Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

298 Effervescent

About Angelshard

Recent Profile Visitors

933 profile views
  1. I'm pretty sure there's going to be an errata regarding this point. I highly doubt the design intention was to copy suits and modifiers.
  2. @Cursed25 you're right. I've managed to add an 'up to' in my head that doesn't exist. Oh well, guess that means I'll have to give the focus to two different models and use Santiago earlier than I'd prefer from now on.
  3. @Calriel great initiative and very comprehensive. Well done! A couple of things. I don't see expert marksman mentioned for Nino. It's a massive boost for him. It gives him expert shot so he can shoot into melee without penalty and, thanks to his build in tome, it gives him built in armour piercing. Heroic intervention, it might be me reading your post wrong, but it seems like you think it can only be used if you target a model that is within 1" of one of yours. That's not the case, you can always use it. I'd also mention that turn one you can use Santiago to give perdita 2 focus with sober up and then have him move up turn two, he wants to hang back a bit anyway. I'd also argue that Lead lined coat on loco makes him a lot better. The armour is obvious, but I think he gains more from laugh off. Suddenly lures and many other movement shenanigans don't work on him, making his wp 3 less of an issue.
  4. Congratulations! Well done, especially with only two games before the tournament. Out of curiosity what was the list and the strats? I have a hard time seeing perdita win against Zoraida in cursed idols, for example.
  5. @Jesy Blue I'm not the one who quoted your edit.... Nor do I see any need for the aggressive tone just because we disagree.
  6. @Maniacal_cackle How is the distinction between a model's actions and actions available to a model arbitrary? It's two different meanings. I've yet to hear an argument from either you or @Jesy Blue as to why different wording should be considered the same. Is there any rules argument for why it makes more sense that the designers have used two different terms? It could also have been written as " Select an Action available to the target." and there would be no argument. Again, since the designers use the word available in the rulebook when referring to the general Actions, why not just use it here too? An alternative would be to write general actions in the rulebook as "General actions are actions that may be taken by all models in the game, but arent considered the models actions." Or, if written in a way that would agree with your reading of the rules "General actions belong to all models." This would clearly indicate that the actions should be counted as the models inherent actions. PS: No matter which way we interpret it you can already infinite loop this ability. Just keep spamming it on yourself. That has nothing to do with wether or nor it allows for general actions to be taken. The idea that a model can use a rule or action without the rule or action specifically belonging to that model isn't some new and groundbreaking idea.... It's actually quite common in games. Oh and by the way, editing your post withoutat least writing edit, especially when someone else has quoted the original line, seems a bit fishy.
  7. @eddy Only if he has the opportunity to do so, there's quite a lot of situations where that would require spending an action walking, meaning you only get shot once instead of twice. I'd take that deal any day. Additionally, placing his model in a spot that would negate the push might place the model out of position or in range of one of your other models or away from an aura. Honestly Drawn to pain is a strong ability and doesn't need a boost.
  8. @Jesy Blue My bad, Mimic doesn't include , it really doesn't matter for the sake of this argument. The target's action I.e an action that belongs to the target. This isn't about rules, this is about gramma.
  9. @Maniacal_cackle While I agree that the rules could certainley use tighter writing I cannot agree in this instance. The difference between add to the conflict and place into the conflict is quite clear. They use the two terms in the same sentence. P 8. Under Flips: "If multiple cards are added to the Conflict as the result of Fate Modifiers, only one card is placed into the Conflict, the others are discarded." This sentence, and thus the entire resulution of multiple cards in a conflict, doen't work if added to the conflict and place into the conflict are the same in game terms. So if we presume that the rules works the term placed into the Conflict has to be a consistent term and therefore also be the one used in Fiendish Gambit.
  10. @Maniacal_cackle It's a matter of the words. The text on Adaptive tactics or mimic or just like you or any other copy ability that I can think of, requires you to select one of the target's actions. Not an action available to the target. Just because something is available to you doesn't mean it's yours. @Jesy Blue I'm not arguing that a models options are limited to what is written on the stat card, I am saying that the defienition of targets actions are limited to the actions on the stat card or an upgrade attached to it. Your quote just says that there are actions outside of the models actions that are available to all models. Again, just because something is available to you doesn't mean it belongs to you. If was to be written they way you would want it to work it would read "Select a non- action available to the target that does not Attach Upgrades or list a model by name."
  11. No. The difference is that Hanna can use Tactical actions from upgrades, whereas lazarus is limited to the card. The general actions are available to all models but they don't belong to a model, only actions on cards are a models actions.
  12. @CD1248 P. 29 in the ruleboook: "Focused +X: Before performing an opposed duel, this model may lower the value of this Condition by one to receive a + to the duel (and any resulting damage flip this model makes)." The defensive trigger is a resulting damage flip from the duel, so focus should work.
  13. @Maniacal_cackle the difference with The Old Ways is that it's well written. It clearly states that you can only use it when you have no fate modifiers, and it says that you flip the card from the discard pile instead of the date deck. Fiendish Gamble, on the other hand, specifically states that you use your removed cars instead of flipping, without specifying what they mean by flip. If we presume that wyrd has thought the writing through (which I doubt, fiendish gamble was added as a late change) the fact that Fiendish Gamble doesn't say you can only use it when you have no fate modifiers implies that it can be used with fate modifiers. Placed into the conflict is consistently defined as the card you use in your final dual total, nowhere in the rules have I found a different use for the term. Since it's the exact same wording in every instance, including Fiendish Gamble, I read it as a rules term. Unlike flip where I will agree that there are several different uses.
  14. @Maniacal_cackle I agree that fiendish gamble is way too good. It wasn't until I sat down to look at all the consequences of making GYL an attack action that I realised all the things you can get around with fiendish gamble (if you read the rules as I do). Stitched can pretty much ignore any effect that would put it at a minus flip, both offensively and defensively once per activation.
  15. I believe the relevant definition here is from page 9 under fate modifiers. "For each Fate Modifier on a flip, one additional card is revealed (so a + flip would reveal two cards, as would a - flip). When multiple cards are revealed as a result of Fate Modifiers, only one card is placed into the Conflict and the others are discarded." As I read it a flip can be several cards. But the flip is still one instance and therefore replaced by fiendish gamble. I also find think the most important term for this discussion is" placed into the conflict". This is clearly defined as the card that is used for the final dual total and fiendish gamble says that this is the card that you take from the removed cards. If we try to create a situation where the gamble only replaces one card you have the problem that there's no timing on the flip. When does the stitched decide if it wants to use fiendish gamble? Can it wait until the opponent has flipped all his cards? Does it have to be the first card it flips or can it be a subsequent card?
  • Create New...

Important Information