solkan

False advertising. This should be listed as "You can try to shoot the grenade launcher 15 times, once. But half of the attempts are going to fail half the time (eight single coin toss flips and one double coin toss flip), and the other two shots are once per game." Details you're leaving out: - Lazarus gets fast due to discarding Oath Keeper (cost: 1ss) - Jack Daw gets fast due to discarding Oath Keepr (cost: 1ss) - Feel Their Torment requires an 8 or better to succeed, and you're trying to do it six times times. (Your "and feel their torment once on Lazarus" appears to be missing a subject on the first line. Who is performing the fifth Feel Their Torment?) - Command Construct needs a 7 or better to succeed. - Make a New Entry needs a 6 or better to succeed. Assimilate needs a 6 or better to succeed. So Hanna needs a 6 or better to succeed twice before she fires the grenade launcher.

The effect described in the trigger is in addition to the effects described in the body of the action. Note that Interact (1) actions are Actions (1), and there would be no purpose to voluntarily declare the trigger in that case.

I don't know what you mean by "during target", but I think the answer you're generating is "Neither." All of those effects described are resolved in Step 5, essentially in order, if you succeed in the duel. When you flip for the duel, you haven't removed any of the web markers, so all of web markers have their effect on the defender. And you don't remove anything if the duel fails.

If you have the Core Rulebook, see page 54 for the section on Characteristics. The short version Construct, Living, Undead, Mercenary, Rare, and Totem are on page 54. And on the page after that it explains things like Minion, Peon, Master and Henchman. The keywords like Gamin, Hoard, and Beast fall under the "keywords for effects" category and don't have any effect on their own. Simple example interaction is Marcus's Call of the Wild ability:

It's situations like this where confusion is generated by the practical consideration of putting an actions special rules in the block of text for the effect. There are cases like the Waldegeist's attack where there are rules for the attack in the text: That section in red is special rules for the attack. Likewise, text in an actions which specify they can only be taken once per turn applies regardless. For Hammer fall: vs. Jackhammer Kick When the rules specify "Apply results if applicable" means that you have to go through the effects and apply those that specify that they happen if the action fails. That's going to be things like "After failing" triggers for attacks, and successful defensive triggers, and stuff like Jackhammer Kick's "even if this action fails" clause. Another, better example is Teddy's Gobble You Up action: That's the description of the results of succeeding with the attack, because it's not saying otherwise. So, in order for Teddy to get the positive flip, or to move, the attack action has to succeed. Likewise, for Hammer Fall, the attack has to succeed against the target in order for the "All other enemy models within 3" of the target model ..." effect to resolve.

Well, you can't reduce Df from 3 to 4, so there's not anything it can do.

Quoting the disengaging strike rules: The rules for disengaging strike don't care how much the attack costs. Note that generally the only thing that matters for the attack are the values and defenses, because:

I think at the moment you're going to be forced to cross reference the various stories in the Chronicles, and the rulebooks if you want to put together details of the Neverborn history. It's odd to say this, but if you're looking for straight forward summaries and explanations of the world and setting, you probably want to look at the Through the Breach books rather than the Malifaux books. If you're willing to wait, I can't find the post at the moment but there is a Neverborn book for Through the Breach in development which is going to include details for making Neverborn characters. That would be the reasonable place to put more collected information about their history, I would imagine. On the other hand, if you look at the recent discussion reviewing the revealed information about the tyrants and who's what, there are some things that look like deliberate ambiguities.

A little bit. There are four diary/log book entries scattered about which give a bit of context to the encounters. Otherwise, the background material for the models in the starter set is in Shifting Loyalties.

At 150ss of models, I expect that you'll end up starved for cards to cheat/discard for various abilities. You'd probably be better off trying to run three parallel games or running it as a three crew team game.

Until the Doppleganger is killed or sacrificed. "this model make take the selected Action as if it were printed on this model's card" changes what the meaning of "this model" in the selected Action. Because "if it were printed on this model's card", then it would reference the Doppleganger.

I guess that's the more typical question. Same difference, the meaning gets across. Yeah, I suppose that simply starting another game is a choice. Although that has potential risk with appealing less mechanically or otherwise. And it feels weird to think that a miniature game like this would be shelved and simply kept in a single state, a final state. If that's what you're implying, that "closing the chapter" on Malifaux to prevent it degenerating due to design limitations/flaws inherent to games that seek to never stop expanding. Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying. But it seems like going that route would be the same as asking people to stop caring. I mean, certainly plenty of people are interested in the game as it stands, but with no new products ever I don't see the game drawing in new customers? Especially when it's this style, where there is a very large selection of things to potentially buy, as appose to say, a board game, which you expect to typically purchase once and be done. Although even board games often have expansions, but there are a great number stand on their own over the years. Settlers of Catan or Carcassonne are two that despite not being new are quite likely to continue being purchased by board gamers. But I can't imagine stock for a typical table-top wargame to draw in sales when the game no longer is generating new support or product. No, you are misinterpreting what I'm saying because you've made the assumption that the developers have only two choices: expand the game until it collapses under its own weight, or kill it (either slowly or rapidly) by no longer supporting it. Through the Breach generates Malifaux sales. Through the Breach has nothing to do with playing Malifaux, yet it generates miniatures sales and interest in the game. Likewise, Malifaux generates interest in Through the Breach. So Wyrd can come out with another Malifaux spin off game, Malifaux continues to progress at a controlled rate not requiring the money generating techniques pioneered in the "collectible" ('please pay $X per year to continue playing) card game systems, and benefit from the continued interest without suffocating the original game system under its own weight. And without having to say "Okay, Malifaux's done. You're all going to have to find different games to play now."

FAQ answers 14 and 15: Models are damaged and killed during Step 5. Killed models may not be removed until later because of all of the triggers which specify "after .... but before removing ...". But the killing still happens during step five.

It's like Wyrd would want to start a second game to continue producing new models or something....

The marker goes underneath the other model's base, presuming that the rule allowing you to place the marker doesn't care about distance to the other model or proximity to models doesn't otherwise prohibit the placement.

I'm now going to propose a third, completely different answer. You've already seen the FAQ answer with it's equal parts Sure, that's allowed.You should reconsider defining things as climbablewith another option: Declare the crates as formations instead, if they're not big enough to stand on top off: If they're just severe terrain, then models just move through them with the movement penalty, and don't have to deal with all of the climbing or falling business.

See the FAQ: If the model is supposed to be somewhere that you're going to have trouble balancing or placing it, you're probably going to want to use a work around like putting a marker where the model is supposed to be. I have a block of non-hardening clay that I like to use to build temporary supports; and I've seen people build piles of six sided dice to support models when playing other games.

Whirlwind is an after damaging trigger. Malevolence on the Lost Love model is an Ability with timing "after ____ suffers damage from an enemy action" If Malevolence said "When ____ suffers damage from an enemy action", there would be cause to resolve it during Step 5, instead of after step five. For example, Black Blood specifies "... when this model suffers damage" for its timing, so Black Blood resolves during Step 5. So, as far as I can tell, both Whirlwind and Malevolence specify the same timing. As a result, the Whirlwind trigger is resolved first, and then Malevolence resolves, as specified in the General Timing callout on page 46 of the Core Rulebook.

Which type of paint are you using, acrylic or otherwise, and what are you using to thin it? For example, if I get out my old GW inks (I mean, really old GW inks, from the days that GW sold an ink paint set and had $8 blister packs...) and paint those undiluted on the model, that paint dries a glossy metallic color which resembles the ink found in pens.

1. Pre-primed plastic. 2. Two sets of cards in every box, so that you can just give one set to the other player for reference. 3. The Miss models as standard releases.

All of the forums that I've seen with Off Topic sections have those sections specifically to reduce or eliminate the various reasons for making distracting off-topic replies. Having the Off Topic thread is a "I'm not going to waste my time telling you not to drink, because telling you not to is going to make it sound exciting. Instead I'm going to ask you to do so in a responsible manner, safely over there where it won't cause trouble" policy. But I don't think the ten minute buffer on the chat function is long enough to fulfill the same function as the Off Topic Playground thread. Consider what happens when one long time poster sees another long time poster's post in some thread after a long absence. A few things could happen on the forum: Poster A sends Poster B a private message, and the two catch up in private. Nice, discrete, no one else is aware anything happened.Poster A makes an off-topic reply in the thread. The inevitable replies clutter up the thread, but it also produces evidence of people chatting in a friendly manner. If it's annoying enough, gets deleted by moderators.Poster A, expecting Poster B to see the Off Topic thread, posts the "It's nice to see Poster B around again. *waves*" in the off topic thread. Evidence is produced that people chat in a friendly manner.Poster A opens up the chat window, and doesn't see Poster B in the chat. If Poster A writes something, Poster B won't see anything unless they open the chat window within ten minutes. Likewise, any evidence of people chatting disappears after ten minutes.If A posts in chat, B isn't likely to see it. So A dismisses the idea, and instead makes the off-topic reply to the message. If there's no Off Topic area, that reduces the moderator response when the off-topic replies get out of control to Moderator: "Please conduct your friendly chat in the appropriate areas." A: "There aren't any other appropriate areas. No one sees the posts in Chat, private messaging, or social media on the forum."

That's the reason why you have all of those abilities which make the condition not cause damage rather than being immune to the condition. A Rail Golem immune to Burning would never gain Burning. Likewise, if Shenlong was immune to Burning and Poison (instead of being immune to damage caused by conditions), he would never gain the Burning or Poison conditions and the Words on the River upgrade wouldn't do anything--there would be no condition to remove. Yes, but I was bringing up the possible distinction between "immune to damage" and "reduce all damage suffered by the Burning condition to 0". I understand that immunity to the condition would be antithetical to what the models do, but it had seemed like there was a distinction between immunity to the damage and reducing it to 0. Now it seems like they may have made the "reduce to 0" wording to future proof for if they ever same something that removes immunity to damage from conditions. This is the first you've mentioned that. Your first post was "immune to damage from Condition and not the Conditions themselves". Shang: Monk of the Low River: So the designers have managed to make models immune to the specific conditions, instead of not being immune to the condition and instead being immune to the damage from the condition or reducing it to 0. The point being that "immune to X" isn't "immune to damage from X" or "Reduces all damage from X to 0".

Under Immunity in the Core Rulebook: That's the reason why you have all of those abilities which make the condition not cause damage rather than being immune to the condition. A Rail Golem immune to Burning would never gain Burning. Likewise, if Shenlong was immune to Burning and Poison (instead of being immune to damage caused by conditions), he would never gain the Burning or Poison conditions and the Words on the River upgrade wouldn't do anything--there would be no condition to remove.

There are four matches for "after dealing ... damage" in the first two books: The Huh, it survived trigger on Lenny's I'll Love it and Pet it upgrade (Core Rulebook). Summons a piglet "After dealing weak damage", and then wounds the piglet.Playtime condition caused by ability of same name of the Dreamer's Otherworldly upgrade (Crossroads) Divine Egg Punch from the Fight Night Scenario (Crossroads) The one mentioned for Collodi (Crossroads)

The two neverborn minions in the starter set have That's completely automatic for the little five point minions, if this is going to get derailed into a discussion about what is and isn't overpowered to do the actions generated by a charge. And I think anyone who says that Face of Death is a useless trigger has never been stuck in the middle of a turn with a hand full of aces and threes wishing that they had gotten better luck on the draw. I think having on the damage flip would be worth taking two damage and discarding some aces.