Maladroit

10 hours ago, Peturd said:

So where are people coming down on Cryosleep? Does it allow you to ignore an ice pillar when determining if a target has cover, since you count the ice pillar as a corpse marker?

NuMah has a similar ability (except that it isn't a choice) with Pit Trap and Scrap markers. There was some discussion in another forum on this, but while we agreed it would have been nice if they had used "also", it is pretty clear they don't stop being their original marker (otherwise it doesn't make sense to have the ability). I'd imagine it should be the same here.

1 hour ago, PiersonsMuppeteer said:

The action is resolved using Colette’s stat card, and she doesn’t have Insignificant on her stat card. I don’t think there is any permission in the rules to permit a model using two stat cards simultaneously. If “using this model’s stat card” were omitted, I think there would be more argument for the Dove’s Insignificant stopping “Colette” from Interacting. 

I realise my original post is now on the previous page, but I'm not sure how it has lead to this point. My point was that there are situations in Malifaux where an object is two things at once, just because it is currently being treated as one thing does not stop it being the original thing as well. I was hesitant to post anything because the discussion didn't seem to be going anywhere . . . but thought it was worth raising.

Having said that, I don't disagree on the interaction - a marker cannot take any action, so it seems weird to say that a Dove, which is being treated as a decoy marker, which takes an action as though it was Colette, cannot take an interact action.

2 minutes ago, Thatguy said:

I think this is the core of the debate.

Whether it's treated as " a Colette model" or " the Colette model". 

I'd agree with that - I don't think we will get agreement until a FAQ/errate. My contribution was about whether it also remains a marker/dove during the action and then what are the consequences to that - which has now come back around to the original sticking point.

15 minutes ago, solkan said:

So what you're saying is that you read the words "treated as this model" to say that it's treated as a different Collette model.

 

I didn't read the words "treated as this model" at all. That is not what the card says.  

Edit to add: Sorry that sounds a bit curt, I'm trying to pay attention to a seminar at the same time.

What I read was "as though it were this model" to mean that we treat it as a Colette model for the duration of the action. I could be wrong.

1 minute ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

But the marker is acting as a model? So why can't you mark damage on it? Are you saying things that would push a model wouldn't work either?

My argument is  that the marker remains a marker and is also, for the duration of the action only, treated as a Colette model with Colette's stat card. The pseudomodel can take damage - only models can take damage and it's health is reduced. The marker itself does not take any damage. Once the action is over, the marker stops being treated as a model, has no health stat and has taken no damage.   

5 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I was originally replying to the person who said that the marker is only the marker and not colette.

However, why would damage fall off over time? Once damage is marked on a marker, nothing tells you to remove it. And as a pseudo-colette, it could take that damage.

(Which was also me) Because you cannot apply damage to a marker, only a model. 

Just now, Maladroit said:

Not quite - my argument it is both the marker and a Colette model at the same time, the pseudoColette can take damage, the marker cannot.

And as it is only a pseudomodel for the duration of the action, I don;t see why damage would accumulate over several actions.

1 minute ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

But if you're going with the interpretation that the marker isn't being a proxy for Colette, but just becomes a copy with her stat card... Then it can take damage.

Not quite - my argument it is both the marker and a Colette model at the same time, the pseudoColette can take damage, the marker cannot.

5 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

There's also the weird issue of tracking damage on the marker.

If the marker is just a copy of colette (and not Colette herself), if it takes damage do you track it? Does it die if you use the same decoy three times and it takes lethal damage over the course of those three attacks?

Pretty sure only models can take damage, Markers and Models are separate in the rules (which is why the decoy marker has to act as though it was a model):

"When a model suffers damage, it loses Health equal to the amount of damage it suffered."

"A damage flip is a variable flip (pg. 😎 that determines how much damage a model suffers due to an effect."

So, as far as I read the rules, markers do not take damage and do not need to record any. Edit to add, so you would get a new damage track for each action . . . for the pseudomodel.

At the risk of duplicating content - this has been rattling around in my head for a few days. When something is treated as something else, it does not stop being the what it was originally (see nuMah and scheme/pit-trap markers) - I think. So in this case the decoy marker, while acting a though it was a Colette Model, it remains a decoy marker (this is the less problematic bit). I assume this means that one action it could take is remove destructible terrain to remove the marker and actualColette gets shielded 2. 

As a model it can gain and lose conditions and the pseudoColette can be damaged, but the marker cannot gain or lose conditions or be damaged so when the action finishes, the marker just returns to being a marker. However, as pseudoColette can be damaged, there is an edge case where pseudoColette takes so much damage that her health is reduced to zero. IMO pseudoColette starts with max health - the health she has is the health stat printed on her card (which would mean we would not count any health actualColette has taken). There are a couple of events that could cause this. Killing Joss with 10 power tokens, taking falling damage followed by killing the guild steward. In this case, the model would be removed - would this mean that we would remove the marker?

The more problematic issue (or maybe this is good) is that the Dove remains a Dove and is acting as pseudoColette at the same time. Implications - things like black-blood damages all models in LOS and range, pseudoColette and the Dove are both in LOS and range and both take damage, same with moving through hazardous resulting in damage/conditions, both pseudoColette and the Dove take damage, same for gaining conditions from hazardous aura's or terrain. That doesn't exactly clear up how defensive trigger damage will work, but I am leaning towards pseudoCollete taking the damage and reducing her health - I don't see what rule means that the Dove takes any damage - either during damage allocation or when the action ends. 

5 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

In Third Edition, you can't mix factions like that (unless they share a keyword, which these models do not I believe).

So that wouldn't be a legal list

Having said that, if you really love the model, then I wouldn't object to you converting a cerebus into a proxy rogue necromancy. Probably look pretty cool.

24 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

1. After the books are in physical stores. So late October?

2. I believe everything will be available immediately, like with ES. Not confirmed.

3. People who know the answer are beta testing this and not allowed to disclose the answer. But I would guess you only deal with titles in the crew builder, not the game builder.

4. Fire not included, but you can burn the app or book yourself.

 

Confirming point 1

36 minutes ago, Jinn said:

. . . . I just want more Slow synergy.

Totally agree with this. It's what should be working now but just doesn't do enough.

Thought I'd do a quick count of posts about the new titles as a gauge of popularity (not scientific in any way . . .). Top is the sub-forum, then posts by master - some forums have a couple of threads for new masters and I wasn't particularly careful so might have missed something. 

18 minutes ago, dancater said:

. . . .

I think the Hoarcats are borderline, they are OK, I don't think they are a great take in Marcus (either) or Raspy-1, but they do appear useful situational summons. So if, if you do buff them I'd look at something either very, very slight or more maybe buff them through something on Raspy-1 card. But honestly I'd leave them, let the meta's of titles shake out some more, its fair that certain models will see much more action with one or other master iteration.

This brings us to the real troublesome model, the December Acolyte, clearly a poor choice in Raspy-1 and Raspy-2 based on community input. This model is, fortunately, entirely Frozen Heart so only impacts directly in this keyword, and the model is also clearly poorly regarded in both iterations of Rasputina, so improvement can happily stretch across OG and title. This I think could start with -1SS cost AND perhaps a slight buff (I'd like something which means they ignore Ice Pillars as cover) or alternatively a fairly major buff (say Shielded when activating near Ice Pillars, +built in to melee and ranged, +ignore Ice Pillars as cover). The Acolytes really do need a buff and I think it is pretty safe to do so. 

 

I agree on the Hoarcats, they are fine as is atm - particularly as summons. They were already decent enough as schemers, just being able to summon a Hoarcat at the range Raspy can makes them solid. If it was me designing the only thing I would change about them at the moment is making them  individual Hoarcats on a 30 mm base. But that's not going to change. So as hires, then unimpeded would be great, but as summons that doesn't really improve them significantly.  

Acolytes could lose from the shadows which is I don't think provides a lot of value most of the time, and no value as a summons - especially compared to what they could gain in that card space. So replace with a ice pillar buff as you say. The thing is their Harpoon gun is solid - in particular the slow trigger - so if I was to pick something you've suggested it would be the built in crow near an ice pillar.

10 minutes ago, PiersonsMuppeteer said:

All Malifaux Rats will move 3” and gain Focus+1 before the first Malifaux Rat’s action is resolved since generated Actions are only resolved once the initial Action is completely resolved. So Rat King forms with Focus+2.

Okay, I think I've got it. So say four rats get pulsed by Unclean influence, you choose one rat (all rats are acting simultaneously) move the rat if you choose, you don't even choose an action at this point as that is part of the resolving an action, gain focus 1 from the trigger, then move on to rat number 2 and repeat? Then all four rats choose an action - and resolve each action in any order you choose. 

A related question then, the Direct Control tigger hands out Focus to each Malifaux rat, I'm assuming that if you decided to form the rat king first, for . . . reasons . .  . you wouldn't get Focus - the Focus is applied when resolving, which means that you resolve the replace effect first and then the trigger effect - meaning that the rat king is no longer a rat? I mean this should almost never be an issue - you can just work through the rats without using the move or taking an action to pile on the focus. But just checking my rules understanding.

Edit to add: Unless only one rat is in range obviously . . .

12 minutes ago, PiersonsMuppeteer said:

Misery is once per activation for the model which has the ability, it would not trigger again when the new Guard Patrol gains Fast and Stunned. Only if there were two other models that could ping it for those conditions, like Pandora and another Lyssa, would it be killed in this example.

Abilities do not target as an additional factor that makes this example different from Unclean Influence, and Misery does not have you chose a model.

Maybe this is more accurate than what I said.

16 minutes ago, Kharnage said:

I think we get into annoying territory with this interpretation either way. If a 4 hp Mounted Guard gets hit by Candy's Burn Out trigger on Glimpse of Insanity, does the old model dying to her Misery on his fast and a Lyssa's ping on his Stunned, then also immediately die because the Guard Patrol is now not carrying over any lasting game effects and getting pinged by Pandora and a Sorrow for the 'new' model's Fast and Stunned? I would initially assume that "have I been pinged for gaining this" carried over but now you've got me wondering. 

If the Mounted guard was in all 4 Misery aura's at the same time then all 4 would be triggered as sequential effects, and you'd have to pick which of the overlapping aura's to apply (I think - aura's are one effect in the game that are specifically defined as lasting effects, but that is the aura itself - not an effect generated by the aura). And because these are once per activation they have already been applied to the mounted guard model so would not be able to be applied to the guard. However, if the new guard model was placed such that it was in Pandora's aura when the mounted guard was not, I don't see why Misery wouldn't ping.

43 minutes ago, trikk said:

Sonnia is preassembled I think

That was the joke. My joking font is very similar to my normal font.

Hoffman (and metallurgist):

https://www.wyrd-games.net/plastic-build-instructions/2021/9/13/remade-and-reforged?rq=hoffman

Perdita and Sly:

https://www.wyrd-games.net/plastic-build-instructions/2021/9/13/behind-the-trigger?rq=perdita

Lucius and Cavatica

https://www.wyrd-games.net/plastic-build-instructions/2021/9/13/best-kept-secrets?rq=lucius

The master-we-don't-admit-is-ours and Auguste Hart:

https://www.wyrd-games.net/plastic-build-instructions/2021/9/13/a-twisted-tale?rq=nellie

No Basse, Justice or Dashel yet  - we'll be waiting a while for Sonnia obviously.

5 minutes ago, solkan said:

Can anyone be specific on where the "They will be momentous moments in Malifaux's timeline or alt timelines" statement was made?  Given what happened with Rawlings (starting out as a McCabe alt, and getting redone as an Explorer's Society master), it's probably a real dilemma for each new set of sculpts to go "Nightmare box, alt models, or new title?"  I mean, Alt Graves and Alt Tannen with tweaked rules...  Wouldn't that be so nice?  😈

But, before I get more distracted, the point I was trying to make was that "momentous moments in Malifaux's timeline or alt timelines" sounds to me like game designer talk for "Wouldn't it be a cool idea for a model?" if you remember that they produced two Malifaux 2099 boxes for Mei Feng, and they've done Rotten Harvest releases twice so far. 

And while I obviously don't have any insider knowledge on the matter, everyone in the current DMH have ways that they could be returned to the story.  I mean, it wouldn't be outlandish for Nicodem to be released from the soul stone as part of a plot by Gorgon.  It wouldn't be outlandish for Collodi to be rebuilt.  It wouldn't be outlandish for the prisoners to be released and regroup.

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/AWYRDPLACE/posts/1689386654591725/?comment_id=1689482241248833&reply_comment_id=1689708457892878&notif_id=1632013734157408&ref=notif&notif_t=group_comment_mention

Edit to add: And totally yes please on Graves and Tannen.

Perdita and Sly's building instructions are up so you can see the model renders in more detail:

https://www.wyrd-games.net/plastic-build-instructions/2021/9/13/behind-the-trigger?rq=perdita

Some of the other boxes are up too, but not all of them.

1 hour ago, HomelessOne said:

Mimics and robots?

I'd say the Guild's all monsters (especially Nellie) myself, but...

That's true - , but only once you get to know them. Except Lucius who is a refined and proper gentleman who is in no way suspicious, merely a secretary faithfully serving the people of Malifaux. I mean he was even wearing a mask all this time to prevent the spread of infection. A true gentleman, always considering the people around him.

Just talking specifically about new players, maybe there might be something to the "human" faction element though, at least at first glance. I wonder if players who would be attracted to Guild are also likely to be also attracted to historical skirmish games like Saga or Bushido and we don't see as many taking up Malifaux. Or maybe people don't usually like playing the "police" faction - I'd guess we'd see a similar thing in Newcromunda. I'm not sure it is the mechanics, I think for a new player those are much harder to judge - though if they are not exciting as Fliox said, then we don't get existing players recommending Guild to new players.

25 minutes ago, solkan said:

It's really this simple:  Beach Vacation Rasputina is, and will always be, the one true version of Rasputina that Wyrd will never be able to escape.  🏖️

When Wyrd removed the avatar mechanic, they went out of their way to allow people to substitute those models for the emissaries.  If future editions removed a title from a master, I expect that you'd see at worst the model for that title being demoted to "oh, that's just an alt model for the regular model now".

 

Of course, except at Christmas.

The "it is an alt version" is one I had thought of - in many (most) cases the new model is just an alt version anyway (like Nekima and Perdita). However, overall that will be an interesting choice - or create an interesting problem, I don't remember an alt master being on a different base size before (maybe it has happened and I just don't play those).

In Arcanists v2 masters we've seen Raspy 30mm -> 40mm; Hoffman 30mm -> 50mm (and v2 Hoffman is huge); Kaeris 30mm -> 40mm; Marcus 30mm -> 40mm.  So 4 out of 8 masters have new base sizes. I don't think it is as widespread in other factions (Guild has 2 I think).