solkan

I love having the argument about this statement. Can you explain where in the rulebook you get that a rule saying that the "Squad" taking an Action means that every fire team in the unit takes an Action? There's an Asset which says That doesn't say to choose a fire team to do it, either, yet you have to in order to resolve the Action.

Ah, whoops. You're right. I managed to overlook two different rules saying the same thing, one in Assets and this one in Hire Your Company and just saw this part: My poor card efficiency... 🥀

In case it comes up again later, here's the follow up for the bigger argument concerning AV modifications and Penetration flips.... For this trigger it's important to note that Margin Value is a "live" value for the duel that usually just gets reduced to declare triggers but can also be modified by various effects. There are units in the game that can lower their Margin Value to gain suits, and triggers that can be declared to increase the Margin Value. Most of the time those aren't a concern, so most of time a player just looks at their margin value and spends it straight out. You've got a Margin Value of 8, you declare (5) Powerful Attack, and the remaining Margin Value of 3 doesn't matter. With the Give In to Hunger trigger, you get various sequences if you've got a Margin Value of 8, a in the duel total, and a Reinforcement token. Declare Powerful Attack once (reducing Margin Value to 3), remember you've got Give In to Hunger and declare it raising the Margin Value back to 5, then declare the second Powerful Attack to reduce the Margin Value to 0 Declare Give In to Hunger to use up the ram, raising the Margin Value to 10, and then declare Powerful Attack twice to lower the Margin Value to 0 But that's not all that the game currently has in it. Abyssinia has Magic Dampeners (-2 AV to ☄️ actions) and Mechanized Infantry with its Tracer Rounds ability (+1 AV for other fireteams in the unit when taking against the same target unit that activation). Cult has the Snapping Heads asset (each Snapping Head adds +1 AV to the Snapping Jaws action). Thrace has her morale action which is going to give +2 AV once she has a Guild unit with a gun to boss around. The Karkanoi have Hunger (up to +3 AV from Reinforcement tokens). Kings Empire has Sharpshooter and Soulstone Processing Matrix that give +1 AV and the Bayonettes rule that applies -2 AV for using their as . All of those are modifications to the AV of the duel for the action. This sentence in the Penetration Flip: is a technical error that has to be taken as saying to play the game because Margin Values aren't defined for flips and its a result that makes sense. This is the definition of Margin Value in the rules PDF: Margin Value is only defined for duels. And as far as I can tell, those half dozen abilities which manipulate AV for an action are written with that definition in mind. Edit: So I shouldn't launch into a tirade when I haven't had my evening caffein yet. I still think that the fact that Penetration Flips use the phrase "Margin Value" is a technical error, and that technical error is what causes this argument. But when I started searching for "Margin Value" somehow I got distracted and ended up looking up AV on the cards instead. 😕. Woops.

I feel like I've read this question somewhere else. Note the timing of the trigger: It's an immediately trigger. So you resolve its effects when declared, and then it's done. (Rules PDF, page 25, Triggers section) So you declare the trigger and it resolves immediately, changing the margin value for the duel. And then it's done because it has been resolved.

On the subject of vehicles, I think there's a category of vehicles that generally aren't function in sort of wargame: transport vehicles. The game has a fixed number of turns, the need to get models across the table, and no rules in the main book for one unit to carry another unit. So I wouldn't hold my breath concerning APCs. As far as "support zeppelins" and the like, there's already some mention of those things as off the table support elements. If they put flying unit into the game, you're going to have to deal with the Gibbering Hordes "Obviously can't fly" units attacking them, and that's just going to make everyone sad. If it looks like Steampunk 40K on the table, no one's going to be happy. The other problem is going to be model scale. The Abyssinia Dreadnought is probably at 80% or so scale compared to the rest of the faction. That's a three legged walker with three people riding it. In comparison, the two Abyssinian Combined Arms titans are 80mm bases and in the same scale as the rest of the faction. Crab style walkers are going to end up with Dreadnought Scale Disease. On the other hand, if I had to bet I'd say that the Guild is probably the faction most likely to end with "Early 1900's Super Tank" as a vehicle option. Although I think there's already artwork of giant Peacekeeper style robots, and I don't think "Early 1900's Super Tank" beats that. But the late Governor did have that siege train thing, so it's possible.

You're making the Abyssinian Marauder and the Kings Empire Motor Scout sad by ignoring their non-titan vehicularity.

Keep in mind that in most cases if the unit starts its activation in base contact with a portal, the unit could have teleported through the portal earlier. For instance... You've got a Rhino two inches from a portal and you've got initiative at the start of the turn. At the start of the turn you discard a card to move that portal into base contact with the Rhino. You teleport the Rhino to a different portal. Then, when the rhino activates it can either teleport through the portal (because it's still in base contact) and it won't be able to use the movement from its order; or you can choose not to teleport it and move from where it is. If you had decided not to teleport the Rhino through the portal when you moved the portal, then when it activates it can be placed but won't be able to move from where it is. Presumably the start of the activation teleportation effect is so Cult players complain that they can't use portals that they're standing right next to when they focus. Disclaimer: Yeah, this means that this phrase "Fireteams that move in this way may not use any remaining movement that was granted by the Order" is applying even though you haven't declared an order yet. The Burning Man travels back through time and opens tears in the fabric of reality, so do his rules.

If you get bonus soulstones for an encounter, they don’t carry over after the encounter. If you’ve got a huge excess during an encounter and you’ve already maxed out you soulstone pool, the extra just goes to waste. But note that the difference in campaign rating results in a bonus to the soulstone pool only, the bonus is applied after crew selection, and that bonus can exceed the normal pool limit. You still don’t get to keep any excess soulstones at the end of the game. Unless I’m forgetting something, the only time soulstones convert to Scrip is right after you’ve chosen your starting Arsenal. Cut ‘Em Up For Parts says to round up. But it’s an optional campaign rule. That’s the only way to sell off models that I can think of off hand, but if there’s something else the rule in the main rulebook is that you round up. The campaign system doesn’t use half scrip. See “Finished Off” paragraph two. If you hired it and then sacrificed it, then you go to injuries. But don’t forget about the Summoned Models exceptions for injuries on page 31. For things like Arachnid Swarms or shapeshifters where you sacrifice a model to produce a different model, self sacrifice doesn’t automatically result in an injury. But injuries to the replacement model apply back to the original.

That’s wishful thinking, because of course you’d rather have one action which generates three. It also requires ignoring the fact that it’s worded the same way that the Commander extra action is.

Thrace’s Action lets one fireteam in the Squad unit take an Action. By the Combined Arms rules, “In all other ways, it functions as a normal Fireteam in the unit it came with (including Activations, Orders, etc.)” after talking about how that fireteam differs from the other Fireteams “on the normal Unit Card.” So you get a Titan that acts like it’s part of the Squad. (So it’s subject to Squad coherence as well...) More importantly, the Fireteams don’t have the Squad rule, their Unit does. And it’s the unit being targeted.

I do not think you're going to be happy with the style in which the rules have been written. In order to get models back when you Reinforce, you need to discard a Reinforcement token. You're only allowed to discard the one token, not multiple tokens. If the unit that Reinforces has the Reserves(X) rule, when it discards that token it gets back X more models. Part of the reason for the disconnect, as far as I can tell, is the mutual annihilation mechanism where Pinned Tokens and Reinforcement Tokens cancel each other out. There are effects that give out Reinforcement tokens and then say that the unit reinforces. If the unit had Pinned tokens, one of them cancels out the Reinforcement Token and the unit ends up not being able to regain any models.

Okay, good point but we've both got it wrong at this point--I got the part you quoted somewhat incorrect, but your correction is also somewhat incorrect. (If the target has a 2" melee range and there's an enemy model nearby with a 1" melee range, that's good enough even though the target is one causing the engagement.) The target has to be engaged with one or more models which are also within 2" of the target. That doesn't change the candidate pool, it means that sometimes when you shoot at an engaged model, you don't randomize because there's no engaging or engaged model within 2" of the target. One enemy model and a dozen friendly models packed into the area within 2" of the target is still randomizing for 14 models (target + 1 enemy + 12 friendly); the same as being surrounded by 13 enemy models would be. As long as someone within 2" was engaged with the target.

Edit: I'm going to claim Edition Fatigue on this post, because I committed two long running errors: 1. In order to randomize, the target has to be engaged with an enemy model within 2" of it. 2. I forgot how bad the rules were about "engaged", "engaged with", "engaging", and not keeping straight who's responsible for the situation because it goes both ways. So I added an important correction to my original post in red. No, the candidate pool for randomization has nothing to do with who is engaging whom. The candidate pool is quite simple: 1. Every single model within 2" of the original target if and only if the target is engaged with a model within 2" of it. Line of sight is irrelevant, and is called out both in the rulebook and the FAQ as irrelevant. Whether any of those models are engaging the target is irrelevant. You could be targeting a model that was engaged by an enemy model that was 3" away from it, and the candidate pool wouldn't be any different. But you still need the one model within 2" of the target engaged with the target. The enemy model 3" is actually a red herring and it can't cause randomization anyway. In order to be excluded from the candidate pool specified above, a model needs a rule like Santiago or the Doppleganger where no card is flipped for it. You randomize to determine the actual target because your declared target was engaged. The randomization process doesn't care about who is engaging whom. Incorrect. The rules call out these as possible outcomes. "When firing into an engagement it is possible to hit targets that aren't technically within LoS or range to the Attacker, or to even hit models that aren't engaged (but are within 2" of the target model)." To quote a different section of the rules "[It] is important to note that a player may not Cheat Fate unless specifically allowed." The randomization rules do not grant permission to cheat the randomization flips. Ht of the models involved is irrelevant. For what it's worth, the firing into engagement rules are likely going to become irrelevant in the next edition due to rules changes. So if this seems implausible or unreasonably simplified, just wait.

Why do the developers continue, edition upon edition, to include rules that the players insist on skipping over and making irrelevant? Rulebook: Choose your faction, leader, and hire your crew after you know what the table, schemes and strategy are. Players: Lets have single faction, single master fixed list tournaments. And then complain about situational models. 🎊

1. Tide Pools and Poison Clouds both say "120mm ... terrain piece" while Portal Markers are specified as "50mm Portal Markers". Note that Tide Pools and Poison Clouds are created during the activation phase as well as during the Scouting phase. Once upon a time Tide Pools were Tide Pool Markers (which was probably convenient at the time convenient because you're putting this 120mm marker shaped piece of cardboard on the table for them) but then for various reasons all of the cards got changed. Both Objective Markers and additional Tide Pools and Poison Clouds get created during the game, as do Portal Markers. (Disclaimer: I wasn't in the TOS beta. But I'd bet that the obvious negative play scenario is what happened.) As specified on the cards, no, they aren't currently markers. I'm pretty sure you can point to scenarios like Set Traps for the reason why Tide Pool and Poison Cloud are specified on the cards as terrain pieces and not Markers. 2. Look at the Hazardous terrain rules broken down in sections: So you've got a piece of terrain that's both Hazardous 2 because the Difficult terrain rule and Hazardous 3 due to the Stormsiren's rule. The second sentence tells you to use the 3 instead of the 2. The next two sentences: A piece of terrain that is both Difficult and Hazardous 3 doesn't become two terrain pieces. So if you Rush through a single Difficult, Hazardous 3 terrain piece, it's a strength 3 hit. 3. The answer to your begged question has everything to do with publishing a rulebook on schedule. But we're all currently patiently waiting for inevitable release FAQ/Errata to deal with various issues like the missing numeric value on one of Abyssinia's Poison Cloud effects.

The list of abnormally tall or short models for their Ht attribute would derail the discussion. But that's all a 1st or 2nd edition Dreamer model would be at worst--an abnormally short H2 model. Please conduct the following brief experiment if Dead Man's Hand Collodi has the rules that would feel like a "person using strings to move puppets". Version 1. Look at the DMH version of Collodi, put the Neverborn faction logo back onto the card, and ask if M3E Neverborn Collodi is what you wanted. Version 2. Then go back to DHM Collodi, where it can only hire puppets and versatile Neverborn models. Compare between Version 1 and Version 2 whether you can make the crews that you want to make. It seems to me that the conclusion has to be that a dedicated Collodi player is losing access to are the non-generic Neverborn things. And it seems to me that since Dead Man's Hand isn't a faction, you're not violating your pledge of allegiance to the Neverborn faction to play a Dead Man's Hand master.

The problem with the singular in this use is things in English like "You can stop me at any time to ask a question." In common use, that's not saying you only get one question. So you get a situation where "Before or after taking an action" and "Before or after discarding a Tactics Token" are when you can discard that token. At any of the possible timing points, you can discard a token, so as a result you can discard any number of tokens. Just like how "After you flip a card, you may discard one Tactics Token to flip an additional card" is a limit of one per flip, but if you flip cards several times during an activation you can end up discarding more than one token.

That's my understanding as well. When you reinforce, you're allowed to discard one token. It's once per reinforcement, and you'd need more explicit permission to be able to choose the same unit multiple times. For assets, it's the fact that you're allowed to do it at any time during the activation that's not putting a limit on the use. I've run into the occasional person who's expecting the asset thing to be once per activation for consistency, but it feels like that's an over generalization.

No, not Gritty Teen Protagonist in a YA novel Dreamer! 😱... 🙃 It looks like LCB's continuing to suffer from Chronic Base Overhang with those new arms, though.

For The Burning Man Descends, that's not a "flip": Disclaimer: I presume that after you resolve the cards, they get discarded to clean out the Conflict. Same for the ECB death triangle: You can Cheat and/or spend a Tactics Token on a Flip. But it'll be called a flip if it's a Flip.

Can both cheat it and spend one tactics token on the flip. You're supposed to be scared of the tide pools if the Gibbering Hordes player has the Siren in glory, a stack of tactics tokens, and a fist full of cards.

You've been mislead by the statement in the rules: That statement is there because there are two players involved, and you'd either get card slapping or "Uh uh, I want you to cheat first." You can cheat any flip that doesn't say otherwise. Like the penetration flip rules saying that you can't cheat those when performed by fire team that's missing models. Whether or not you can Cheat a flip, you can spend a tactics token to flip the additional card. It's a completely independent thing, granted by the Tactics Token rules. Again, the Duels steps specify details because there are potentially two players involved. Note that the statement about one token of each type being used to modify a duel resulting in a limit of one tactics token for each player is mostly redundant--the callout box on the page with the Cheating rules creates an equivalent "one Tactics token per flip" restriction.

Not in this version of Rules English. "then" is used to denote sequentiality of resolution, not causality. If the damage was contingent on the model having been pushed, it would be phrased as such.

😮

At this point I'm pretty sure you wouldn't believe the people involved explaining that personal lives don't happen according to product development schedules.