solkan

See this post if you want to use the models as mostly the same models: If you just want to use the as stand in’s for Zoraida’s voodoo doll in extremely specific circumstances, you could do that, too. That’s probably more work than anyone would expect, though.

Threads from last year: To give an idea of the usual time frame for announcements, and so on. So far for this year, there was a card in some of the GenCon orders teasing the add on box for the Nekima nightmare box.

The main difference between the fate decks is going to be the artwork on the cards. Most of the decks for Malifaux have some indicator on the card whether the card is weak, moderate or severe (to save you having to look up the number on the chart in the rulebook), usually by one, two or three marks in the corner or the word weak, moderate or severe. I just checked, and the deck in the Explorer's Society box has one, two or three dots on each card, and the red joker has all four suits on it. All of the "Faction" decks should be like that. If you get a The Other Side fate deck, or a Puppet Wars fate deck, those decks won't have the weak/moderate/severe markings. Otherwise, it's pretty much just a matter of what artwork you prefer.

Pretty much just in the books, I think. I think the map in the Explorer's Society book on page 16 is the most recent one, just by virtue of having a spot marked "EVS Outpost" and goes a bit further south east than the rulebook map. The M3E rulebook (the printed version or the non-free FDF version) has a color surrounding locations map and a Malifaux city map with some locations of interest marked (it actually has three more locations marked on it than the Through the Breach main book's version). I don't see a map thumbing through Malifaux Burns, and I don't see a map in From Nightmares even though it has a "Notable Locations" entry in the index. Can't find my Above the Law or ressers sourcebooks at the moment--either of those should have maps and info about notable locations in Malifaux City.

The effects of an action only occur after the duel has been resolved. That isn’t the same thing as saying that the effects of the action have the timing “after resolving a duel” (as implied or defined in the ability timing rules). Just like if you have something like “Target suffers 2 damage and is pushed 1””, the push isn’t simultaneous with “after suffering damage” effects.

So, here are the effects in play: and The duel is performed in Step 4 of the action, and the outcome of the duel is determined at Step F of the duel. Going through the flip process, the Conflict and discard pile rules, the sequence of events should end up being (no attempt being made to have these sequence numbers match the book's step numbers...): the player flips one or more cards into the conflict one of the cards in the conflict is chosen, the rest (if any) are placed on the discard pile if the duel is cheated, the card in the conflict is discarded and a different card is put in its place eventually, Step F is reached and the player(s) determine the duel's success the duel has been resolved. Now, it's "after the duel has been resolved", and the card in the conflict is discarded after the duel has been resolved I think Adran's hypothesis is that Aura of Courage goes off right after Step F, before you're done resolving the duel (and thus before you discard the card in the conflict). The problem with that hypothesis is that it allows a situation to occur where the conflict is being used by multiple duels or flips at once. Here's one of them: Flip succeeds by 2 Aura of Courage Chronicle (Seclusion) pushes the Healed model into hazardous terrain The pushed model is a soul stone user and performs a damage prevention flip Or, more excitingly: Flip succeeds by 2 Aura of Courage Chronicle (Servitude) pushes a Moorwraith and it ends in engagement range of Seamus (starting there or not) Seamus's "Why Hello Love" ability goes off An opposed duel takes place ... So, which is worse? Filling the conflict with the cards for potentially many flips and duels at the same time Chronicle(Influence) being part of a combo where you can snag and re-use a card once per activation I personally prefer the version where there aren't any nested duels possible in the game.

There's a relevant FAQ entry which I'll just post here: to reinforce the fact that "A and B" effects in actions are sequential. Remember that the text for applying the results of an action is:

For the record, there end up being two different situations a model gets into when resolving an action: It has to resolve a single effect that is impossible. For instance "Discard a card" when there aren't any cards in the appropriate hand. Result: You attempt to resolve the impossible, nothing happens, and you continue to the next effect in the action. Note that "A and B", and "A then B" ("Target suffers X and is pushed" or "Target suffers X, then is pushed") A and B are separate sequential effects. It has to resolve "A or B" choices. Stuff like "Discard a card or suffer 2 damage". You can't choose an impossible option. The point being that you can get into situations where you declare a trigger that goes through a long sequence of impossible effects, or have an action that's a long sequence of impossible effects. You won't accomplish anything, but you can still declare the action, pay its cost, etc. Don't forget that that option is "Remove all enemy Scheme Markers in base contact". If you declare Interact while standing on top of your own scheme marker, you're not going to remove your own marker. Edit: Aaarg. I double checked the PDF and the print version, and both say: In second edition, this functionality only removed enemy markers. And I fear I've been playing it wrong for a while. 😨

Please provide a human test subject that is claiming that "may ignore the effects of ... terrain Markers" does not include the effect "may ignore the terrain traits on ... terrain Markers".

Exact release date: subject to change.

Choose a deployment zone, resolve effects that say “after choosing deployment zone”, then split crews, and so forth. Edit: That “and” between ‘choose a deployment zone’ and ‘split the crew in half’ is separating two different events, not combining them into one event.

There are enough models that run around getting treated as corpse markers that you're not going to get anywhere there. More importantly, a Corpse Marker has -no- distinguishing characteristics apart from being named a Corpse marker. The marker rules say that a particular marker is Ht 0 unless the rules say otherwise, and a Ht4 Blocking, Impassable marker is saying otherwise just as much as a Sz mindless zombie is. (There isn't any reason a model couldn't have a rule like "This model drops a Ht4 impassable Corpse marker when killed". )

Yep, the place doesn’t have to succeed for the rest of that sentence to happen.

You’re trying to make a distinction that the rules don’t. There’s no such distinction made between “active” and “passive” as abilities far as responsibility for killing a model in the rules for killing models.

It's true that model with the pilot upgrade attached to it ("the pilot") doesn't have a way to draw line of sight and range to other models while buried (even though the pilot upgrade allows other models to draw line of sight and range to it). I think it's a pretty much deliberate arrangement, because it'd be just silly if you could just have Maxine sit around using the Calypso as an armored suit instead of having Dr. Beebe piloting. Especially since Dr. Beebe's Master Pilot ability does have the extra text to make his Bleeps and Sweeps pulse work while he's piloting the Calypso.

I think so. As far as I can tell, Black Blood should treating the generated damage pretty much like you’d treat a generated action—you figure out the pulse and who’s getting damaged, and queue all of the ‘suffers 1 damage’ instances up, rather than trying to resolve Black Blood’s pulse after the fact.

The is part of the action’s range, and that’s not copied. Even though there are rules associated with it, it’s not “special restrictions”. “Special restrictions” are in italics.

The triggers for an action are part of that action. So all of the triggers for the action have to satisfy the same requirements that the main body of the action does. As a pure hypothetical, if the restriction had been "take ... action without naming a model", then you'd be able to do so, but that would probably cause all sorts of weird interactions. "These limitations are all by Action (or Ability) and model" refers to both of the previous paragraphs. No. "Once per turn" and "once per activation" work exactly the same way as far as "These limitations are all by Action (or Ability) and model". Which means that if you have X models in a situation to take an action once per turn, each one of those X models can take that action each turn. "listing a model by name" includes both things like "name a X model" and effects that have an exact model name (like "Summon a Gaki" or whatever). In the immediately previous edition, this was explained in a FAQ entry which reads as follows: (The protection of Metal action in the previous edition was: But the important part of that answer is the part where it says: with Re-animator given as an action that includes the text "name a Resurrectionist Minion Undead model". Your group is welcome to be annoyed by the fact that that explanation isn't included in the current FAQ, but the meaning of "list a model by name" hasn't changed, especially given the amount of action text that directly copied to the new edition.

The thing is that Explorer’s Society probably has enough plot background for its own book (or an adventure series?). On the other hand, in spite of all of the writing at the end of M2E and the start of M3E, it still feels wrong to me to call something the Capital O Outcasts.

Big hug to the people in shipping as they continue to wrap up the GenCon orders.

Edit: Nevermind, I misread some text.

Away and towards are only defined for two different objects. You mechanically are unable to move a model towards or away from itself, because the rules do not tell you how to resolve that movement. Edit: For emphasis:

In order to maximize the chances of someone replicating your problem, and thus helping you, can you specify: - Are you using the web page version? If so, which browser (and version, if you know it) and which platform for that browser? - Are you using the Apple or Android version? If so, can you specify the version number of the app, your device model, and your device's OS version number?

One of the things you're not paying attention to is that a model at 0 wounds mechanically cannot suffer damage--any damage it suffers will be ignored. Because you're ignoring all of the damage, the model won't loop through the damage sequence: While things like the timing sequences are useful for specifying some of the complicated rules interactions, those sequences need to be understood in the context of the rest of the rules. For instance, the situation of a model at 0 wounds remaining being subject to a "target suffers X damage" event becomes a non-event because of the statement in damage reduction: when it combines with the fact that all of X damage was ignored. The crucial limitation of things like the Damage Timing is that they don't tell you when to give up on the sequence. And look at steps 4 and five: According to the damage reduction rules, if you didn't suffer any damage at step 4, you weren't damaged. That means that you're supposed to stop without resolving step five. Likewise, if a model is healed in Step 6a, you're supposed to stop and not continue resolving the rest of Step 6. I'm just saying all of this to come to the point that a loop appears to exist because the damage timing chart doesn't say when to stop the process. Addressing that oversight would probably be the most direct way to address the issue.

Only if they somehow manage to do it separately. From Auras: You’ll still have the two auras on the two models. But standing in the overlap of the two auras doesn’t give a doubled effect.