Jump to content

PiersonsMuppeteer

Vote Enabled
  • Posts

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

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

PiersonsMuppeteer's Achievements

Rookie

Rookie (2/14)

  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Collaborator
  • First Post
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later

Recent Badges

3

Reputation

  1. I think the Nurse could use a little more love than “only heal-bot”. She has good synergy with hanged and Montressor specifically. Using tools to pick up a black joker is nice when you have an unactivated Hanged. Bedside is also good since it keeps a Noose teleport, or Montressor pull, from dealing with friendly-fire on a committed enemy model. Montressor can also hand out fast to them when the Nurse is cursed. Probably a niche play, but still impactful if ripping focus or extra movement is needed. Nurse also has fairly easy access to Stagger and Push on triggers, both of which Tormented love. How is Carrion Emissary into pools with research mission? Is the +1 Mv while activating for the crew and the ability to bluff, or pick, research mission worth the 10ss?
  2. Ive only played her a few times, but I don’t think maintaining burning around the board is something you necessarily want to do with the models you possess. I think Draugar, Wanyudo, and Lampad are the only models in the crew which look to maintain burning (either because they can use it or don’t take damage). I only own Wanyudo, so I try to keep Reva w/in 7/14 inches of pyre makers, while keeping models which may need healing close to those pyre markers which Reva is close to. I charge her into a pyre maker, and then attack through corpse markers. You generate 3-4 burning, and can use it for positives on the above attack flips, heal Reva or something w/in 3” for 3, or save it for defensive flips. I found this pretty effective, as Reva had plenty of healing and positive flips w/o any burning management.
  3. Damage flips are variable flips, but variable flips consist of flips other than damage flips. A joker will not affect a variable flip for a heal, since it is not a damage flip. There is no accuracy modifier and no ability to stone for a minus, so calling the variable flip for the ability a “damage flip” doesn’t make much sense. I would think you’d treat it similarly to a variable flip for Juggernaut.
  4. Joker damage modification only applies to damage flips, not all variable flips. Since you can’t stone to give a minus to the “flip” in this ability, wouldn’t this only be a variable flip and not a damage flip?
  5. The ability clarifying is towards the card used for the flip, the discarded card in this instance. Abilities dont clarify how they use a joker for damage generally.
  6. Unfortunately I don't see this happening without the new title causing Molly to perform completely differently, which I don't think will happen based on how the new titles alter HOW a master accomplishes their niche instead of WHAT their niche is. I don't really consider summoning a entire niche, just a tool for the summoner to accomplish their niche. For example, either Asami gets an additional activation per turn which will start with 3 flicker tokens (barring other factors), and either Dreamer can still unbury minions into enemies. How opponents deal with the Masters accomplishing that is different. A discard focused mechanic will always favor large payoff or large card draw, neither of which forgotten models do well (as you pointed out). Either you have the current situation, where strong OOK/Versatile models are fueled by card advantage, or you have OOK/Versatile card draw powering the discard because the effect is so strong, which Forgotten lack. The entire Forgotten keyword would need a re-work, with the card draw spread out amongst Forgotten models instead of singularly focused on the master, to enable mostly in-Keyword crews. I just hope they can change her up enough that the new title is able to utilize Rabble Risers/Night Terrors a little better as offensive/defensive options for kill-oriented scheme pools. If the new title can cause consistently wanting to take a Rabbles & Terrors as one of the 2-3 Forgotten models, then at least all of the Keyword is playable and the problem has a "good enough" solution.
  7. Looking at the other Master's new titles, nothing seems "fixed" for them other than they have different options for the same functions. Using Asami's new title, she kept her 3 core functions albeit with different flavor. Crew/enemy movement, Flicker removal, and an additional activation per turn (summoning). Looking at Molly, we've got card draw, an additional minion activation, and opponent control (slow, lethe's, story). So the question is: "How to make these core functions remain the same while changing the abilities to create different strengths/weaknesses and counter-play from the opponent?" I now agree with the above comments that the titles shouldn't fix how the crew plays, but how the opponent plays the crew. One way I could see doing this would be to change Lethe's to an ability with a Strange Behavior like bubble. Something like: "Once per Activation. After an enemy model within 10" declares an Action that is has already declared during this Activation, a friendly Forgotten minion within LoS may discard a card to move up to 3" and take an Action". We keep some opponent Action control, while gaining actions. Forgotton Minions gain a little more power, and opponent doesn't have as easy of a choice as plain 2 dmg since declaring 2x action could result in a Crooligan ripping a vital scheme marker and/or stealing a soulstone, a Night Terror gaining additional movement, or having to eat a focused attack from a Rabble Riser. How does this change the opponent? Amor and shield no longer blunt Molly as well, and incorporeal gains some effectiveness since the damage of 2x declaration will come from attacks. The opponent now also needs to play around Molly's physical location instead of pure LoS. I think adding a friendly Forgotten-only Obey in place of Con Crit would even out losing the extra activation. Losing activation control may hurt, but this would grant a higher ceiling for actions per turn when including the above ability. I would probably place a Surge or Deja Vu trigger here. Card draw similarity could be accomplished by giving Molly Arcane Reservoir and an Equality of Fate-like Bonus action. Action could be draw one card, draw two cards if less cards in hand than opponent's hand". Could throw two triggers on there, "perform action again" (with this suit built-in) and "if hand size equal to opponent, opponent discards a card at random". Molly retains a 2-4 cards per turn capability, while still encouraging the opponent to manage their hand in comparison to Molly's. This pairs well with the 2x action declaration ability above as well, since performing an action a second time could result in more cards drawn by Molly or a randomly discarded card. I like how this offers very different options for Molly and the opponent. Molly's hand in relation to opponents Even or Greater: Molly draws 2, -1: Molly draws 3, -2: Molly draws 3 or draws 2 w/ random opponent discard, -3+: Molly draws 4. That's all I have for now. EDIT: I actually think tying irreducible damage to the Obey could work well. Make the Obey Friendly Forgotten (possibly just Minion) or Enemy only, and have it be "the target may suffer irreducible damage equal to the number of cards this model has drawn this turn. If it doesn't, non-bonus action controlled by Molly". Gives the opponent less control over the amount of damage suffered, but more control on if they suffer damage or the action Molly's controller decides on. Rabble Risers could get an indirect buff here with the Obey causing the model to treat abilities like it was the model's activation, and would certainly keep the opponent from bringing models w/ Flurry.
  8. I like the thought of changing Molly to use upgrades to force opponent discarding. Something like: Forgotten Memories Ability Name 1: Once per Activation. When an enemy model within 3" with Fading(X) would discard a card, this model must pass a TNX Wp duel or it must discard a card instead of the enemy model. Ability Name 2: Whenever this model would discard a card, another model within 6" with Fading(X) may gain the effect of that ability. The change really revolves around the Forgotten Keyword, and flips Molly on her head causing the opponent to have to consider a self-discarding crew or an opponent-discarding crew. Archie and Rabble Riser's Flurry can serve as easy opponent discard, and RR's challenge gains some additional functionality. Good placement is also rewarded with being able to utilize other model's Fading out of activation. Alternatively, I also like the idea of making ability #2 some sort of negative fading ability. Something like: Forgotten Memories Ability Name 1: Once per Activation. When an enemy model within 3" with Fading(X) would discard a card, this model must pass a TNX Wp duel or it must discard a card instead of the enemy model. Fading(Lost): After this model discards any cards, it gains Injured +1. This version would work in-Keyword like the previous, but would offer a more offensive oriented version of Molly. This could also be accomplished with markers (Similar to new Asami Rift markers) instead of an upgrade if it treads too much into Daw's territory.
  9. This was the topic of another thread recently, and had three competing opinions. 1. The trigger goes off of how much damage suffered after damage reduction. 2. Since the trigger states "damage suffered when declaring" vice only "damage suffered" like most triggers, it does the amount of damage chosen and A&D suffers one less than the chosen amount. 3. Since trigger is considered a separate action from the attack action, it is possible that it is not an attack action itself and is unaffected by incorporeal. I personally think that the most correct is option #2, as the declare step considers cost paid already paid not what you paid in the pay costs step. So you declare how much damage you will suffer as additional payment, the trigger references the declared amount (already considered paid), trigger is paid for and A&D suffers the declared amount -1 for incorporeal, and the target suffers damage equal to the amount in the declare step. Option #3 is less gamey and probably going to cause less argument since the pros and cons of the trigger are evenly counterbalanced. Option #1 just seems the most wrong to me because of the "damage suffered when declaring" clause. Most other abilities only reference damage suffered, so I think this gets around the usual count damage suffered after damage reduction. If the trigger only said "equal to damage suffered", I would agree with #1 being most correct.
  10. I would offer the counter-point that the trigger references damage suffered "when declaring" and not just plain damage suffered. As the declare step considers costs to be paid, the ability should register the damage suffered at the point of trigger declaration vice after costs are paid. Personally I think the second interpretation is better, as it counterbalances the pluses and minuses of the trigger better.
  11. I think for non-damage effects, theory 2 is the correct way to resolve an effect. In the crooligan example, the discard causes another effect to occur. The sequential effects rules would cause the scheme marker removal to take place after. Theory 1 can cause a difference of opinion of if the second effect is resolved first or second, and would be at odds with the sequential effects rule if allowed to occur before moving the crooligan. For actions/effects which cause damage, theory 1 is correct since the damage timing table states when an effect should be resolved. However, if an effect resolved in stage 5 or 6 causes another effect to occur, sequential effects would require the effect generated by an effect to occur once the current effect queue has resolved. So, any stage 5 effects would resolve, and any additional effects generated by those stage 5 effects would resolve after the initial, but before stage 6's four effects are generated. Really theory 2 only causes differences in effect resolution when a demise ability would cause another effect, since the additional effect would resolve only after all of stage 6's effects.
  12. The limit on choosing to suffer damage is already in the rules, and Yasunori's ability does not have any language that allows circumvention of the rule. I don't think any errata is needed.
  13. Correct me if I am wrong, but the trigger has the "when declaring" clause Would this not allow it to side-step the reduction caused by incorporeal? "Paying costs" states that when an action is declared, the cost is already considered paid. So, the trigger considers the two damage as paid when it is declared. Since the cost does not reference the target, the damage would be suffered in the "pay costs" step, and would be reduced by one because it is suffering it from an attack action. So +1 damage would be "free", and +2 would cost only 1 health to be suffered. The trigger does not follow the damage suffered rules as per p.24 because of the "when declaring" clause pointing to a time before Ashes and Dust even suffers the damage from the trigger's cost. Alternatively, triggers being a separate action from the attack action makes it possible that they are non-attack actions. In which case Ashes and Dust suffers full damage and the trigger resolves as read. I think the upper interpretation is more correct, since there is no explicit statement on if a trigger is the same type of action as the action that triggered it (ie. and attack actions triggers are all generated as attack actions themselves) or a generic action. With a bonus action only being able to cause another bonus action to occur if stated explicitly, it is made impossible for a bonus action trigger to also be a bonus action and strengthens the argument for triggers being generic actions. Either way, I think the real question is not if Ashes and Dust does the damage equal to the damage suffered, but if Ashes and Dust loses health equal the chosen amount or the chosen amount minus 1.
  14. It can't. After reading this whole thread, I think some people have skipped over the fact that step 6 generates effects, and is not just rules text to follow. To elaborate with the trooper/Nekima example. 1. Happens as normal. 2. Happens as normal. 3. Happens as normal. 4. Happens as normal. 5. Happens as normal. 6. Trooper being killed triggers. The 4 effects listed are all generated at the same time, but because of the text in 6, are generated in the 6a, 6b, 6c, 6d order. 6a. Healing/Replacing killed effects resolve, ie. Demise(Eternal), and are not generated as per sequential effects. 6b. Triggers as normal. 6c. Demise(Explosive) resolves, and is not generated as per sequential effects. (Explosive effect resolution) 1. normal 2. normal 3. normal 4. normal 5. Nekima's black blood triggers. Any after damage effects are additionally generated effects, and are added to resolution queue 6. Nekima being killed triggers. All four killed effects are additionally generated effects and are added to resolution queue in the 6a, 6b, 6c, 6d order. Additionally, trooper's dark powers effect is generated and added to queue. 6d. Trooper if removed *7. Resolve Nekima's black blood *8. Nekima's killed effects and the troopers heal effect are simultaneous, so active player's model will act first. Results in the trooper being removed before it heals, and Nekima dies since the trooper is no longer able to take damage from it. This line of resolution does not result in any nested effects (the damage of Demise(explosive) is not an effect, but a resolution of the effect). The Demise abilities are part of the 6a or 6c effect resolution, and not generated by 6a or 6c (otherwise models could not be healed by a demise ability).
  15. Fairly certain this is not able to happen, as a model cannot choose to suffer damage if it would bring its health to 0 or below (Choosing to Suffer Damage, p. 33). HTK has no effect on this action, as you can only choose to suffer damage to 1 health left. At most you can choose to draw 8, but not sure if it's worth him dying in two attacks though. I also agree with Adran, the lelu example has the model only suffer one damage because any damage past 0 health is ignored, or not suffered. So the model only suffers 1 damage, and lelu heals 1. Also, Ashes and Dust's trigger has the "when trigger is declared" cause, so the trigger won't be affected by incorporeal's DR.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information