PiersonsMuppeteer

More accurately the question would be: When a model with the ability Animated Remains or The Walking Dead is removed from the table, does RRR trigger? (Bury is a consideration) That answer depends on if the literal removing of the model is enough to count as removal of a marker (I think it does), or if an explicit wording saying “remove” is needed (a little clunky imo).

The FAQ doesn’t really apply to Mindless Zombies and RRR, Alignment is not a part of the interaction being discussed. Unless you can use enemy Mindless Zombies to trigger RRR, which would place an Enemy Marker, it has no bearing.

Some decent options include: Grave Golem, Bone Pile, Restless Spirit, and Dead Rider

There isn't really an issue; if a Marker is not removed you can not specify an upgrade to attach. Curator suffering 2 damage instead of removing a Marker means that no Marker is removed (unless it becomes killed and subsequently removed from the table). Specifically speaking when Curator dies and is removed from the table, for RRR or upgrades, I'd say you'd get your choice of resolving as a Corpse or Scrap because a Marker of both types was removed.

The Four Winds FAQ only answers whether or not alignment of markers changes when the same marker is dropped. Friendly/Enemy are distinctions that exist off the table, Models become friendly as soon as they are hired before they ever hit the table. Those model's Abilities do not affect the model until they are "in play". I don't think there is any premise for allowing model Abilities to function when not in play unless the Ability specifically says so. As for Yan 2; his trigger doesn't choose a model in play, since it specifies otherwise, so I don't think it has any relation to RRR/The Walking Dead, which do not specify working outside the confines of play.

I think Mindless Zombies are fine with RRR, but I don’t think Corpse Curator actually has interaction with it (also a thought birthed after more sleep). RRR has “After a corpse marker is removed…”, so a Corpse Marker has to be removed prior to the trigger. Corpse Curator’s Animated Remains actually makes it so the Corpse Marker (the Curator) is never removed. For contrast, The Walking Dead doesn’t stop the Corpse Maker removal. This thought comes from the answer given to the Treasure Seekers and Ingenuity thread.

Friendly/Enemy doesn’t affect the type of marker though, it’s an added distinction. There is a Corpse Marker, a friendly Corpse Marker, and an enemy Corpse Marker. The latter two count as the first unless an Action or effect specifically call for the friendly/enemy distinction. Edit: I see the how four winds is reading. Though the FAQ only allows alignment to persist. Looks like a big assumption is made to allow anything other than alignment to persist when dropping the same removed marker.

My opinion, it’s a huge stretch. Rule-wise: The Walking Dead ability is only in effect while the zombie is in play. Once it is removed, it is no longer a marker. Either you drop a Corpse Marker (the Marker that an Action/effect removed), or you drop nothing because a Mindless Zombie is only a Marker while in play. Via common sense… Scrap because that was what the Action/effect which removed it treated it as. The common sense ruling you mentioned would place a Corpse Marker when removing a Mindless Zombie for the same reason.

Terrifying and TTH are generated as simultaneous effects prior to any duels, the owner (opponent for both in this case) gets to choose resolution order. The opponent could choose to change targets with TTH before resolving Terrifying, though that would make Terrifying fail to resolve. The new target can't benefit from any of the original target's defensive abilities, and the new target is unable to generate effects from being targeted (like Terrifying and TTH). Also, the new target still gains some defensive abilities, Manipulative or Serene Countenance for example. As long as the defensive abilities do not generate/resolve during target declaration, the new model will still benefit from effects that require being the target of an action (widely accepted exception Vengeance because it uses "targeted").

For Terrifying: the ability effect is only generated when the opponent declares a model as the target. Any target change after target declaration is not the opponent model targeting a model. This decision was made to stop 2x Terrifying from going off, since you could resolve the original model's Terrifying and then use TTH to switch targets to generate a second Terrifying. Perfectly reasonable to FAQ the interaction. For Vengeance: extremely gray area. A majority play it the same as any ability generated when a model declares a target. However, it is generated after action resolution, introducing the gray area. This one couldn't go off twice like Terrifying, so it is still debatable on if it falls into the category of abilities covered by the FAQ. Really depends on if you view "targeted" as passively or actively. I won't go into further debate on right/wrong here, there was a long enough thread on it a while back. Edit -- Relevant FAQ entry: Note: Manipulative, an effect that resolves when the target of an action, resolves in a step after declaring targets, and as such still gets generated on the new model. The big issue from keeping Vengeance from resolving similarly is that Vengeance uses "targeted", and the FAQ specifically references "targeted" effects not being generated on the new model. So, it has a foot in both the can/can't camps.

Jack1 looks good into that specific list as well. I don't think you can take Jack into every pool, but you'll get some nice options for dealing with the specified Cooper list when you do: Terrifying: Copper and Jedza both lack Ruthless. Cooper only has WP 5, so Cooper has to activate early to make sure he's got the cards to cheat through it. Incorporeal: Bear traps, Geodes, and Jedza's ability to move them around become a non-factor. Durability: Hanged w/ GST and smart SS use can traverse open ground mostly unafraid of Cooper. Jack doesn't care about Jedza's irreducible damage. Executes: Hand pressure from Terrifying, Dead Man's Collar, Shared Guilt, and Forbidden Knowledge will put a lot of weight on SS use to avoid death.

The answer is the same, but I’ll give more explanation. Assuming RAI wants a model that was targeted or chosen for effects to transfer, Actions are the only thing that generates an effect in the rules that does either of those. The abilities you mention are not generated from an action, so there was no target or model chosen to resolve the effect. Do all effects from Actions transfer? I don’t think so as not all Actions target or choose. So we can pare down further to effects of actions that contain “target” or “choose” in the effect text. I think the only grey area left is whether or not a currently resolving effect transfers. My opinion is that only resolved effects which are existing until a future point in time should transfer, but there is no RAW or indications of RAI towards either.

Those are both Area Effects, models never become a target of those. It seems like the way to go is either ignore wording in the replace rules to transfer all effects, or use a liberal definition of target and effect to follow the replace rules to a word. I’m in favor of the simplest solution involving adhering to the entire text of rules, it also appears many are not and favor more strict and complex rulings. OP can be the judge of how they would like to play.

I already agreed no effect targets (a model can be the target of an effect) or chooses (a model can be the chosen model of an effect) using absolute RAW, which would mean no effect transfers to the new model (pretty obviously not the intent). (4) Only says new model becomes the target; not x, y, z effects transfer to new model with it as the “target”. So I think there is a huge logical gap (and RAW gap) going from “transfer target of effects to new model” -> “no effects target/choose” -> all effects transfer to the new model”. I think it makes more sense using RAW to go “no effects target” -> “transfer effects that were generated & resolved with a target/chosen model”.

That is a grey area, I’d still go in favor of not transferring since the original model was not a target or choice. I’m not sure what it breaks though, how many models can generate an Aura from an action, replace themselves or be replaced by another model, and that interaction be a core function of the model? I’ve only found Ice/Metal Golem can generate an Aura and have the ability to be replaced, I don’t think it breaks them to not have the Aura persist. The replace rule says effects that target or choose transfer and then provides examples. RAW was thrown as the reason why all effects transfer, and yet there is no RAW backing all effects transferring.

Transferring all effects is still ignoring the main clause in point 4, the new model becomes a target for effects that targeted or chose the original model. The “such as” just providing examples, not expanding what effects transfer. The attack from a charge would definitely not transfer, and a discard effect would only transfer if the old model was targeted or chosen. “May” for Unclean doesn’t cause the rat to become a target; a Pulse never targets. You are just given permission to not resolve the effect. Edit: Saying that no effects target would make no effect transfer RAW other than effects that choose a model, so all effects transferring would still be wrong from a strict RAW perspective.

Seems odd to just allow all effects to transfer instead of restricting to effects that have "target" or "choose" in the text; there is at least room to say those targeted/chose a model. Really doesn't make sense for applying it to effects of actions that do not target, such as Area Effects. That interpretation goes on to ignore the lasting part and just implies that all effects are "Lasting Effects". RAW, Auras are the only Area Effect defined as a Lasting Effect. I think that kind of flies in the face of allowing pulse effects to transfer during replacement. Edit: Pulses even say they have no game effect once resolved. Not really sure how one argues a Pulse effect is lasting.

Effects that target/chose a model are the only ones transferred. Unclean influence effect doesn’t target/choose a model since it’s a pulse.

Lasting game effects generated by models usually have a clause like “Until the End phase…” (ie, Challenge) and persist after effect resolution. I would say A, a lasting effect would be one that has been previously resolved.

When running 2 Komainu you only need one Ancestor besides Yan2 to give both free focus. Also 3 Focus is rather trivial to do first turn; fist Komainu has Yan2 reliquary, Final Wishes to give second Komainu a reliquary, Obey K1, Obey K2, and then the Komainu with Yan2 reliquary makes Yan Obey a third time during its activation. As said above, the quality of action on the minions due to +2Mv and positive flips makes it close to a no-brainer to hit the retainer minions w/ reliquaries over anything else.

I wouldn’t consider the need of a marker, and subsequent opponent counter play, as being free in the same vein as Yan2. While giving Focus+1 on Misaki2’s Obey is fairly easy to achieve, it’s not guaranteed and sometimes needs additional AP to set up.

Of the Obeys that offer Focus+1 (Yan2, Misaki2, Ngaatoro), Yan2 is the only one who gets the suit for free. Probably one of the aspects that puts Yan2 just above his peers for efficiency. Pretty big not having to use a SS or card for the suit like the others, especially when getting 2-3 extra Focus for free every turn.

Strategy markers cannot be affected by the effects of a model (moving, removing, targeting) unless specifically stated in the Strategy (ie. Break the Line). Pg 28 of rules, “Strategy Markers”.

Trying to cement how Treasure Seekers and Ingenuity interact with each other. Say Viks use Treasure Seekers to drop a scheme marker w/in 2" of Big Jake. Big Jake elects to discard a card to gain Focus +1. Since Big Jake is w/in 6" of Yannic and w/in 2" of a Scheme Marker, Big Jake elects to remove the Scheme marker to draw a card instead of discarding. Does Big Jake still gain Focus +1, or is the Focus +1 dependent on a card being actually discarded?

Your explanation doesn’t make sense based on how added effects from triggers resolve. Not from a you didn’t explain it well enough, but from a “unless otherwise stated” is not explicitly stated in the trigger.