Jump to content

solkan

Members
  • Content Count

    3,841
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

solkan last won the day on July 16

solkan had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,010 Excellent Walrus

3 Followers

About solkan

  • Rank
    Tyrant
  • Birthday 02/23/1973

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Old threads wouldn't really give you the wording you're looking for. If old versions of the rules PDFs existed, they would presumably still be under NDA. But, after going back and checking, in good faith I am going to quote the open beta announcement: (emphasis added). I believe that's permission to not beat around the bush concerning the former Nested Effects rules. If the lifting of the beta NDAs was rescinded, would a moderator please delete this post? According to my records, the Nested Effects were in the rules up to the 9.19 Core Rules (I can't confirm when they appeared originally), and then removed from the text from 10.13 and later. (Disclaimer: This is according to my records.) Damage Timing in something resembling its current form (where 'after killing' effects are resolved before the model is removed from the game) appears shortly after that. In any event, that rule existed for part of the closed beta and then went away.
  2. Looking at the timing, as far as I can tell there's only one (or two) duels performed in Step 4, depending on whether the Action uses a Simple Duel or an Opposed Duel. And that what Inhuman Physiology would apply to. The duel caused by Terrifying happens during Step 3, because Terrifying is specified: "After an enemy model targets this model with an Attack Action, the enemy model must pass a TN11 Wp duel or the Action fails." The M2E rulebook contains a nice reminder that that's the step during which Terror Duels are resolved, but the combat example with Basse thankfully confirms that the Terrifying duel still happens immediately upon declaration. Why does Step 4 say "Duels", plural? And that's also why Combat Finesse says "the Attacking model's duel". In the opposed duel, the attacker doesn't get to cheat fate. It's not stopping the defender cheating its duel.
  3. The "Only Masters, No Men" lists don't seem to have quite caught on yet. For example: Leader: Molly Squidpidge Necrotic Machine Reva Cortinas Corpse Candle x2 Kirai Ankoku Ikiryo Just sayin'. 🤷‍♀️
  4. What game state is there to differentiate between the two Rocket Launcher upgrades, or prove that the Rocket Launcher upgrade you removed from the model is a different Rocket Launcher upgrade than the one you detached from the model? You started with an upgrade with the name Rocket Launcher attached to a given model, and you're ending with an upgrade of the same name attached to the same model. Prove that it's a different upgrade. Two models with the same name constitute different models because they occupy different positions, have distinct game states (wounds, activation status, etc). And effects such as summoning specify things such as this:
  5. I’m not quite sure what’s supposed to happen next, here. 👻 I think either I or @santaclaws01 are supposed to visit you on the eve of a tournament, dragging chains forged out of 1st and 2nd edition Malifaux cards, and tell you that you will be visited by three ghosts. Are the ghosts of playtesters past, future and present good, because I think the developer ghosts are in convention season? 👻 Because attaching an identical upgrade to the one that you just discarded is what that statement is prohibiting, using the obscure meaning of the word “different” meaning “not identical”. Edit: On a slightly more serious note, please consider the wording in the Upgrade Cards rules: Note the meaning of the word "same" in that sentence. When the rules refer to "the same Upgrade" or "a different Upgrade", that's the sort of context that's being used.
  6. And it specifies a limit even on the models that can’t do those things because they use the same wording on all of the copies of that trigger.
  7. If they want to expend that much Chi acting out a scene from a Kung Fu movie, I guess that has to be okay.
  8. Yeah, the split Red Joker results... There's part one: and there's part two: For what it's worth, the answer in the previous edition (when the red joker was severe+light damage) was this: For context, Nix's Weakness ability reduced Severe damage to Moderate. In other words, reducing it to Moderate removed the the bonus damage. Edit: Looking at the Variable Flips chart, where it lists 14 as Severe, it looks like that reasoning still applies. So it's Severe damage that happens to be 1 point higher than normal; and that would get reduced to unmodified Moderate.
  9. Just keep in mind the two big catches on that: 1. Targeting happens after you've done the move. 2. When you get to the targeting, and you only have one valid model (or only friendly models) in range that you can target, the rules don't care whether you want to target that model. If you've got valid targets in range, you have to pick one. So don't use that cost-granted move to get within 1" of a friendly model with no one else you'd rather kick around, unless you don't mind kicking your own model.
  10. Agree with @santaclaws01. The rules say: If you have to move toward or away from something, usually there's only one direction for the movement which satisfies that requirement. But when they're perfectly co-positioned, any direction will satisfy the requirement initially, and then because it's a push, you're locked in to moving straight in that direction.
  11. "this model may take the Charge Action" are the magic words to generate a Charge Action that doesn't count against the model's Action Limit, but it isn't the magic words required to get around Charge's "Once per Activation" restriction. So in the situation "charge, use a trigger to bury it and then use the tactical action to unbury and take the charge action" the second Charge Action would not be allowed. You're still allowed to take the Rise Again tactical action, you just can't take the Charge. By "Breaking the Rules", the effect would have to explicitly say something like I cannot at the moment find any Actions that say something like "may take the Charge Action, even if it has already done so" or something similar, but that's essentially the alternative that would be required.
  12. That's what the italics at the start of actions are for. It's not exactly what you're looking for, but it's an action that takes a Condition off a model. The Draw Off Flame Action on the Fire Golem (Arcanists model). It starts off in italics: and then describes placing the golem and moving Burning around.
  13. Yep. It's worth noting that in 2nd edition, you explicitly suffered no damage for falls of 2" or less. In this edition, it works out about the same, if you climb down a fraction of an inch to get below 2" when you fall.
  14. The implied convention between things like the Execute trigger (which says "ignoring Demise Abilities") and Ruthless ("ignores the Terrifying and Manipulative Abilities of other models") is that there could be variations of the Terrifying Ability or Manipulative Ability, and they would all be covered as long as they were Terrifying (Variation) or something similar. Disclaimer: The next few sentences are technically coincidence. Wyrd could put Terrifying with no (X) on a card with an effect completely unlike any other Terrifying ability, and it would still get ignored by Ruthless because it's only the name of the Ability that matters. There are a bunch of different Demise abilities that have different effects. All of the instances of Manipulative are the same. The various instances of Terrifying differ in the numeric value for the TN. but so far it appears that the undocumented convention is that if there are multiple different versions of an Ability, the Ability will be named Some Name followed by parentheses and something to tell the abilities apart in the parentheses.
  15. Viktoria Chambers is her own totem (effectively), because trying to keep Viktoria of Ashes and Viktoria of Blood straight was too confusing. And I think, on the contrary, that what the small keyword pool means is that you're more likely to see variety in that crew because it's forced by necessity to hire versatile and out-of-keyword models more often.
×
×
  • Create New...