Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

265 Effervescent

About Bazlord_Prime

  • Rank
  • Birthday 11/01/1977

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Huntly, New Zealand

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Cool. I'll look at updating that!
  2. No, I've had an extended leave of absence from all things Malifaux, so it's not got anything newer than the OP. I'm getting back into it again, so I'll have a look at what needs to be added. Thanks!
  3. I think this is the rub: some people are going to contend that everything following the Ensorcel trigger is subject to the "no Triggers" clause, but what you're saying is that each Action subsequently generated should be regarded as a discrete case when determining whether or not Triggers can be declared. Has there been any indication from Wyrd about which way we're supposed to lean?
  4. I agree with your reading of the different Trigger regimes resulting from Obey & Ensorcel, but In confused about the Ensorcel Charge situation Just for clarification for everyone. I mean, that chain looks like this: Action (Obey) > Trigger (Ensorcel) > Action (Charge) > Action (Attack generated by a Charge) > Trigger (eg Onslaught) > Action (Attack from Onslaught). All for 1 AP 😉 I can see such a cat-fight coming over that chain of Actions/Triggers when it happens. Which will probably be next gaming night...
  5. Zoraida's "Obey" Attack causes the target to take an Action, controlled by Zoraida. Can this resultant Action declare Triggers ("Onslaught", for example)? If Zoraida succeeds with a second Mask on her Obey, she can declare the "Ensorcel" Trigger, which reads more or less the same as the original Obey text. Can an Action resulting from this Trigger declare Triggers of its own? I can't see anything in the digital rulebook saying that Actions generated by Actions cannot declare Triggers. But there is definitely a rule against Actions generated by Triggers declaring further Triggers. Thanks!
  6. Yeah, Gluttony was a complete pariah in M2e, but he's worth looking at now. Reaching out to 10" to snag an enemy, and throwing them into their own Markers both for removal and damage - it's pretty nice. He is a 7 Stones opportunity cost on something else, but if you know you're going up against a Marker boss...
  7. No-one would fault you for playing that as an Alt McTavish. Especially since on this model the rider is *actually* sitting on the damned gator!
  8. Gluttony is another Versatile option for Marker removal. It's less straightforward than the Emissary's way of doing it, but Gluttony has a few of his own good things going on there. I used both Emissary and Gluttony against Kaeris last week, and - because of positioning and other things - Gluttony ended up removing ~4 Pyre Markers, Emissary 0.
  9. Yeah, it's now (in M3e) worded specifically that the target suffers damage from the Poison Condition. I know in M2e it was clarified that Expunge just did plain old damage, but this is ... suspicious. I'm going to go with what's written, as CD1248 agrees, unless I see otherwise. And as far as I know, no-one else has questioned this, so it must be fairly uncontroversial? Or do we think most players are probably just playing it the same way as M2e Expunge, out of habit?
  10. Hi all, Just taking a gander over M3e Brewmaster for the first time, and then reading a mate's batrep about a McMourning game, and I wondered how the two would interact when faced with each other? To me, "Blood Poisoning" reads kinda like the damage done from it is actually Poison damage, rather than generic damage: "Target suffers damage from the Poison Condition equal to the value of its Poison Condition (to a maximum of 5 damage)." So am I correct in thinking that the defensive abilities of both Brewy and McM's crews regarding Poison would just negate the Blood Poisoning damage (also thereby Healing the filthy Rezzer crew. Sigh...)? Thanks!
  11. Gotcha, thanks. I hadn't even looked at the Summoning upgrade yet, so that makes a whole lot more sense.
  12. Had my first M3e game last night, and I'm stepping out in style with Lynch! Had quite a few issues though with figuring out what Brilliance is supposed to do on my own models (beyond Illuminated). Why the heck do Beckoners receive +2 Brilliance at the start of the game, when they seem to have no way of using our themselves?? Only thing I can see is that other models (Kitty & Depleted) can target them to lose a Brilliance so that they can push towards the Beckoners. Is that it? Ta! P.S. (also, really surprised the Beckoners don't impose a -ve to Wp on their Lure for each Brilliance a target has. That would be pure fluff, right? It's a shame)
  13. Forgive the necro... But we've just started playing a bit of HH as a last hurrah for M2e, and in order to get some enthusiasm back, ahead of M3e (which we're hoping will be soon??). Last night, we all took models we'd never/hardly played in M2e, and most of us got wasted by this combo: Ryle + Executioner (Ready to Work) + Hunter + Brutal Effigy. The Effigy's (0) "Fear Not The Sword" proved too useful, and who needs both Ryle AND an Executioner in your face? Also, the Hunter was working surprisingly well with its Harpoon dragging our models out of position, and into the death zone. So far, this is the list to beat (in our little group). Just FYI, I took: Samael (Witch Hunt, Dampening Field) + Witchling Handler + 2x Witchling Stalkers. Wasn't happy with Sam's squishiness, and it always seemed that he had to be the one putting Burning on models, for some reason. I know - I didn't play him well, but I'm keen to try him again, as his damage output is enticingly high. Just was disappointed by the lack of synergy of the other models, in that none of them gained anything from an enemy having Burning. Any ideas? I'm already thinking about a Freikorps Specialist and a Guardian instead...
  14. BLAM!!! "Let me through - I'm a doctor!" BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! "Okay - better call the morgue, actually"...
  15. And the Sawbones gets to use that attack without: a). Paying 1 AP to ready the weapon; b). Arousing suspicion, as he's just carrying a simple and inconspicuous Drs bag 😉 Still - that shotgun bag could also be inconspicuous. The first time...
  • Create New...

Important Information