruled how Hazardous works because Impassable Hazardous didn't really function rules as written. And then there's the Elevated rules, which the MWS couldn't decide between two interpretations of the rule so went with a third compromise version that isn't supported by the rulebook at all. At a certain point you and your opponents just need to pick an interpretation you want to live with and go for it.

You wouldn't see anyone play it like that because the rules say that touching is within 0", so if you are 1" from a model with a 1" hazardous aura you are within the hazardous. As for the bridge, terrain is a consensus system particularly as it gets complicated with elevation. I would just call the bridge itself a base.

Fair enough, a poor example. There is still no indication from that FAQ that auras have a base, since the FAQ specifies terrain pieces and not all instances of things with terrain traits. The aura rules don't indicate that an aura exists as an object on the table, but rather a measurement tied to the object projecting the aura. I'm inclined to go with the MWS ruling on this, it seems like it's inventing the least amount of language.

Not to get into the nitty gritty, but the official FAQ is very clear that all terrain has a base that must be defined by the players at the start of the game. Nothing in that infers auras must have a base however. Auras are clearly treated differently, as can be seen by the fact that a model generating a Hazardous aura doesn't apply Hazardous to other models when it moves.

And there's the fact that Trigger Finger doesn't even work outside their own activation, as an opponent can always place the marker such that the Bandido can't draw LOS to it... I wonder if removing the aura from Trigger Finger (so that they ignore LOS) and getting a printed tome would be enough? That's potentially a lot of attacks out of a couple of Bandidos, but they would still die shockingly easily and have no bonus. At Gunpoint meanwhile should at minimum let you draw a card if your opponent takes the Discard option. I don't think even that would be enough to make the action all that worth it but it'd be something.

I actually think Bandits probably find it easier to get the extra AP with Life of Crime. For one, with all their scheme marker generation discarding a marker is probably on average a cheaper cost than discarding a card (though it remains to be seen if this holds true for the Cavalier Keyword). For another, Life of Crime gives them the freedom of flexibility in terms of how they spend their turn. Hexbows need to end their turn within 2" of a predetermined location. A Lawyer might help get a marker out in a good spot but you do need to line up the trigger for that, and it isn't like Witch Hunters are swimming in card draw to fuel the extra AP.

Enforcer rather than Henchman, technically. Though in Dashel2 at least the distinction is relatively minor I use them a lot in Hamelin2. Great synergy with the Catalan Brawler, thanks to him applying Staggered while generating extra shots targeting Mv. I guess the Pale Rider might be a comparable buddy? A local Guild player got a bit of a kick out of summoning Guild Hounds then burning them to death to hand out Focus and get some corpses on the table early... that evil evil man.

Also worth noting you can't build in the triggers on the Tactical Actions with Runed Quiver, as it's attack actions only.

Have you been proxying 33 out of interest? Or are you waiting on the model release? 33 is useful since the Two Places At Once effect lets you avoid Black Blood splashes with the Nothing Beast, since you can unbury and place out of Black Blood range. And of course burying models easily also lets you dodge Black Blood. It's definitely a cagey game though. Nekima is a much better fighter and mobile enough to make Tara's usual game of avoiding the combat difficult. Personally I usually give the Nothing Beast Fast by having Aionus charge and punch it with a Tick Tock attack (healing the damage with Karina if necessary), rather than trying for the Fast transfer trigger on Tara's Time Slip. I rarely get that trigger off myself since Tara is usually trying to score without getting too close to the combat.

I don't disagree honestly. As you say, the degree to which not knowing the opposing crews impacts you is a lot less than other systems I've played. The relatively small range of impactful auras, the importance of scoring, the alternating activations, and the control given to players through being able to cheat and stone can actually make the game comparatively forgiving once you're over the hump of knowing how to play. I've played systems where bringing no-healing tech into something healing focused like Jedza would be considered a hard counter, but in Malifaux that same tech doesn't feel like a true shut-down since there are many ways to play around it on the table. Similarly, being taken off guard by something unknown will put you on the backfoot, but will rarely be so game changing that you won't be able to make a game of it provided you took a good crew for the Strategy and Scheme Pool and focus on getting points.

Sure, I just felt it was worth noting that the pre-game is going to become more challenging over the lifespan of the game. That doesn't have to mean power creep or a trend away from balance, but more options will inherently make predicting opposing tactics harder. Wishing for that that part of the game to remain as weighted as it is (or was pre-Malifaux Burns, or whenever you felt the balance was right) needs to be tempered with the knowledge that it isn't practicable to remain that way. Though you can certainly advocate for the rate of change to be slowed. Titles were a big dial change to go through at once.

There's actually an argument that the nerfs were nearly a buff. Going to Stat 6 alone makes Leveticus's attacks considerably more reliable, and if you pack stones for the crow trigger you can still force through a good amount of Irreducible damage. I think the new Gaining Grounds is more relevant to the drop in Leve's popularity. The pool this season rewards Tara's mobility or Schill's flexibility more so than Leve's killing power. He still has a place in more killy pools though.

All I know is I am excited to find out Haven't had a chance to play him yet, been busy with other Masters, but he's high on my list to try out.

Haha, you and I look at different things. For me, both Sonnias are going to be a ranged AOE blaster and are going to put out a lot of burning. For Colette I know I'm going to be facing a highly mobile schemer I probably won't get to kill with the ability to kidnap my models (and a probably guaranteed chance of seeing the Duet). If I build against those aspects of their game plans then the other minor differences don't tend to phase me.

I'm not sure titles really impact counter teching too badly, for every wildly divergent pair like Seamus you get ones like Sonnia or Colette where the challenges posed are at least broadly similar. But that aside, this is always going to be a problem as new releases hit the shelves, and there isn't really an alternative to new releases. Wyrd needs to make money to stay solvent. Miniature companies make money primarily by releasing new models. We don't have access to their finances so we can really only assume the number of new releases was calibrated to allow Wyrd to remain financially viable as a company, which is really in all our best interests. But it will lead to pre-game teching for your opponent (rather than emphasising the pool) becoming inherently more difficult as the number of variables grows.

I don't disagree, but if you're only playing with physical models then the period of time in which you need to contend in a meta with broken models before they get nerfed is reduced. If Tara2 gets nerfed in March next year then someone who only has to worry about her post-model release only has to handle her for about 6-7 months rather than the 15 or so online players have delt with.

I tend to think the act of proxying adds an additional barrier to using a model in meatspace. Not a high barrier, but unless you're competitively minded it's enough to deter many players in my experience. Consequently many players don't need to worry about new busted models until they release.

Sounds like a reasonable summation to me. It's a bit of an inherent issue with Wyrd's release cycle conflicting with the Errata schedule. Old busted stuff gets nerfed a few months after new busted stuff gets released, which then feels unfair for those people trying to face new threats with old toys. There isn't really a good solution. More frequent erratas help but consume resources and can alienate players in other ways, as well as running the risk of creating as many problems as they solve. Maybe the best approach would be to move the yearly errata to June and give it time to include the most recent release? Better to deal with broken models for only 9 months than 15... but it would still only leave a 3 month period before the next release wave hits and need to be contended with (in online Vassal environments at least).

It can sort of vary by Master. A couple of titles, such as Lucius or Som'er, are just a way those Masters act when the mood takes them. Others are clear progressions of those characters in the story, such as Jack Daw Ensouled (he has a soul now) or, sadly, Jakob Lynch Dark Bet. The unifying theme is that they are pretty much all representative of how those Masters are behaving at the time of the Burning Man's return to Malifaux, so they can be considered the most "current" versions of the Masters in the timeline, even if in a few cases all it will take is putting on a different outfit in the morning to flip back.

Ok so I decided to do some toying around with Parker2 in a competitive environment, so soloed him in the April Malifaux World Series event. Worked out well in the end, since I spent the latter half of April down with COVID so wasn't getting real life games. The April event had a 15 stone limit on OOK and Versatile options. Given that my Parker2 core includes the Hodgepodge Emissary I was essentially locked into picking a Bandit model with my last 15 stones. Ended up settling on the Convict Gunslinger and running it in all four games. A 7 stone cache felt about right, and in my view the Gunslinger is an outright better model than Sue (who does at least have Fistful of Scrip for Perdition synergy, but in my experience Sue is a tougher model who does less damage and is worse at scheming than the Gunslinger) and I like the Gunslinger's ability to reposition Mad Dog/Parker for effective turns and contribute potshots while scheming with Run and Gun over the Wokou Raider's improved durability and occasionally better personal mobility. That Gunslinger would ultimately contribute in a big way, scoring nearly all of my points in the last two rounds of the event himself. I was actually really impressed and will probably be hiring him to round out the crew a lot even in games where I'm not constrained by the OOK limit. In terms of key takeaways from the experience, I think I will start with saying Parker2 absolutely has competitive legs. My games were close, every game bar Round One (in which Parker engaged Sonnia1 in melee on Turn 1 and Staggered her so that her Disengage actions would be Mv 2 duels vs Stat 6 in which even a weak prevention flip would keep her locked in melee, ensuring she spent the entire game just making sword attacks) had a diff of 1 or 2, so there weren't really any blowout games. The general rule for most of the matches was that Parker and Mad Dog absorbed all the attention while either Benny or the Convict Gunslinger quietly stole the game, and thanks to the formidable healing in the crew most games finished with the crew largely intact (emphasis on "most" there).

All I mean with Stutter Time is that it can still give Fast. 33 has From Nothing. You can have Tara Rewind 33 and then give a model Fast with Stutter Time. Then bury 33 with Stutter Time and then unbury them by ending that Fast condition. Pine Box your target and Rewind back to the deployment zone to avoid retaliation. Though, thinking about it, what you probably do is run up a friendly model and hit them with a Burn Out Rewind rather than bothering to interact with enemy models at all. That would be the easier trick. 33 can just unbury off a friendly model with Fast with much the same threat range as the Expedite trick, except now it probably happens on Activation 3 instead of Activation 1 (an activation to run a friendly model, Tara's activation to Burn Out Rewind that model, Rewind 33, Stutter Time 33. And then 33 activates, ends Fast on the friendly to Unbury, buries an enemy model and Rewinds back to their deployment zone). If you make Expedite non-functional with her other abilities it certainly makes her weaker, but it doesn't remove the specific trick everyone complains about. It'll be harder to do but there will remain games where Tara gets to be thoroughly uninteractive.

I'm not really into testing fan rules myself, but I appreciate the offer. I'm not a playtester and I play games to have fun, not to provide data to back the opinions I espouse on the internet. My issue with your suggestion in turn is that it doesn't actually stop the kidnap with no retaliation. Nerfing Expedite does make it harder to pull off, but Tara can still use Stutter Time to allow 33 to Unbury. It won't be a Turn 1 Activation 1 play every game anymore, but the option will remain to have someone's Master buried and 33 in your deployment zone with minimal options to interact. You would be making Tara2 worse, absolutely, but the NPE would remain intact in its current form.