MrDeathTrout

Please see "Who Flips" I quoted earlier in this thread.

Where is it stated that you control the model? I have found nothing in the rules to support this, only that you control the Action.

Obey does control an entire action. "an" is the key word there it controls 1 action and everything to do with that 1 action. It has not effect on any other actions even if they are generated by that action and even if that 1 action is not resolved until after other actions are resolved. Focus also benefits an entire action. If an attack action made multiple damage flips (I believe Wong can do this) I would argue all of them would benefit from focus. It has not effect on any other actions even if they are generated by that action and even if that 1 action is not resolved until after other actions are resolved. That is not how I interpret the FAQ entry. My interpretation of what happens if you use focus on a Charge action. Declare charge and Focus use. [Focused] Charge action takes place (move the model). No attack or damage flips are used so the focus has no effect. Perform (1) Ml Attack (not focused) Perform (1) Ml Attack (not focused) [Focused] Charge action is resolved. If you want to use a focus on one of your charge attacks you declare it when you declare the individual attack.

I agree that any action you control can do anything that is valid for that action (like us abilities, declare triggers, etc). But there is strong precedent that something Applied to an action only affects that action, not any resulting actions. E.g. Focus used on a Charge does not benefit the resulting attacks. Both Obey and Focus affect a single action. Why does Obey affect the resulting actions and Focus does not?

I don't thing that is very strong evidence. Vengeance Bullet says "When this model declares an Sh Attack Action..." so that's all part of the obeyed action.

The controller of the model does not change. The Obeying models controller controls the action, but not the model. See quote below. While the Charge action is not resolved until after all resulting attacks are resolved it does not follow that anything that applies to the charge action applies to the resulting actions. For example Focus applies to a single action (just like Obey) and if used on a Charge action it does not apply to the resulting actions. Also why would a triggered attack operate any differently? The Charge action would not be resolved until after the Triggered attack was resolved/

I remember this being in a thread, but cannot find it. If a model obeys an opponents model to take a (1) Charge action who controls the attack actions? I believe it is the controller of the obeyed model. The Obey gives control of the action it takes only (in this case the Charge). Any actions generated from this action are separate actions not under control of the Obey. Is that correct? Same question for Collodi'e Idle Hands.

Do Tengu need a buff? I'm torn. I love them for scheme marker removal, but they can't do much else. Its too much work go get much out of their give regen, with so many other good healers. They are too fragile to even stand up to other scheme runners. So all I ever use them for is darting out and removing a couple of markers before they die. So I almost never take them since their us is so limited. For TT Archers make their Leap Aside ability built in and work after an attack succeeds (instead of fails as it is now). So your opponent gets one good wack at them. As it is the trigger is so hard to get off it might as well not be there.

Thunder Archers need something as well. They have potential, but are over shadowed by every other shooting model in TT.

Home Front League: Oct 16 thru Dec 10 2017 Mugu Games 5233 Evergreen Way, Everett, WA 98203 and PFC Games 7528 Olympic View Dr, Edmonds, WA 98026 Format: To count in the league you and your opponent must agree the game is a Home Front game and will be reported on the Home Front page on Wyrd’s site. Email the results of the game to me as well; I’ll need the names of the participants and their VP totals. You can play up to 5 Home Front games per two-week block. The will be determined by League Points, with VP Differential, then Total VP as tie breakers. You can score up to 5 LP per game, and you are guaranteed at least 2 LP if you play a different opponent each game in a block. League Points per game. +4 Win +2 Draw +1 Lose +1 Playing an opponent you have not yet played this block. Schedule: Block 2 Oct 16 to Oct 29 Block 3 Oct 30 to Nov 12 Block 4 Nov 13 to Nov 26 Block 5 Nov 27 to Dec 10 FYI – the league will run from Blocks 2 thru 4. Block one games will not count toward this league. Prizes: TBD based on participation.

I think we all need to take it down a notch. My 2 cents. The rule book clearly defines a flips as turning over one or more cards. Dismissing this because is it not in the +/- flips section is completely invalid. The game works perfectly well using this definition. The fact that so many things do not work as we know they are intended (Recalled Training, Lawyers, Damage Filps) with the alternate interpretation it should be enough to convince anyone which interpretation is intended. You can dismiss them all as poorly writen or consider the Lucky Emissaries trait is the one that is poorly written in a game that is full of loose language. Anyone who has played Malifaux for any length of time should know the language is very loose and can often be used to support unintended outcomes when desired. Flip is probably used to refer to a single card flip many places, but the intent of the Lucky Emisary's trait is pretty obvious.

But that part hasn't yet gotten to the and and there it talks about flipping additional cards. You naturally get only a single suit and a single number for the duel but Lucky Draw isn't talking about the result but about flipping. It may not have gotten to the +/- flips yet, but it says "...the model turns over one or more cards..." So how how does this not apply to +/- flips. Is there another way to flip multiple cards I don't know about? If each card flipped is a flip what does this mean? Each time you flip a single card don't flip more than four of them? if each card is a flip that means I flip an extra card for each card flipped. So that's an infinite number of cards? I'n guessing you'll sat this is another card that is written incorrectly?

I don't see the difference. Neither uses keywords that have a specific timing, yet one says use the "After X" trigger timing and the other says not to. IMHO: Only Wyrd can explain this seeming contradiction. IMHO part 2: It's time for M2.5. Clean timing up.

"'After an Attack Action fails" should be the same timing as "after an Attack Action succeeds", right? It's just happening due to a different outcome of the duel. This doesn't really change anything about who places the model in this case, but it would matter for something like Mei Feng's Jackhammer Kick that pushes Mei Feng even if her Attack fails. Interesting. I was going off this FAQ entry Am I misunderstanding or are they in direct conflict with one another? Both are Df triggers.

EDIT: I agree your outcome, but I don't think your resoning is correct. 1) After Damaging triggers are resolved after Step 5. I think that has the same timing as "after an attack action fails". You may be right that Go Home resolves after the attack, so the Brew Master's control has expired when the model is sent home. But... 2) ... it is irrelevant. Go Home says "...the Attacker's controller places...". The controller of the attacking model does not change. Brew Master's controller controls the attack action, but never the model. So whenever the place occurs Brew Master's controller doesn't get to place it.

There's no need to be rude and condescending.

Feels dirty, but I'd say Shrodingers Huggy works RAW.

Great, episode. One correction: the Shadow Emissary's upgrade does half the Oni's total wounds rounded up +1. So Asami will take 6 damage from it regardless of here current wounds.

I would say yes.

Thank you! I searched the forum, but missed that one. It doesn't look like there was total consensus, but the majority said you can choose the condition.

If the Necrotic Machine forces a model with Frozen Heart to either take damage or gain Paralyzed can the Frozen Heart model choose to gain Paralyzed, which is then nullified by Frozen Heart? I think the answer is no because is says to gain the condition which the Frozen Heard model cannot do, so it is not a valid choice.

I think it needs LoS to any part of the marker, just like anything else. That's what we do when placing all the other markers, but most if not all of them have a Ht associated with them.

The upgrade says "...place all resulting Markers anywhere in 12" of this model and within Line of Sight." Doesn't that mean the blast markers must be withing LoS of Misaki? If so then Ht of the blast marker is relevant.

I must be thinking of something else. Determining LoS. Could be important with Misaki's new upgrade. I'll treat them as Ht 0 then.

I know blast markers only affect models within 3" above or below, but do that have a Ht characteristic? I swear they were Ht 5, but I can't find that anywhere in the rulebook or FAQ.