solkan

Let me put it bluntly. The "On the Move" upgrade:

The really bizarre thing is that every game that I've played that has used cylinders for volumes has been explicit about it and included illustrated diagrams. So it really baffles me when people claim that the Malifaux rules use cylinders for auras and pulses. Especially when I've sat down and counted out the references to Ht and they're all either: 1. Defining that something has a Ht characteristic 2. Dealing with line of sight (8 or so references) 3. Falling (3 references) 4. Engagement and Elevation (1 reference) So if you're going to write "it's equally easy to read the rules as defining a cylinder", please explain to me how it's doing that. Where and how are the rules defining that cylinder?

Open the Rules Manual (available for free in PDF form) to Page 37 or the Core Rulebook to page 38, and read the example on the page for Tactical Actions; and explain why you think the rules as written would go either way.

To spell it out: * Unless the push is specified to be "in any direction", the push is being performed directly towards or away from something. * If you're told to push in to base contact with a model, that's a push directly towards that model. Partial search results for "push directly": http://themostexcellentandawesomeforumever-wyrd.com/topic/115923-push-towards-vs-base-contact/ http://themostexcellentandawesomeforumever-wyrd.com/topic/113039-pushing-into-base-contact-vs-directly-into-base-contact/ and http://themostexcellentandawesomeforumever-wyrd.com/topic/109910-pushes-into-base-with-incorporeal-model/ Random FAQ trivia: That last linked thread is part of the reason why this entry got added to the FAQ:

Their dual faction Gremlins/Ten Thunders. In addition to having the Oni characteristic (in addition to the Tri-Chi characteristic). So there's lots of ways for Asami to take the Akaname.

No, that's not what it means. The Slug Trigger damage flip isn't an Action, and that's the difference. If one Action causes another Action, the original Action isn't considered resolved until the second Action has been resolved, which matters for timing, but they're still considered separate Actions as far as resolution goes. Among other places, see:

Which models do you feel aren't covered by the current document?

Agreed. The statement "A model can't be killed twice" is incorrect. Instead, what's true is that if a model is already dead, killing it doesn't do anything. Just like if a model is already dead, inflicting additional wounds doesn't do anything more to the model. You can't make the model more dead, but you're not forbidden from trying.

Unless a model has Flying or some other rule which exempts it from falling, when it's pushed and leaves a surface it falls. The timing, as specified in the FAQ:

But the image in that post isn't new artwork. It's from (if nowhere else) Storm of Shadows, page 16. If that's what the original poster was looking at, then this is just a false alarm.

Agreed with the Finns. "another model" is there to prevent Titania from benefiting when she places a scheme marker near herself. *cough* A New Harvest and The Forest Claims All *cough* But Rejoice in Rebirth would trigger if another model standing outside of the 6" range (or line of sight) placed a scheme marker within 6 of Titania. And there are enough ranged placements or marker moving effects that the difference is likely to matter.

What new Misaki puppet art?

Weren't those running blades for double amputees a big thing last the year or two?

To quote the second paragraph of Take Actions in the Activation rules: So there's no need to try to figure out how to take actions that don't accomplish anything (or figure out a way to avoid actions causing self-harm), it's allowed to just decide not to spend the AP and be done.

One side of things, the Friekorps probably have enough money to purchase their glorious leader the expensive but boring "As good as the real thing, you won't notice a difference" prosthetic replacements. As shocking as it may sound to anyone who has ever played an adventure game, often times that all a person really wants. And that wouldn't result in a change to Von Schill's card or stats. On the other side of things, Shifting Loyalties has that whole section on injuries and upgrades that a person could go through if they were looking for things to model the results of the vignettes. It makes me wonder if somewhere behind closed doors there's a fight between producing the 1906 versions of the masters using a new set of upgrade cards, and producing alternate 1906 versions of the cards. (With the original M2E versions being 1902 versions.)

I don't think that reply was a request to change Nico's card, but just pointing out the discrepancy caused by the typo.

Is this the part where someone needs to point out that the FAQ entry in question is specifically about Scheme Markers, so everyone is pretty much guilty of extrapolating the answer beyond its specified scope? I don't want to claim to be the Kettle or the Pot, I'd rather claim to be a vegetable steamer because that'd be more useful to me right now. Note the number of times that the question and answer are specific to Scheme Markers. Personally, when I go extrapolating out of the FAQ to make it cover more useful things, I prefer to make extrapolations that don't involve inventing new clauses and situations to the line of sight mechanics.

Agreed, the ability in question doesn't care about who is discarding the ace. What matters is: * It's a friendly model's Activation. Hungering Darkness is still friendly to Mr. Lynch. The fact that Hungering Darkness is also friendly to the 'Heed My Voice' target hasn't changed the relationship to anyone else. * Is it an Ace from this crew's deck? It doesn't really matter why it's getting discarded. If you had a model with a regular Obey, then you'd still get it back. It's your Ace, it's been discarded during a friendly model's Activation, you get it back after the Action resolves.

I have to agree with Dogmantra. The FAQ entry isn't creating a new subclause of the blocking rules, it's just explaining "If you're standing completely over another object, then you're going to be intervening in every direction if someone tries to draw line of sight to it." Especially since there exists a rules forum and the discussion threads which precipitated that FAQ entry. Or did you want to claim that it works differently if a 40mm or 50mm model is standing on top of a 30mm scheme marker?

The list excludes models that could be hired anyway due to the Mercenary characteristic. In other words, this is the Out of Faction non-Mercenary model list. Although a separate "Every Mercenary Model" list would probably be nice to see accompanying this.

You've got Sandeep listed under Neverborn instead of Arcanists.

I'm still set in my theory that...

I think the reasoning in the previous thread still stands: Short version: The healing rules explain what happens when a model tries to heal wounds that it hasn't suffered: the excess wounds are simply discarded. Thus you can heal an unwounded model. Edit: On the other hand, I'm pretty sure you're going to be limited to eating one scheme marker per model: So if you're surrounded by a dozen enemy Scheme Markers, it's going to take you a dozen activations to clear them out using that ability.

Part of the reason is that there are abilities and auras in the game which remove suits from the action attributes. For example: So Nicodem standing within Hannah's Nether Flux aura is going to have to do extra work to get his summon action to succeed since he's only going to have Ca 6 instead of Ca 6. In other words, the game gives specifically so that the game can take away.

The answer to that question is messy. Abilities and actions are written by default that the model with the ability is doing the things. The person controlling the model makes all of the choices, but when you start dealing with cards there's an exception that gets made. From the FAQ: The same thing goes for when a model has to discard a card--if you're controlling the action, you're going to discard the card from your hand instead of trying to pick card from the other player's hand. So if a model draws a card, it goes to the person whose crew owns the model. If the model discards or cheats a card, the card comes from the person controlling the model's action. If you'd like to read a related discussion which, if I remember correctly, predates the FAQ entry: http://themostexcellentandawesomeforumever-wyrd.com/topic/94421-obey-and-soul-stone-usage/ But, again, note that that discussion was before the FAQ, otherwise it would have ended a lot quicker and more decisively.