Icebeard

@Maniacal_cackle sorry to revive a sleeping thread. But this discussion came up with our gaming group, and I was curious about yours (and anyone elses) thoughts . "Regret" Vs "that one counts as mine" Things to take into consideration would be For the side arguing that "Regret" would stop "that one counts as mine". But on the other hand, the action taken is not by the model declaring the trigger, and since the trigger has already been declared, would ending that models activation stop said trigger from making another model attack?

We had an interesting interaction in a game the other day, and got curious about what the right answer would be. So the three models and abilities involved where: Jedza with "inevitability of death" Lamplighter with "Unnatural glow" Candy with "Disarm" The Lamplighter attacked Candy, and ended up healing candy for 3. Candy flipped crows, so since no trigger was declared, she was able to declare "Disarming" Jedza used "inevitability of death" on the heal 3, changing it to damage instead. Now. The question is wether Candy is allowed to reduce that damage by 2, because of Disarming, or if the attack resolved with a heal, and therefore is irreducible by the defensive trigger, and the actual damage comes from Jedzas "inevitability of death" ability. We decided to call it in Jedzas favour, but can't say for sure what the right answer would be! What do you think?

@Plaag, yeah it didn't work out the way I had planned it! Realistically I brought too many models that want to use cards instead of support pieces. With the idea being that Toni uses "bring it" to isolate a target early on, and everything else working together to delete it. In this match the only thing in reach was Serena Bowman. But a couple of unfortunate flips combined with her survivability left her alive, even after the full keyword put attacks into her. I brought Joss due to the irreducible damage potential, but can see the point of him needing focus to really get swinging. Emissary without "up" I'm guessing you're referring to diesel engine? I left the upgrade off in order to push in obeys if need be. But that never really worked the way I planned it either. So, what would you replace / use model wise? I think one of the reasons I stuck with the scheme marker based schemes is due to my original thought of hiring in Colette as a 2nd master. To run scheme and anti scheme with the rider. I made quite a few mistakes, some of them probably with taking a mismatched crew. Just curious what other people would take into a similar situation.

Alright. So I had a game with M&SU against dreamer the other day. And admittedly, I could have made better choices. But just out of curiosity, what would you run against him? The pool was GG0 : And as you can see, I chose breakthrough and search the ruins. My list was: Toni ironsides Mouse (Totem) Amina. 9 Rider + SS. 13 Joss 11 Arcane emissary 10 And a pool of 7 stones. I went for joss due to his ruthless and access to irreducible damage, hoping to give both him and the emissary fast, with the ability to reactivate one of them through the rider from turn 2 onwards, trying to strike hard and fast, keeping an elite crew to dictate where the strategy markers would come down. The game did not go according to plan for a few different reasons. But out of curiosity. What would you guys pick into this pool versing Dreamer?

Jumping into the discussion a bit late. I've only played Malifaux for about 1 year now, and have a very limited Meta that might skew how I view things. I can't speak for specific keywords when it comes to over powered, as I've only had enough games to get a good feel for Rasputina, Marcus and Kaeris. (I also own Ironsides, Colette and Ramos, but have only had 1-2 games with each) But as for a keyword I feel could need a boost, I agree that December needs it the most. Like most people say, the lack of card draw and the resource strain seems to cause more issues for Raspi than it does for her opponents. Another thing is the "Grim feast" as the only bonus action on a crew where a lot of models simply don't want to be anywhere near where corpses land, as they'd rather ping in shots from afar. Compared to most other keywords, I find the bonus actions lacking. Marcus has been one of my strongest masters for quite some time as we've been learning the ropes, and even though I've seen a lot of negative feedback against him I find him very adaptable, If not necessarily by the list chosen, but by the simple speed and mobility of the crew. Changing tactics mid fight is quite easily done with leaps and high movement, whilst for example, a raspy list feels more "locked in" where your models have to stay in the zone they've committed to. Kaeris wins points in the same aspect as Marcus with high mobility. Decent damage output and access to advantage on flips. It might be to our Meta being a relatively new one, but mobility and movement shenanigans seem to hold the top tier master spots for most of our players.

Ok! Two friends are currently mid game, (Monk vs big hat) and a new question came up. Does hazardous damage caused by auras like : Or Work and effect abilities like : And I. E, does hazardous aura count as damage done by the model creating said aura? This would also be relevant to certain schemes and strategies.

Either way, it would have to be one of two options, right? Either A) it's all baked in prior to damage reduction, and incorporeal models still take 1 damage. Or B) it happens after damage reduction, incorporeal takes nothing, but armor is now rendered useless against it. (and it would be two separate stone attempts if people want to stone to reduce damage. The reason I posted it is because I think we've treated it like some form of middle ground, where both armor and incorporeal get used to full effect (incorporeal taking 0 damage and armored models taking 1). Which shouldn't, be possible unless I've missed something

@Adran OK, so if the damage is added before reductions, that'd mean it does 2 damage against incorporeal, reduced to 1, and not 1 reduced to 0 and therefore no +1?

Hi guys! I have a question in regards to Rasputinas ability "Freeze Over". In a discussion with a friend, we came to the conclusion that her ability wouldn't be able to damage incorporeal models due to its wording "models damages by this action suffer +1 damage" I.E, she's located the shock wave on a pillar for extra damage, but by how it is worded, the extra damage only occurs if they get damaged in the first place. Does this make incorporeal and shielded models immune to the +1? And if so, does she do 1+1 damage (separate effects) against armour?

Perfect. Thank you for clarifying!

Yeah the reference cards we have from the faction packs does not have the word attack on there. We figured the rulebook would overrule, but I wasn't sure about the English grammar and if it would read as "non (melee attack) action“ or "non melee, attack action)". I know there are no commas in the rulebook, so just to get it straight, it is option a, only non melee attack actions suffer from concealment? Heals are OK, but obey for example, would be affected.

Hi guys! a question came up in a game I watched today, regarding concealment and whether it affects tactical actions. In the rulebook it states : The reference cards say the same, with the difference of removing the word "attack" Is it: a) only effecting non melee attack actions, so heals and other tactical actions are unaffected. b) non melee actions, (I.e tacticals and other actions are affected too).

Here's a link to the rules. Probably should've added that form the start! And yeah, you'd think so, but since all players have the same opportunity, it balanced out, the masters do make up for the majority of the crews function and usually tends to be a beater. In my list, Toni used "bring it" to force people to fight on my terms, the captain was a secondary beater with his 3/4/6 2" hammer, an option to force card discard by shock waves, and a good defensive bubble, as one of my opponents fielded Parker. Mouse and the Mannequin where simply models to heal/hand out focus to the two main models.

I know everyone is focused on the new gg1 strats and schemes right now. But I just played the 3-man variant "Paranoia" last night, and it got me thinking of other fun combinations to try within the limited point frame and the other restrictions. So, in paranoia, no summons are allowed, you get your master and your totem for free, a 5 ss cache and an additional 15 ss to spend on extra models. The main strat is based on holding the center, and the schemes are based on interaction or damage to opposing masters, more info can be found on paranoias own page on this forum. I ran Toni Ironsides - 0 Mouse - 0 The captain. - 10 Mannequin. - 4+1 Now, without thinking about what you have available or what your opponent is likely to bring, what are your ideas?

Tried Paranoia for the first time last night. Had heaps of fun. Toni Ironsides, Mouse, The captain, Mannequin VS Brewmaster, Wesley, popcorn Turner, moon shinobi. VS Parker, doc mitchel, Sue, Johan creedy. What happens if two (or more) players have an equal amount of models within 8 of the center? Do they both get a point, or neither?

Yup! I didn't read that properly, which makes sense, since that would also block charges from causing triggers. Thanks for clarifying that the ability is OK.

Question regarding Paul crockets scent of blood. With the new Errata, actions generated by actions can not use triggers. Does A) scent of blood (being an ability) allow for triggers to happen, as it's the ability that creates the second action. Or B) in order for Paul to actually cause damage to a model he needs to take an action, the action generated by scent of blood ties in with the action that caused damage, and for that reason no triggers may be declared.

So in the case of a Bury, does she keep it and buries anyway, or does the Bury fail?

Following up on moving the lode stone. We just had a game where misaki was the last of her crew on the board, carrying the lode stone. What happens if there are no models to pass the stone to?

@Yore Huckleberry. That was my take on "same effect" as well. But I wasn't sure if that was part of what people had used to argue for its allowance, so I felt adding all info would be best! It rarely seems to be a thing, as extra activations earlier turns usually have a better pay out. But I've had one game where I black jokered the action, and ended up with an additional five tokens for the following turn. It does give an interesting option of a real intense round 5 scheming though.

Hey guys! I remember reading a thread about the mechanical rider somewhere a few months ago, in regards to its trigger revelation on the action "revel in creation" and its trigger revelation. My question is : Can the mechanical rider re-activate herself multiple times in the same turn if you have enough fate tokens to do so? Revelation let's any friendly non master activate immediately after the rider ends its activation: Rules for chained activations state : Is it possible because she is the same model (i.e you're not activating more than two models in a row, regardless of how many times she manages to activate) Is it possible because they (or she) is activated by the same effect, even though it would be under separate actions. Or is it not possible due to another rule weighing in, or something I have missed.

I had a discussion with a friend about the wording and effects regarding charges made into hazardous terrain. Option A, the move and attack actions count as separate actions. (the charging model takes one damage for the move aspect of the charge, and after attacking it takes another damage) Option B, taking a "Charge action" involves both the movement aspect and attack aspect of the text, and the action itself isn't completed until after the attack is made (so it would only take one damage) We've discussed it, but figured it wouldn't hurt to get a general consensus for it.