Jump to content

Maladroit

Members
  • Content Count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About Maladroit

  • Rank
    Peon

Profile Information

  • Location
    Melbourne, Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I think I like this better than mine but I would add friendly to the first sentence: "Discard a Power Token from any number of friendly models in range." I think the other issue is, as this reads(and this applied to mine as well) you could use it to end the condition on any model, construct or other, friendly or non-friendly. So the second line might need to be worded to reflect the intent - I am not sure it was intended to be used on enemy models because it does not say what resistance to use. Perhaps the second line should read: "Choose a friendly model (construct?) in range that did not discard or gain a power token this turn/action."
  2. It will still be 4 lines of text I think, but I had overlooked that it would need another stat line as well if it were two seperate actions. So I don't think it will work - even if you remove the push. Perhaps if the transfer power went on to the front of the card but I don't see that happening? It should probably be called redistribute power or something different as well . . . . Other people have suggested using repeat to clean up the wording. Maybe something like: "Target friendly construct discards a power token. Another construct within range gains a power token. This model may end one condition on any model that gained a power token. This action may be repeated however no model may discard or gain more than one power token using this action each turn." I think this uses 4 lines of card space like the existing action - but it might still be unclear - could a model discard a token on the first run then gain one on the second? I am sure someone can do this better than I can.
  3. I think the value for this is in the condition removal personally, what if Hoffman had two bonus actions. One is the same token transfer as the rest of the crew with the 2" push. The second is he spends one power token to end one condition each on up to two models within 6". Edit: now I have thought about it some more, this was one of the only ways you could get use of a token that was on a non augmented construct. So perhaps Hoffman's Transfer Power was modified to be used to transfer a (maybe up to 2?) tokens from any construct within 3 to any other construct within 3. Something like: "Target construct discards a power token. Another construct within 3" gains a power token. Any model that gained a power token may push up to 2"." then his second bonus bonus action is the condition removal: "Discard a power token. Target up to two friendly models (constructs?). This model may end one condition on each model targeted by this action."
  4. You might be able to use focus twice for one action, but since you can now only concentrate once per activation it does not seem to be much of an improvement. With the old concentrate rules, if you were in range of Dashel you could concentrate as a bonus, use one action to concentrate again, which would give you two to use for your third action. But now you would need to build up concentrate to use two at once you would need to save up over two turns or get it from another source, Dashel's foul mouthed motivation for example. As a second thought, it seems like the concentrate change has madeDashel's shouting Orders ability less valuable - could the discard a card cost be removed?
  5. His axe gets irreducible damage if he spent or gained a power token during the action, so by gaining a token immediately I guess this is so that it is clearly satisfied before resolving damage to reduce any timing issues? Otherwise I agree that it seems a little on the complicated side ATM.
  6. Well the new update answered some of these at least. You cannot target two models to both pass to a third, but it still leaves a question whether chain passing is possible for condition removal (Models 1&2 are targets, Model 1 passes to Model 2 who passes to Model 3). It does look like the passing is meant to be done one at a time rather then simultaneously, otherwise this would not apply: " . . . that has not gained a Power Token from this Action." So I am leaning towards chain passing of tokens being fine as I read it.
  7. I hope so, I really like the existing models - they looked fantastic with McMourning and co. in M2E. Personally I would like to see Dr Dufresne become a new master for Asylum and I would love to see the theme fleshed out properly. At the moment I am guessing that the starter box will remain unchanged in terms of models - both halves clock in at 17 SS. If that is the case they might well be trying to keep the models relatively tame so that games between the two mini crews are still fun - models can do a bunch of things, but nothing that is too effective considering that both sides still have a full control hand each turn. The fact that they also lack synergy with thematic master then keeps a lid on their potential in a larger crew. On a side note, While I think the Guild vs Neverborn starter is perfect, I don't see how the asylum half really exemplifies the rest of the guild faction anymore now that McMourning is gone. They don't really fit into any of the current master themes.
  8. Or three models with 3, 3 and zero. Can Hoffman select the two models with 3 tokens then: Can model 2 pass a token to model three reducing the number of tokens it has to 2. Now that model 2 has less tokens than model 1, can model 1 now pass a token across to Model 2. Models 2 and 3 can now end a condition. This revolves around whether the passing is sequential or simultaneous?
  9. Not sure this is a typo, has the Riotbreaker actually gone from a 40 mm base to a 50 mm base? Not a lot of base size changes so this one seems a little strange, I have not based mine yet but I didn't think there was an issue with fitting the model on the base.
×
×
  • Create New...