BurkerKiing

OK a couple of issues. Firstly I didn't say you were stupid - I play Malifaux and enjoy the game. In a game of zombies, giant teddy bears and robots I'm not looking for hyper-realism. I'm simply looking for some internal consistency. As the rules (in the rule book) read there is that consistency. It is the FAQ that has introduced the spell vs melee attack wrinkle. I feel saddened that you feel you can't enter in to a debate with me before you play the "well hey don't play the game" argument. Isn't that how rules get looked at, reflected on, and dare I say changed because they were debated? Is everything npow written canonical? I totally agree with the fact that it is easier to say Pulses and Auras act as if a cylinder - it makes the game much easier. I also get that melee has a reach. As far as spells go I fail to see what extra complication it adds to the game by measuring diagonally. If you need reference points use the figures bases. I also agree with Razhem - lets add premeasuring, it won't destroy the game.

Again I would say that if you have LoS to the figure (as stated in the rules - no need to change them) you simple measure base to base as stated in the main rules p40. And if that means you need to measure diagonally you do so. You have already checked the figure is in LoS so that isn't an issue. Don't forget you don't actually care about the distance - all you care about is whether they are in range or not which usually boils down to are they within x" or not? ---------- Post added at 06:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:00 PM ---------- 40K lots, Fantasy lots, Magig CCG some - the others you are correct I don't have much experience. However, my point still stands. I was validating the fact that Malifaux players are more than capable of accepting that distances are not just horizontal or vertical and can be measured diagonally. My apologies if you are insulted by that comment but that was not its purpose.

Except distances aren't ALWAYS measured horizontally! Read my post re: Molly vs Dead Rider. If they were all measured the same I could understand it. But how it is measured depends on what the character is doing.

I do see your point about the scenery being drawn, but I'm willing to bet that those players are in the minority by a long way - even using books as hills would eliminate any problem with height, calculating the diagonal, or LOS. Hell if they really need to actually calculate the distance using the horizontal and vertical distance I'll make a table for them! Partial Cover? We have rules for that in the game. LoS? There are rules for that too. How would measuring the actual distance change any of those rules?

Hi Ratty - thanks for the input. I was hoping a Marshall would get involved. With regards to your comment about the range rules allowing you to play on a 2D board I don't see how these 'simplified' rules make any difference as they only have an effect when you use 3D. Further, the FAQ starts off with the sentence "Malifaux removes a lot of the complexity of playing a game with 2D or 3D terrain by abstracting measurements as ‘top-down’." I'm sorry but the players of Malifaux have got to be one of the most 'rules-lawery' (real word!) group of gamers I know! In no other game are individual words, phrases, sentences analysed as much as in Malifaux; and yet, a decision has been made to simplify one aspect of the rules (range) to such an extent that they no longer make sense to those very people who you point to in your post above. In fact, new players would NEED to start on a 2D board because if they go to 3D (say using the 'official' Malifaux scenery Terraclips) they will have to unlearn anything they have learnt about ranges from other games (or even real-life) and cope with possible scenarios I have outlined above. How can this really be better than measure the distance with a tape and that is the range? How can the same distance be 4" one way, but 2" another - try explaining that to your new player who you are trying to get interested in this different style of game! As I read back my post, please understand I do love this game but this one aspect really, really bugs me.

OK, thanks for the link to the FAQ. Is that basically saying that Malifaux players are too stupid to be able to cope with non-horizontal or vertical measuring so they have made it really easy for us? Can the general Malifaux player not cope with diagonals? Imagine the following scenario: Molly Squidpidge is standing atop the 6" tower from my first post, the Dead Rider is 2" away from the base of the tower. Player A measures the distance to the Dead Rider and says "great, I am only 2" away I can cast The Shocking Truth" (Range 3"). Player B measures the same range and says "Damn, can't attck you as my Scythe only has a range of 3" and you are 6" away!" How on Earth does this simplify measuring when the distance between you depends on what you want to do? I don't think the average Malifaux player is an idiot and think they are more than capable of holding the tape at an angle and reading from it. Why was it deemed too difficult to measure to different elevations! It seems an unnecessary complication to say how far apart are you? Well that depends on what you want to do!!!

Thanks for the reply. I have a big issue with this "all distances are measured horizontally" thing, and actually I can't find anywhere in the rule book that states this is so. It does state that for LoS you use a top-down view (P20) - thus reducing three dimensions to two. However, when you get to combat it states (page 40, Declare Target, then Check Range) that "All range measurements in Malifaux are made from the attacking model's base edge to the closest point on the target model's base edge." Hence in this scenario, for ALL purposes the two characters would be 6.3" apart, i.e. more than 6", less than 7".

Please answer the following question. Character A is at the top of a 6" high tower (on the edge) and character B is 2" from the base of the tower. How far apart are they?