Jump to content

solkan

Members
  • Content Count

    4,788
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Everything posted by solkan

  1. Going into the app and searching for the word "then", it appears to just be "writing flavor", since as you say without it you'd just resolve the effects in order. For instance... "Place the cards back on the Fate Deck in any order, then draw a card." Redundant. "Push target 4" away from this model, then Push this model 4" toward the target." Redundant. "After this model is killed, it is Replaced with an Ashen Core, then the new model Heals 6." Redundant. "This models Heals an amount equal to the target's Health then kill the target ..." Redundant. "Target suffers damage equal to th
  2. Just because it’s shown with fifteen odd limbs or appendages...
  3. Let that be the first lesson: Just because you're at a tournament doesn't mean either player knows what the rules are. There's no correction to be made. There is no limit to the number of Pass Tokens that can be spent in a row, or any other sort of general limit to the number of times a player can end up activating models in a row. There's just the limit for Chain Activation, which is a specific and entirely different thing. So if it's two models vs. 8 models at the start of the turn and you've got six pass tokens, you sure can spend all six of those pass tokens in a row.
  4. The thing about large buildings is that you end up having to either build accommodations into them so that models can get around or through them easily (and remember, base sizes run 30 to 50mm), or otherwise design the table around them. And then, you’re going to end up with a section of the table that heavily favors some models over others. I mean, hell, you can play Malifaux on an Infinity style urban table if you really want, but it’s not going to a great idea most of the time.
  5. It may be clearer to say that the effects of Stunned doesn’t change what a bonus action is, just like Fast and Slow don’t cause a model to gain or lose actions. Instead, each time you’re at the top of the “Take Actions” loop for Step 2 of an activation, you recount the actions you’ve taken and refigure the answer to “Can I still take another action?” using whether you’re -currently- Fast, Slow, or Stunned. Crucially, that means that a model can take an action and then the next time it to the top of the loop discover that it’s well over its action limit (because it gained Slow and/or S
  6. Here are some of the things wrong with this statement: * "the check for a Flicker happens at the end of the current action". There is no principle that states that abilities are checked at the end of an action. Instead, the rules state that by default abilities are always in effect and create effects in reaction to various events. * Whatever timing rules that Magic the Gathering has, those timing rules apply because the rules for that game says so. How many pages are the detailed rules (not the rules fold out, the actual detailed rules, with all of the timing and interactions bet
  7. During second edition, I think the FAQs ended up being every six months or so, with models sometimes getting balance errata at that time. Confusing items in the rulebook have been FAQ’d or errata’d in the past, although the standard for “confusing” is naturally debatable. Likewise for model abilities, although FAQ’s are usually preferred for models because card errata mean card reprints. If there were a misprint on a card, that would probably get acknowledged and/or errata’d right away. If only from the play testers pointing out the change. Disclaimer: There were one or two minor gra
  8. Good point on this part. The trigger on Hunger Pangs is "after [an enemy model] takes the Interact Action or drops an enemy Scheme Marker". In the war-games that I'm used to, if you have a (possibly) overlapping condition like that, you go with whatever happens first. In this case, if you do that, you end up with two slightly different timings: - If an enemy model takes an Interact Action, Hunger Pangs will produce an effect at the "after the action has been resolved" step of the action. That's the point where the model has taken an action. - If an enemy model drops a Scheme Mark
  9. Hunger Pangs causes the model to gain a sin token after dropping the marker, and Gluttony needs the sin token before it’s dropped to use Consumed By Gluttony (because he’s reacting to “would drop”).
  10. I think there are two supporting factors: - You don't shuffle the cards into the deck one a time. So if you shuffle three tomes into the deck, you're at a situation of "choose three models", not "choose one model" three times in sequence. - The alternatives like "For every tome ... chose another enemy model ..." or "For every tome ... choose a different enemy model ..." don't work semantically when the main action's effect doesn't choose a model.
  11. That would be the "This or That" choices rule, page 33 of the rules PDF. If you are already stunned, and you have a card in your hand, you have to discard, because you have to choose the option you can actually do. The only escape is when you can't do any of the choices (no cards in your hand and have Stunned).
  12. First, the example of line of sight in the rules PDF dealing with "Terrain with Height" (PDF page 18) demonstrates that one model can be positioned perfectly to block line of sight between two other models. It does require the model to be perfectly positioned, thus it's unlikely that the position shown in the rulebook would happen by chance. Instead, that position is likely to be the result of invoking the "Rule of Intent" (PDF page 33) to place the middle model after the outer two models have taken positions (although it's also possible that once you have two models, the third may come alon
  13. This is what that FAQ entry states: That FAQ entry does not say that two instances of the same effect on the same model are not cumulative. It says, instead, that Last Breath doesn't stack with itself. You're trying to make up a principle from a FAQ entry that's addressing how a specific action was used during testing.
  14. It might be better to say that each of the books (main rulebook, and each of the supplements) specifies a different tarot for generating a character. If you use the main book's tarot, you get two upgrades. If you use one of the supplement's tarot, you get one upgrade (as specified in those tarots) but you also have backgrounds and perks that aren't present in the core rulebook's tarot process.
  15. From participating in previous promotions, you may get a shipping notice for the bonus items (I got a shipping notice for Sparkle Steed, and others that I can remember but I think others have shown up without notice). Otherwise, you won't get contacted unless they have questions about what you submitted. Usually, though, no shipments are sent out until after the end of the promotion.
  16. Not always. (Counter example: End of turn condition resolution can kill models, and 'I'm done with this' is a summoning effect on being killed. And there are models with abilities like Pyromaniac where they get the credit for the kill.) VonSchtook's summoning mechanic requires a friendly transports model to kill another model, and all of them currently require performing an action to do that.
  17. The rulebook clause isn't unburying Misaki, the rulebook clause is dealing with -placement-. "When Unburying a model, the con- troller of the Unbury effect places the model back on the table as described by the effect. If the model cannot be Placed, the owner of the model instead places it anywhere inside their Deployment Zone." But that's probably not relevant. 😕 From Shadows: "At the start of this model's Activation, if it is Buried, Unbury it in base contact with a friendly Shadow Marker, then remove that Marker. If it does so, [movement penalty]" Shang's Flickering
  18. Did you write these words deliberately trying to get placed on an ignore list, or is that an accident?
  19. What the words "Target suffers +" mean is that you add a to the result of the damage flip against the target. Doing so causes the Blasts rules to apply and as a result you place a Blast marker. If you feel that this is unclear or confusing, please feel free to complain or ask questions. The rules do a bad job of explaining the interaction, and in a better world should have included a timing example.
  20. The opposite. The FAQ is saying that Pouncing Strike's 'another enemy model' cannot refer to the target of the action. To try to paraphrase the FAQ into something more understandable... 1. If 'another' could refer to the model whose effect is being resolved (such as 'another friendly model') then the model itself is excluded by 'another'. 2. If 'another' cannot refer to the model whose effect is being resolved because of qualifiers (such as 'another enemy model' or 'another marker'), you cannot choose the same object. -- Even something like 'target other enemy model'
  21. That doesn't matter. What the FAQ says about the word "another" is: The full context is: [spoiler] 1. Nekima – Can Nekima Push and take a Action as a result of a friendly Nephilim model being killed within range of her Enraged By Insolence Action? a) No. “Another” always refers to “not the model from which this text is written” except in those instances where the model in which “Another” is written would not always be a legal subject of the sentence, such as “Another Scrap Marker”, or “Another enemy model”. In such cases, “Another” will never refer to the prev
  22. It's this option. For Flameburst, the first "Models damaged by this action gain Burning +1" happens in Step 5 (Apply Results). The effects of the Blaze trigger ("models damaged by this Action gain Burning +1 for each in this Action's final duel total (to a maximum of Burning +2)" happens in Step 6 (After Resolving): Yeah, the trigger is still part of the action, and subject to anything that would influence the action. But what it comes down to is that if you had an action that said "Target gains Burning +1. Target gains Burning +1." that's gaining Burning +1 two separate times
  23. “How come all of the summoners are using horde crews now?” — What happens when you base hand size on crew size.
  24. Doesn’t anyone use focus for defensive flips any more? 🤕 To be honest, unless there’s going to be a corresponding to damage when Focused gets reduced by the defender, the to damage for the attacker when reducing focus does seem like a relic of the previous edition.
  25. I think one serious component of the answer is time. There hasn’t been enough to get to everything yet. Stuff like the Malisaurus Rex being Fae should be proof enough that the developers still believe in out-of-faction keyword models. But it’s probably not going to be very common because models that get used in two keywords have to be tested in their own faction’s keywords and the foreign keyword. That actually puts a big limit on what the model can do.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information