solkan

You're probably allowed to claim hazard pay if you read the forum, so if it's Mr. Caroland's account then it's most likely Mr. Caroland posting.

You're referencing pre-M2E books, right? I'm curious about eh Neverborn mask you said, not sure if I have anything that that in it. But it does resemble the icon you suggest, just a bit more stylized. I don't think it was simply a matter of changing to fit the field of the shield, but I could be wrong Yep, I'm talking about the 1.5 edition books. If you want to see the old Neverborn mask, have a look at the first issue of Chronicles. it's right there on the table of contents.

No fair, the organs are already on the November release schedule, and the orphans are scheduled for December.

Looking through the rulebooks searching for the phrase "until this model", it looks like there are some actions which are effectively permanent if the acting model leaves play and others that end because leaving play is one of the termination conditions: or So preventing the condition from ending by preventing the model activating again, either by burying it or by killing it (or otherwise preventing it from activating), seems to be consistent. Disclaimer: But does seem like something likely to be changed by errata.

See also: which basically says that the rule ends up being like this:

The play area is defined as a square or rectangular area of the table. By definition, how is it possible for a model to move beyond the play area? It's not a question of stopping at the edge of the field, it's a simple matter that there exists nowhere else for the model to move to or be placed at. Edit: For example, Movement is defined as movement across the table: In the section Play Area, the table is defined to be of a fixed size: As a result, model movement is only defined in that designated area when the words "We're playing on this 3x3 table area" are spoken.

From the 1.5 edition core rulebook, direct references to the Tyrants: Page 139, the paper scrap titled DecemberThe story "The Old World", the doppelganger that becomes the other Viktoria talks about it.The story "Wendigo", the big climax where December manifests during the big fight, where December is again outright referred to as a Tyrant.There are some other indirect references in the stories in that edition's core rulebook, but they're mainly concerning why Lilith is more angry with December than Rasputina. The stories in the core rulebook don't really explain what any of that means, and leaves it mysterious, but the concept is most certainly introduced in the book.

Huh? There appears to be a proposed rule change here, but there doesn't appear to be any explanation for what particular problem it's trying to solve.

I think this my unofficial "Disagree on the principles but agree on the importance of the issues with Myyrä" period... To a certain extent, the FAQ is using more rules than it's directly mentioning. From the left column of page 42 of the Core Rulebook, Movement: there's the indirect principle established "No part of a model can move further than the distance specified by its movement." So a model with a Wk of 10 can't move further than 10" from where it starts, however the model actually moves between the two points. That's where part of the relevance of in the FAQ answer comes from: or "That ten inch difference in elevation qualifies as 10" of distance", given the context of the answer: with the supplemental appeal to principles being stated (again) The Incorporeal model doesn't have to deal with movement rules on the terrain it's ignoring--the ability to spend 2" of movement to move an inch on terrain is part of the 'Climbable' trait rules). The ten inch change in elevation is called out as being a 10" difference in position. If there's a New Years FAQ revision, it would be nice if it were clarified whether the incorporeal model standing across a 10" the street from the famous 10" tall building wanting to move to the rooftop can move diagonally through the air using just over 14" of movement diagonally or whether it has to use 20" of movement (moving 10" along the surface of the street, then 10" through the building to the roof.) Likewise, if the famous 10" tall building also happens to be 10" wide, can the incorporeal model move diagonally through the terrain piece? Or do the vertical and horizontal distances have to be measured separately? Because straight diagonal measurement of the distance between the start point and the end point, ignoring everything in between, is consistent the two principles specified, but somewhat awkward to measure directly when there's physical terrain in the way, and would require Vassal players to use calculators. Whereas measuring the vertical separation and the horizontal separation would be less calculation and generally simpler work, and still leave open the uncertainty whether the incorporeal/flying model can "float" while moving. I think what I've seen players with flying or incorporeal models do when they have a model on a street to on top of a building is most of the time measure diagonally through space to the roof top position. But there's been the occasional person who just held the tape measure parallel to the table and then measured the height of the building. Both approaches make enough sense for a person to just go with what the other person wants, until you get two building close enough together that the flying/incorporeal model would want to move through the air from rooftop to rooftop. Say you've got the Wk6 Hungering Darkness hanging out on top of some Ht3 buildings and it wants to get across to another buildings. You put a wooden ruler touching the model on one building, and the six inch mark is touching the spot where you want to put the same point on HD's base, that's sort of the prima facie argument for "That's six inches, so a Wk 6 ignoring intervening terrain should be fine. No part of the model is moving further than 6", after all, and I'm ignoring all of the intervening terrain so why should I care what the intervening elevations are? If it makes a difference whether the model Incorporeal model is moving along a 6" long segment of Ht3 terrain, that's hardly ignoring that intervening intervening ht3 terrain." FAQ question #48 deals with being pushed, it doesn't currently rule out whether a model can move from one Ht X terrain piece to another Ht Y terrain piece ignoring everything in between including the Ht0 ground, and just measure the straight line distance between the two points in space.

It looks like Twisting Fates has several pages that mention Kaeris, as well, but my PDF reader is freaking out on me so I'm not sure if they're full stories or the unit entries.

Looking at the chart in the old 1.5 edition core rulebook, that's the Guild faction emblem (the fancy version, not the simplified version for the icons), squashed together a bit to fit on the shield. I can't find a clean picture online at the moment, but from some of GMorts unboxings... http://gmortschaotica.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/unboxing-malifaux-choffmans-constructs.html It's the fancy logo that the words are covering up, and it's on the old metal shield. Edit: So, looking through the book and comparing the other images, as far as I can tell, that's one of the old stylized versions of the guild mask with a bunch of weird magic lines around the center instead of horns. Just like the old Resurrectionist crow had a skull head, and old Neverborn mask emblem has the three-tailed hat behind the mask.

At this point I have to conclude your original post has been made entirely in jest.

I think you're attempting to summon the non-Metal Gaimen, or at least the stern rules writer. as "specifically exclude by name".

Counter observation: The terrain rules can break down pretty fast if you aren't careful dividing pieces of terrain up, or simply declaring by fiat "If we used the regular rules, this would be broken so instead we're just going to ______". But... In this case, the vantage point rule is pretty specific, I think: You only ignore the ledge it's on (or near), not all of the ledges. But, I think in this case "ledge" in the first highlight phrase is being used to mean "the edge of the scenery piece" while in the second phrase "the flat area of the scenery piece between the model and the edge of the scenery piece". Because in that diagram on page 41, that's not "standing within 2" of a ledge", that's "standing on a ledge" according the first dictionary to come to hand.

On the less exceptional cases, I think being able to nail a list of timing errors to the rules forum door might be a good start to getting things straightened out. I mean, "after damaging" happens after Step 5 unless you kill your target in Step 5 then it gets resolved during Step 5 (since that's when the model dies, and the instructions in the 'after damaging' trigger say to resolve the effect before removing the model. That's a bit of a mess that would be nice to have a more consistent resolution for. But there are already FAQ entries concerning the timing paradoxes: I might be wrong, but I don't think either of these FAQs mention the fact that an "After damaging" effect should be able to happen during Step 5 if the damage is fatal:

I think Jackhammer Kick's going to be one of the FAQs-waiting-to-happen cases, because of that "even if" clause: So you've got a push with effectively a "After anything" trigger (choose any one of the four listed "After ____" triggers, as necessary). That's worth at least a pair of 8's, if you're betting on getting an even bigger exception FAQ'd in.

Concerning 1, from the Gaining Grounds document: Quite officially, you can just photocopy the cards out of the book and laminate them if you need to make replacements or if you're using custom built models. The rulebook cards do look the same as the printed cardstock cards (although the printed cards do tend to have additional artwork for the multiple pose models). You can buy PDF versions of the rulebook from Drive Thru RPG, even: http://drivethrurpg.com/browse/pub/5162/Wyrd-Miniatures?term=wyrd Malifaux Core Rulebook 2nd edition is the book with the wave one cards; the Crossroads book has the wave three cards, and Shifting Loyalties has the wave three cards. And the Drive Thru RPG PDFs are official digital releases. You may have to do a little bit of cleaning up the edges, since the books tend to put artwork or page edging behind the cards; so maybe it's worth campaigning for the book PDFs to include the cards in a cleaner format. 2. The model listings in the Warmachine/Hordes rulebooks don't look like the Warmachine/Hordes cards. The Malifaux model listings do like like the Malifaux cards. and 3. The Privateer Press faction decks don't include any of the new models from Mark II, so they're not particularly helpful in many cases. Convergence players, or people who accidentally spill water on their cards for the models that came out in Mk II, go straight to paying for individual cards from the parts store. Just my two cents as someone who has old and new cards and books from both companies, and who has accidentally ruined a few cards not in the Mk II faction boxes.

Okay, Face Your Sins is a sufficiently compelling argument. And makes the Accomplice/Companion rule the annoying exception. So I'm willing to concede that "after suffering damage" needs to work the same as "after damaging" triggers to be reasonable, even if it's another model suffering the damage. I'm going to think happy thoughts about a Field Manual 2.x with a few extra pages of expository text not in the current rulebook...

Just to be thorough. Except for the unusual cases where an action says that it has to declare a trigger, it's still optional, and it's still only going to be one per side. So Papa Loco isn't going to declare Dropped One if he's attacking someone eight inches away, unless he's being controlled by the other player or there's some other unusual reason. (Unless you're playing gremlins, then you're going to see a lot of "must declare a trigger" actions.) But a lot of the time, especially if you're cheating in cards or spending soul stones for suits, you're doing it specifically to match the values for a specific trigger, and most of time you need to win to get it to work. And once you've gone to all of that trouble, you're going to declare that. But, you could say "All declared triggers get resolved, but they might not do anything." Because there are triggers that have their condition things like "After damaging" and you could end up winning the duel and then not actually causing any damage, and have that trigger not do anything.

Sewn Fate doesn't cause the other model to suffer the damage instead of the voodoo doll, it causes the model with the condition to suffer the same damage (the rule includes a note that the remaining wounds of the doll is the limit of damage duplicated). "Oh, look, you've got a voodoo doll within 2" of you, and that voodoo doll has applied Sewn Fate to me. I think I'll just bury it/push it away/obey Jebsen to kill Zoreida/etc." Or just start laying down blasts from an attack that aren't targeting Jebsen. .

Allow me to rephrase the objection to the ability being resolved when the only model with Malevolence is the model killed. If the ability specified 'When ... suffers damage', then you would resolve the ability during the process of applying damage. At that point, the model would still be in range, and would still be in play. If the ability were an "After damaging" trigger, that's dealt with by the rules for triggers. Since it's not a trigger, but instead an ability, one is left with the process of applying damage, killing the model and the aura in question no longer exists. So what ability is there to resolve? It's the same situation as Companion/Accomplice: The model with Accomplice ends its activation, and afterwards it doesn't exist to resolve its ability that triggers "After this model ends its activation..."

In order for a model to make use of an "After ... suffers damage" ability, it has to still be in play after the damage has been resolved. If you've been killed, you're not able to discard a soulstone or card because you're not in play. That's one of the reasons that there are a few "after ... suffers damage" abilities which specify "before removing the model"--they need to be more specific about when the ability resolves. The definition of After Damage in the Trigger section on page 32 says to resolve such effects before removing the model if it dies. Malevolence may not be a Trigger, but there is no separate definition of After Damage for Abilities. The model with Malevolence has to still be in play, for the same reason that a model with Companion has to be in play at the end of its activation: The ability has to be in play to be resolved, and it's not. That's the difference. Especially considering Malevolence calls out the fact that it's the model with Malevolence taking action, and it's no longer in play. Edit: Note that Malevolence isn't an "after damaging" trigger. If it were, it would have a defined timing and would effectively already be in play.

There isn't anything in the rules which is written in the form your friend was claiming--"all friendly X and Y" to mean "all friendly models that are both X and Y". Aside from the fact that no one talks like that (which is important since the rules are mostly written in normal English). If someone says "All friendly cats and dogs" you expect a collection containing both cats (things that are cats but not dogs) and dogs (things that are dogs but not cats) but cat-dog hybrids are going to be surprising.

If all you own is plastic, you should't need the arsenal boxes. You probably will want to pick up the Generalist Upgrade Deck eventually, though.

Triggers are activated by matching the suit listed, period. Whether a declared trigger actually has any effect is going to be determined by the text of the trigger. Note: The attacker and defender each only get to declare one trigger, so each side is going to have at most one trigger to resolve. For example, the Rail Worker's Metal On Metal trigger doesn't care who won the duel (and usually only matters when the Rail Worker loses). While Jacob Lynch has a defensive trigger that happens whether the duel is won or lost: Edit: Example of an "After failing" trigger on an attack action. From Papa Loco's Throw Dynamite. So there are times where the attacker is failing the duel and is still going to declare a trigger. Edit #2: Here's an example of a defensive trigger where the defender has to win (the attacker has to fail) to get any use out of it. Perdita Ortega's Quick Draw: Edit #3 (last edit, I promise): So, both the attacker and the defender declare triggers based on suit matches. The particular triggers the models have available are going to make the difference for whether they need to succeed on their side of the duel for the trigger to have an effect. But triggers get declared after everyone works out what their duel totals are, so you'd expect people not to bother declaring a trigger if it's not going to work. After all, there's not much point in declaring an attack trigger that works "After succeeding" if the defender flipped the red joker and is sitting there with a total of 20 vs. the attacker's total of 10. Most triggers on an attack action are going to require succeeding, and there are a lot of defensive triggers that mitigate damage (so require the defender to lose) but also a fair amount of defensive triggers which only have an effect if the defender wins.