Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Neutral

About Maladroit

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
    Melbourne, Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Perhaps that is something worth spelling out explicitly in the rules? I don't think most players will overlap bases on the same level (you cannot move through other models) but I can see a situation where a base is overhanging the edge of a Height 2 platform and a Sz 3 model is in base contact with the wall directly below. I think the rules are that this would count as moving through another model and moving to that position should not be possible but I can see it being missed during play? I was trying to think of a situation where you could end up with models overlapping where they would not be moved into that position - deployment? I could only find that you 'deploy' models in the rules which does not come into the movement section (might well be missing something).
  2. In m2e hounds even took a little killing at df5 and 4 wounds. Sometimes scheme runners struggled to put them down efficiently - 3 wounds vs 4 is a huge deal. At least guild hounds are OK summons, you can loot their corpses, and pack mentality is more likely come into play to improve their survivability and effectiveness.
  3. Dropped markers can be placed in base contact with other models (even underneath the base) while created markers can only be in base contact with the model creating the marker and not other models. The change means that the pyre marker can be placed under the model that just killed your model in melee.
  4. Maladroit

    22.03 Update

    Probably a fair call on Ryle - I would have preferred a slight Nerf rather than the cost increase. Orderlies . . . sigh. Unfortunately I really like the models and theme. I actually bought the starter set just to get these (and the Guild themed deck) Hoffman - They fixed the gank you could pull with protected by making it enemy attack actions only. With summoning, I hadn't paid attention before but on the summoners card the upgrade is identified by keyword rather than name (reinforcements for Dashel rather than Patrolling Guard). I wonder if that is leaving the way open for different summoning upgrade options or just a card space issue? I still prefer Master Queeg but I can see that they might not have wanted a non-master model called Master. Did the get threatened by the copyright holders to The Caine Mutiny? Maybe if it was Taggart McQueeg.
  5. 22/3 Update log says: "35. Applying Fate Modifiers comes directly after declaring Soulstone use" which I interpreted as a change to: both players declare their SS use, then both players declare all other modifiers (power tokens, Focus etc). Page 35 says "I. Modify The Duel with Soulstones, Abilities, or other game effects (Active player first). " which reads as they are all declared together, actiive player first. To be clear I am happy with either version, but if it is meant to be one then the other I don't think that is what it currently says.
  6. Or perhaps the model could only mimic an action during its activation (Mimic ends at the end of the activation rather than in the end phase). At least that would stop multiple shoot attacks and force the Agent to engage where it is more vulnerable. Would be a substantial change though.
  7. If you are being attacked 10 times a turn then being able to cheat or not in defence does not really make a lot of difference. You'll likely need to use the high cards to force attacks through a defence that is probably able to repeatedly use highish cards due to the card draw. How many useful cards will you be able to cheat in to defend with a 6 card control hand? Even if you could cheat you might make a difference to one or two attacks that they'll probably still be able to force through anyway. I can see it feels worse not to have the choice, but if the crew can channel 6-10 attacks through a single model, for many crews cheating or not is not going to make a big difference - that is to say, I don't think allowing cheating with a discard is the solution to the problem you are describing.
  8. That's fair enough, it isn't a perfect suggestion. It's certainly my preference that the number of steps be as few as possible, but it does not mean they have to all be consolidated. On the other hand, I have had this come up where where someone said they are targeting my model and went straight into using SStones and Focus in a single sentence, without waiting for me to decide whether I wanted to use intimidating authority. Then complained. I think the more separate timing points there are the more this is likely to come up. Would you be happy for Focus, SStones and Token use to all be consolidated together in a single step, consistently worded?
  9. I argued for option 3 in the first post in the thread, that seems the simplest to remember and follow. Consistently wording the timing should make it easier to follow the intention.
  10. It would certainly be an improvement. I guess, unlike Rail Workers the models don't appear Augmented in any way (well perhaps they are in the McMourning way - hard to tell). I'd run one instead of a Toolkit to test it out at least, but I still think that unless you were running Howard, you'd probably still be better off with a toolkit.
  11. @solkan Thanks for typing all that out - I did feel a bit weird describing the transition from Step 3 to Step A - I was using the timing on Pages 10-11 for the duel steps. If the timing is meant to be the same, I want the same language used. For many of these, the timing is very much in the same 'region' ("before a duel" vs "before flipping") and if the timing is meant to be different (sequential) then that is fine, but I suspect the timing is meant to actually be the same and different language is just making me think the timing might be different. And to be honest, I don't want to be thinking about this much detail, as I posted in the first place I'd rather most of these were bundled together into a single declaration. Perhaps rather than discuss what we currently have, what do you think about changing the wording to be more consistent. I have used Before flipping for the timing because that is how Focused and Soulstone timing is described. These are only for Guild and Ten Thunders. Augmented - Power Converter Current: Before performing a duel, this model may discard a Power Token to receive either a + or a suit of its choice to that duel. Consistent: Before flipping in a duel, this model may discard a Power Token to receive either a + or a suit of its choice to that duel. Oni – From Beyond Current: Before performing a duel, this model may gain a Flicker Token to receive a + to that duel and any damage flips it generates. Consistent: Before flipping in a duel, this model may gain a Flicker Token to receive a + to that duel and any damage flips it generates. Qi and Gong – Leverage Current: When performing a duel, this model may discard a Pass Token to receive a + to that duel. Consistent: Before flipping in a duel, this model may discard a Pass Token to receive a + to that duel. Elite - Intimidating Authority - this one does actually change the step in which it occurs, perhaps with unintended consequences. Current: After this model is targeted with an Attack Action, it may discard a card to have the Attacking model suffer a - to that Action's duel. Consistent: If this model is the target of an Attack Action, before flipping in a duel it may discard a card to have the Attacking model suffer a - to that Action's duel. I agree with you on, Hungering Darkness changing that would actually change the timing and perhaps have unintended consequences. But there seems to be some room for consolidation.
  12. Hungering Darkness has "After declaring an Attack Action, this model may discard a Brilliance Token from the target to receive a + to that Action's duel." At least the timing is very clear here, but I don't think it would make much difference if it was written to be before flipping cards (Step A) - except that the defender would have to use abilities like Take the Hit before knowing if the duel was going to be enhanced. edit to add: ONI: "Before performing a duel, this model may gain a Flicker Token to receive a + to that duel and any damage flips it generates." Same as Power tokens, so before Focus and SStones?
  13. Yep, I am on board with that. However at the moment, there is a fair discrepancy in the description of the timing. To me Focus and SS use looks simultaneous and I am happy they are both in Step A of the duel, they both describe timing as "before flipping cards". Power tokens are used before the duel and Part A is part of the duel process so they would appear to be before Part A, so sequentially and before SS and Focus. Intimidating authority is after being targeted - so at the end of Step 3 but before Step A of the duel - is that simultaneously with Power Tokens or sequential and before. And the Qi and Gong one is perhaps the most vague "when performing a duel", you would assume in Step A, but maybe at the start of Step B? I don't see any reason that the timing cannot all be described in the same way to make it clear that it is all simultaneous.
  14. For Qi and Gong models the timing is: "When performing a duel, this model may discard a Pass Token to receive a + to that duel." At what point is that? Presumably before flipping cards, but after SS use is declared or before or at the same time. @Kyle Imagine a duel between a Qi and Gong henchman with Focus and a Pass token attacking an augmented Henchman with Focus and a Power Token. Based on the rules as they stand what is the correct order to declare enhancements? Power tokens are before the duel (Part A is part of the duel), so the Augmented model declares a Power Token first for a suit. We also know that when we go in to step A, as the attacker, the Qi and Gong declares a SS before the Augmented model. But the rest of the timing is unclear, do we just go back and forth in any order?
  15. I wrote this in another thread but I can't see any value in Steamfitters in a Hoffman crew. The only reason I can see that they actually have Augmented is to support Howard. But the biggest problem with Hoffman is that they are not constructs so do not get Power Tokens when Hoffman activates, cannot use Power Transfer from other models which means they cannot get the 2" push that comes with that. They are far less likely to have a Power Token, so the Mechanical Attendent usually cannot Push them either, which means that they usually have to walk at least once just to keep up with all of the free movement of the rest of the crew. In turn 1 this isn't a problem - but then Shielded and their aura is far less likely to be useful, but even by turn 2 I've found that they either are positioned correctly for their aura or they can use encase in steel maybe once. Hoffman can't even overcharge them to give them fast and a Power Token. You can Toss them with a Guardian, but you've got better things to be doing with that activation. The only reason I might consider them is if the M&SU only restriction was removed from the Bronze Boxing Gloves trigger so that they could also hand out focus with Shielded to models not named Howard. Otherwise a mobile toolkit is only three stones and is as pretty much as effective at handing out buffs (actually Tune Up only needs a 5 rather than a 6) and more mobile because it is a construct.
  • Create New...