Maladroit

2 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

In ressers, there are currently 2 options (Molly 1 or Yan Lo 2). Should people have to tech these in as second masters every time they face Hoffman? Or declare Molly/Yan Lo every time they face arcanists?

I don't think marker removal is a reasonable answer.

You can argue "just play the game only able to score 2 symbols" or whatever, but I'm not sure either of those solutions are very reasonable.

Tend to agree with many of the sentiments through the whole thread - I suspect your level of concern will depend on how much impassable terrain usually features on your boards. Making them climbable would seem to be the simplest solution to those concerns - though maybe a little restrictive on the modelling front. And in this specific case I'm not a fan of rock/paper/scissors where you are having to tech in a bunch of models - which let's face it is already possibly a problem with Augmented with armor 2 throughout the keyword. So your opponent takes Hoffman and you now need to think do I tech in anti-armour and/or marker removal - how much of your original keyword is left if your master matches up less well? Maybe it is my particular preference, but I'd like the game designed so that it pushes you to themey lists, not a tech-pick heavy one. And if you are on the Hoff player that just gets your intended playstyle nuked by some assertive marker removal, I don't see that as intended either.

On the metallurgist, I had hoped the model would give Archoff another option for magical training which as it stood was very limited - but sadly no . . . . .

Has there been any mention of a new Hayreddin card to go with the undead Nephalim? Seems to be his kind of thing . . . . 

I'm never sure about these rules. Do they have to end their push within 8" or start their push within 8"?

1 hour ago, Yore Huckleberry said:

There is only one target of the attack at the time the trigger is declared (the final target after step c is fully resolved in the detailed timing). The trigger is declared at step d-v, at which point the target of the attack is the one on whom the trigger is being declared.

I don't disagree with that. That's how I would play it. But the point I was making is that it could, maybe, be interpreted as the target for the new attack must be different to the model targeted by the previous attack, which was Model A. There does appear to be some distinction between being the target and being targeted in the new FAQ

From GG2 FAQ Q12 Section 2:

"Yes. When a model is targeted all effects that would resolve are generated at the same time and can be resolved in any order (as per Simultaneous Effects on Pg 34). However, some effects may change the target of the Action, in which case that new model is not targeted and as such those effects aren’t generated a second time."

20 hours ago, Adran said:

Quick Reflexes:Take this Action again, targeting a different model.

 

I think that this means you can't target the model that is being hit with the action. If you attacked A, and it was switched to B then when you declare the action again I think you can target A as it is a different model to the one that was the target when you resolve the trigger. 

(If it was worded like Obey where it is you can't target a model more than once per activation with this, then I would say you couldn't go back to A, but that's not how it is phrased). 

It is a tricky one imo. The way protected and terrifying was ruled in the faq implies that model B becomes the target of the action, but it has not been targeted (by the enemy model) when take the hit/protected is used. So for me, if we interpret it as "targeting a different model" (other than the previous target) we could now target model A but not model B. Or I could see it being "targeting a different model" (other that the previously targeted model) which would mean that we can now target model B but not model A. I'm not sure there is a clear answer . . . pick one and agree with your opponent until clarified I guess.

Laugh off means that you may choose not to move, so no, the model has not moved if it chooses not to. If it reduced to move to 0" that would be a different story.

Something similar was in the FAQ though (From Section 5 on page 4):

6. Blade Rush – Is damage from Blade Rush treated as damage from the Charge Action? a) No. The damage from Blade Rush is generated by the Ability as a result of taking the Action, not the Action itself.

Which leans towards damage from Stampede being treated as from an ability rather than from the action.

10 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I don't think there is a clear answer under the rules, but working out what happens when "cause" can chain through multiple abilities or actions gets very messy. 

So I think the cleanest way to play it is to say it came from the ability.

1 hour ago, Adran said:

You can make that argument. It's the same slope that leads to the argument that I summoned the model and therefore every thing it does is a result of that summon action. 

I think it also risks leading to infinite damage possibilities with things like black blood. 

I can't point to a section of the rules that expressly say your argument is wrong, but there is nothing to say it is right either.

They errata d actions caused by triggers to add in the sort of chain which certainly suggests to me that the rules don't intend it as a default. 

Unfortunately my prediction of the next change to Journalist will be a nerf to Phiona. I think they'll look at how widely used she is OOK and decide that she needs to be toned down. While I agree with the process of nerfing overpowered models, I think Phiona should be seen as a symptom of problems in Guild instead.

On 2/28/2021 at 9:29 AM, Essexkiwi said:

Thanks guys. I prefer Arcanists to Guild as a faction hence leaning that way, but I also like the aesthetics of a bot crew so yeah those Guild boxes are appealing.
Joss looks great, looks like I'm getting two additional boxes then LOL.
What are your favoured models to use for scheming?   The Watchers seem ideal with their bonus actions but look a bit fragile.  

Watchers are good for their cost - there isn't anything really more mobile in keyword. You can always make them fast and use the toss from a guardian so they can move to safety after dropping a marker (10" toss followed up with a 2" push and two 7" flight moves and an interact somewhere in there). Make sure they have a power token on them so you can push out of engagement using their bonus action without using a disengage. You have to be careful with them but they are small and very mobile. If you are looking for something more robust then Hunters are OK options (and you already have these models), they are costly for that though and you have to be careful if there is a lot of severe terrain as they really struggle with their 50mm base - and like the watchers you have both deadly pursuit and a power token  push out of engagements and still interact or keep moving towards your target. Like the watcher, you can toss these and Hoffman can give them fast to up the mobility. They're good enough to kill other scheme runners as well.

I guess the other robust option is the Steam Arachnid swarms OOK. They have been toned down but still get around the board very well with nimble and unimpeded if there is severe terrain to slow you down - and nimble means you can drop 2 scheme markers in one activation without fast - something the watcher and Hunter can't do (50mm base (edit: on the Hunter) is slightly smaller than 2"). Again toss and fast to increase the mobility for one turn or so you can interact then move back..    

That's a tough one. Howard Langston, a Guardian(s), watchers are all things you might want in the future. However if you are playing arcanists and intend on collecting more from that faction, then the support staff box is what I would go for. In terms of what I use often, it is Joss and the mobile toolkit. I don't use the medibots with Hoffman, however other crews find use for the medibots even out of keyword. I realise it is probably just me, but loading Joss full of power tokens and launching him at the enemy is my idea of fun. 

I'm not sold on the preassembly either. I can't say I'm not personally disappointed. Unfortunately my experience with TOS models has not been great - this is far from the only badly assembled model I have. I didn't want to get replacements from Wyrd, even though I'm sure that would have been fine so I just cut and filled them myself and swore off buying any more. I can totally see the point of preassembly to help newer hobbyists, not just new to Malifaux players, but personally I'd rather have the control over my modelling. If there was some way of simply deconstructing them without damaging the PVC I'd be fine with that.   

40 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Let me caveat this by saying the rules aren't terribly clear on what is responsible for effects, so there is probably some wiggle room in interpretation.

However, I read Bombs in yer Belly as just adding a blast to the damage track (controlled by the upgrade owner). So I would say the damage is part of the attack.

. . . 

I would agree with that. Bombs adds to the damage track for that action and the trigger adds armour piercing to damage from the action. Thus all damage has armour piercing. 

It would be different if the armour piercing only applied against the target of the action.

There is a bit of newish 'information' in the M3e Guild faction book. We know that he is a Neverborn, but he conceals what kind of NB he is, even Zoraida cannot work out what kind he is. He can only shape shift to a limited extent, the story describes his hands changing to elongate with serious claws appearing. But Lucius had to have McMourning perform plastic surgery to make his face appear humanish - and even after that it is pretty horrible to look at. Dashel got a good look at his new face and either was satisfied he was a horribly disfigured human or didn't care if Lucius wasn't.

On 12/14/2020 at 3:26 AM, Beeray said:

Modified Welder on Dr. Beebe is a melee attack action with a damage track, while it's a ranged attack on Union Miner that gives burning+1.

I'm going to guess this was a naming mistake - Beebe's action is the same as the Steamfitter's "Welding Torch" melee action (minus the triggers and power token mechanic). So should have been named "Welding Torch" rather than "Modified Welder".

If you are staying primarily in Keyword, what Pergli said seems fun. And I wouldn't take my advice but . . . some additional thoughts:

Worth keeping in mind that only the Thrall and Totem are Witchlings in this list, which is important if you intend on making use of Sonnia's 3" hazardous aura (or her other bonus action for that matter). Thralls can also be a little slow without a witchling handler around and if you are using the ride with me on Sonnia, there is not much else you can do to get them up the board, so I think hiring no more than one is the right choice with no handler. Summoning them into a dangerous position though, if you get lucky, is awesome . . .  so I'd paint up both.

You may end up summoning a Witchling Stalker too if you are thinking of your painting table. I would only do this if the Purifying flame was still on the table at the time and the killed model was less than 8ss - otherwise resummoning her totem or a thrall is probably better. I don't think hiring them is worthwhile.

Have a look at sanctioned spellcasters too -.sneaky value that you might use if you get to an awkward SS level (so going from 35 to 40 SS if you are in an escalation type league) and can't yet afford the next spelleater/thrall. But you get the stalkers in the box with Sonnia and you'd have to think would you use the spellcasters long term.

I am still hopeful they eventually flesh out the Asylum keyword one day . . .

I wouldn't mind if they did have a keyword though - a common question from new players is what is new player friendly master, the starter box could guide them in that direction. Before when there were two factions in the one set, I'd have agreed they should not be tied to a specific master, so that players didn't have to overbuy to fill out the keyword. This seems an odd choice though, having a keyword from a master from an entirely different faction?

4 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

My impression is basically you can grab any two starter boxes and play against each other (something you can't do with core boxes, but people use for core boxes currently).

Then after your starter games, you can buy any core box, and bam! You have a complete crew (possibly with two separate synergy sets). I assume all the starter boxes will have a keyword so that all the versatile models tie together, but who knows.

I believe the Outcast one has all Syndicate keyword models (from explorers society) and versatile in outcasts which is why I thought that one felt off. I don't think they have a keyword from Outcasts - but we'll have to wait and see for that one.

Edit for grammar

11 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Oh, I assume all the starter boxes would start balanced at a particular soulstone cost/been playtested against each other. In which case that seems like a pretty ideal starter box to me (if that assumption is true).

I think if you see them as a starter box for Malifaux then that makes some sense - grab a starter box and play a few henchman games to see if M3E is for you - I don't know if that is really how people get started though? (I've got no idea about marketing)

For me though, I'd also want them to really represent the faction as well. I'd want to be able to say to a new player, grab the starter box for your faction and then go with a master that they were drawn to and was New Player Friendly. 

On 1/4/2021 at 4:09 AM, santaclaws01 said:

I would say no, neurotoxins removed their ability to remove soulstones.

It's an interesting question - the fact that the word "cannot" is the opposite of "can" in this case would seem to support your argument.

I guess the problem is that "can" might mean "is capable of" or could also mean "is permitted to". The 14 year old next door can drive a car, but he cannot legally drive a car on the roads.

What about a situation where the crew has no soulstones left - in this instance the model cannot use a soulstone (there are not any to use)? Not relevant for expert thief but is relevant for Control Collar on Sanctioned Spellcasters. Personally I don't think having no SS means control collar no longer functions, but the argument is that Von Schtook also turns off this ability?

4 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Aren't the starter boxes just all packs of versatile models? What's the harm of slapping an extra keyword on them?

None at all, just the marketing of them as an "Starter box" for the faction seems off to me. I'm remembering back to my bewilderment as a new player trying to get a handle on the game.

Edit to add: And to be honest, it is the outcast one that seems off - we have not seen to many of the others yet.

For the most part they seem to be getting it right - or at least are packaging things in a reasonable way. For new players it seems more straightforward than M2E, which was also complicated by the cross faction mercenary system. And the packaging of the new new stuff like the ES boxes seems pretty good so far. However, I find the treatment of dual keyword and dual faction models to be a bit hit and miss. Sometimes they've got it right (Bayou engineering comes to mind) and sometimes they've got it very wrong (packaging Iggy with the Aversions is inexcusable IMO - think about the situation for a new arcanist player trying to complete her Kaeris crew). Sure you can argue that you can use Gadzooks or similar, but in certain parts of the world you pay more in shipping than the model is worth, and to be blunt, you should not need to. For Wyrd to provide a decent alternative in these few cases would be great - I'm pretty sure that Iggy comes on a single sprue and could be done as a special order if Wyrd chose - OR Wyrd should have bitten the bullet and made Iggy single faction if they could not provide a reasonable purchase pathway. 

In the past I've been a fan of Wyrd's approach to the encounter boxes too. They've been fun and interesting models that are not so important to the faction that you NEED to get them, which is how it should be - kind of. I think the problem becomes when you start marketing the boxes in M3E as faction "starter" boxes and they really are not IMO. I'm thinking of the Outcasts starter box which is all Syndicate models . . . I mean it is not really worse than the old M2E starter box, but I'm a bit puzzled why the box is marketed in this way. If I was recommending something to represent the Outcasts faction to a new player this seems like a strange place to start.

On 1/1/2021 at 7:51 AM, santaclaws01 said:

Yeah, there's a lack of specificity in Disarming that gives just enough wiggle room to say that Disarming could apply to the damage from Inevitability of death. There's certainly a strong argument that it's implied that it only reduces damage dealt by the action.

Are there any other effects that deal damage during the resolution of an action that isn't from the action being resolved? I know Parasitic Grasp does, but that's irreducible so doesn't really help.

Falling damage from a forced move or similar with hazardous terrain I guess. For example a model is within Sonnia's hazardous bubble and is obeyed to take an action is similar to the case described by the OP.

A similar question arises with 'drawn to pain', it just says if the model suffers damage not that the damage must have come from the attacker directly.

Edited to add example

On 10/26/2020 at 9:00 AM, dannydb said:

When they unbury they are ignored for stats and schemes so you can't score off them the turn they unbury 

Probably worth pointing out that they are ignored for friendly schemes and strats, your opponent can still use them to score theirs. I made that mistake the first time I played after the errata.

Also same as interact actions, if you can reactivate them then they can count on the turn they unbury.

6 hours ago, Molly said:

 
- How should soulstone miners be used correctly? I guess it is not possible to unearth and leave a marker in the same turn, right? afterall are always bonus action, or no?

Correct, unless they can activate a second time in the same turn, for example using the mech rider.

2 hours ago, Meliondor said:

 

And where do you get the card draw from? Executioners can "kill" a marker and his summoning produce cards. But I see no other effect?

Queeg's bonus action is another card draw.