so_diogenes

18 minutes ago, Zebo said:

Why don't you take Stalker vs TT? 

TT has easy access to focus+2 to negate the penalty to attacking him.

Pretty sure the reward is building a community of folks with whom you get to play a game that you love, which you don't need an official program to do. 

If you like the game so much that you want to build a community around it, do it. If you just want free stuff, maybe don't. 

In GG17 I was playing a tournament with Arcanists and was at the top table for the final round. I had a Silent One as my frame for murder target. She got killed on turn 3 by my Resser opponent's Archie (a henchman, would have been a full 3 VP) and I just failed to announce it or give myself any points. I lost 5-3 and wound up in 4th place when I should have won 6-5 and won the tournament as the match containing the next 2 players tied.

Where'd you get the info about the schemes and strats for the event? I'll be there too and I can't seem to find where they posted that

1 hour ago, cbtb11235813 said:

That seems like an odd complaint. It's only 4 actions (2 attack and 2 tactical: ranged cast attack, a pull, a place, and an interact), and they are all printed on his card. I would understand if actions on upgrades could be used, because that would be much more to keep track of

Agreed, but it's not my complaint (see sandeep thread, page 8ish I think) I was just coming up with a way to address it.

In other threads (and maybe that one too) people have talked about using a cheat sheet to mark off which of his actions have been taken via beacon both for when they're playing against and as a Sandeep crew. 

Instead of adding the  to arcane storm or making it so that actions taken by beacon can't declare triggers, what about making it so only tactical actions or only attack actions could be used by beacon? 

It seems like a common complaint is that people can't keep track of what sandeep players models can do, I think this could simplify that a bit.

Just now, necroon said:

I find that 12" and LOS of a HT 2 Model is pretty generous especially when Sandeep can place. This is more of a... mechanical template and commonality then a limiting factor by near any means.

I completely agree that it isn't much of a limiting factor. In my limited experience playing Sandeep it was never an issue to me (I play Neverborn almost exclusively now except the occasional practice game as another faction), I was just trying to clarify what @WWHSD said based on my interpretation.

I'm kind of coming in during a heated discussion and not really trying to derail it, but having played Sandeep I think it could alleviate some concerns people have to reduce the range of Beacon without taking much away from Sandeep himself who I don't believe is particularly OP on his own.

Just now, raderk said:

So basicly hes complaining that sandeeps range is too great to the point that LoS becomes an issue. Interesting claim.

I don't think he complained at all, I think he just was emphasizing that 

26 minutes ago, WWHSD said:

He's got 4 useful actions that one model a turn can use assuming they have a high enough card, have LoS to Sandeep, are close enough to him (and in the case of the place ability have the right characteristics)

Someone else purported that he was claiming 12" was close which he clarifiied as 

12 minutes ago, WWHSD said:

I wrote "close enough" which isn't the same as  considering two models 12 inches apart to be close to each other

1 minute ago, raderk said:

I dont get it, you have trouble having your sandeep in LoS with your crew?

He's saying if a table is sufficiently covered with terrain, it is very unlikely that there is not blocking terrain over a 12" line of sight.

1 hour ago, Fetid Strumpet said:

Seems odd they would be hyping this and driving up interest in this set if backdraft is what releases first.

I believe you mean it seems.... Wyrd...

I'll see myself out now.

6 hours ago, INXVI said:

@TeddyBear

One of my good mates usually always uses Anna against me. Mainly when I declare Collodi or Pandora, and sometimes when I run Lilith (usually with Graves and/or Lilitu and situationally a Silurid)

 

Why is your opponent picking their models after knowing your master? You should only be declaring what faction you're each playing when you build your crew.

11 minutes ago, solkan said:

The version you've just stated has the (1) action in the last sentence resolved whether or not the card is discarded.

 

edited

7 hours ago, Ludvig said:

@so_diogenes

Using two commas to set something apart from the redt of the sentence is mentioned in several online dictonaries and can be done in other languages than english as well.

 

From an online dictoinary:

 

"Use a pair of commas in the middle of a sentence to set off clauses, phrases, and words that are not essential to the meaning of the sentence. Use one comma before to indicate the beginning of the pause and one at the end to indicate the end of the pause."

 

So by english grammar rules that part isn't essential to understanding the main sentence.

Well that's the root of your question isn't it? Is the comma separated clause essential? I believe it is and that's why the commas are grammatically incorrect. If they meant to target when the discard happens I would hope they would have said "Flesh and metal: At the start of this model's activation it may discard a card. Then, target other friendly non-leader in 6" may take a (1) action at the end of this model's activation."

From an english perspective I don't think the second comma is correct. I've always played it to mean the discard happens at the start of the activation, then at the end of the activation a friendly non-leader model within 6" of the emissary's current position may take a (1) action.

I don't think you can ignore the (at the end of this model's activation) part but maybe you can just consider the "if it does" to be equal to "then"

So if you discard a card at the start of its activation a friendly non-leader model within 6" of where it ends its activation may take a (1) action

Manos == @Mason ressurectionists illuminati confirmed

48 minutes ago, Adran said:

The Effigy buff will only apply to Sandeep. 

 

That's how I've always played it, but I'm not sure that's correct. Sandeep would get the following condition:

Radiance: Models which are damaged by one of this model's Attack Actions must discard a card after the current Action is resolved or gain the Burning +1 Condition.

RAW I believe Sandeep's attack actions would cause burning+1 if the opponent doesn't discard a card regardless of who takes the action because the Attack Action is still "one of Sandeep's Attack Actions." In order for Sandeep's Attack Actions taken by other models to not be affected by the Radiance Condition I would think it should be written like this:

Radiance: Models which are damaged by Attack Actions taken by this model must discard a card after the current Action is resolved or gain the Burning +1 Condition.

Unless there's an FAQ that I'm neglecting here, I think the other models should still do the Radiance thing.

34 minutes ago, dancater said:

Looks amazing.

The positives are obvious.  It will create a variable, interesting, multi-level (so Wyrd clean up those multi-level rules please...)

I didn't want to be the first to say it, but this. That said the render looks amazing and I want to buy every bit of it.

This page contains all pre-Jan2018 errata: https://www.wyrd-games.net/malifaux-faq-errata

This post contains the Jan2018 errata: 

That covers all of it!

16 minutes ago, Adran said:

I think the following are errata free

Lileth

 

Barbaros had an errata, original was listed as 30mm base size but is actually 40mm. Not game breaking because I think the box even came with the correct base size, just something to be aware of.

11 hours ago, oistene said:

I'll be using a modular board, pretty much revolving around this set: https://www.4ground.co.uk/the-curse-of-dead-mans-hand?product_id=1348

Using all the buildings will probably be excessive, and I also want to add a few trees for variety. With enough pieces, I might even have enough for two tables. And yes, I'd love to see pics.

That set is really freakin cool. Here's the pics I promised: https://imgur.com/a/iAuRY

I think it depends a lot on the shape and the other bits of terrain around it, as well as where you place it. Is your board modular or is like a full static thing? I tend to keep my severe terrain around the 50-100mm size using bases to map out a basic shape and then add little curves or whatever as necessary and I place it on the table last so that way I have a feel for if it will actually come into play or not. I can take pics later if you'd like to see.

edit: 

For December I finished:

• Alt-Nekima (13)
• Emeline Bellerose (8)
• Dr. Dufresne (15)
• Lone Swordsman (8)
• Doppleganger (8)
• Mature Nephilim (11)
• Scion of the Void (8)
• Misaki (15)

for a total of 86.

Pics in my album here: 

Thanks so much @prof_bycid for running this, everyone did such awesome work I was very happy to progress my skills by learning from all of your models.

Arcane Effigy, Angelica, and Silent One see the most play for me. Carlos sees the table a lot too, but less lately because I've just been doing a lot of alpha strike type lists and I've had Howard in there.

This month I'm committing to:

• Alt-Nekima (13)
• Emeline Bellerose (8)
• Dr. Dufresne (15)
• Lone Swordsman (8)
• Doppleganger (8)
• Mature Nephilim (11)
• Scion of the Void (8)

for a total of 71 if my math is right. I'll probably get more done as I've started all of these, Scion and Nekima are almost done although I'm struggling with Nekima's wings currently.

22 hours ago, UglyOrangeFish said:

Android version should be live for everyone as of this morning.  iOS is still in review with Apple

I take it this your first cross platform mobile app launch...

Apple review can take full calendar weeks. Please please please don't make breaking back end code changes anymore. API versioning is your friend.