Wastrel Castoffs question

[entropolous]

The Wastrel's Castoffs ability does not have any verbage about ignoring restrictions when passing off upgrades attached.  Am I correct in interpreting that this means that wastrels can only ever give Lucas upgrades back to Lucas?

[The Godlyness]

Looks that way. But maybe he needs his shirt back really badly.

[StuffedKiwi]

I don't play McCabe but I play against him plenty, and that would be my read: the 'give upgrades back to Lucas' ability is not the Wastrel's ability but McCabe's, and it specifically limits the ability to "Upgrades with the Restriction Lucas McCabe." So though Cast-offs can allow the Wastrels to take Upgrades from other friendly models (including McCabe), McCabe's Loan ability means the he gains from Wastrels and others only McCabe-only upgrades.

Unless I've misunderstood what it is you're asking?

My bad, mis-read the card. Sorry for adding confusion.

[Fireuser]

Apparently there is a call out box in the rulebook that says something to the effect of "rules on cards trump rules in the book" (at work so cannot reference specifics), but this means the Wastrels can pass upgrades all day, ignoring the restrictions.

 

And for 2 AP it really should work that way anyways.

[entropolous]

I don't play McCabe but I play against him plenty, and that would be my read: the 'give upgrades back to Lucas' ability is not the Wastrel's ability but McCabe's, and it specifically limits the ability to "Upgrades with the Restriction Lucas McCabe." So though Cast-offs can allow the Wastrels to take Upgrades from other friendly models (including McCabe), McCabe's Loan ability means the he gains from Wastrels and others only McCabe-only upgrades.

Unless I've misunderstood what it is you're asking?

Castoffs doesn't take upgrades it gives upgrades.  The rules text is:

"Target another friendly model within 6". Heal 2 damage on

the target, or remove all Upgrades attached to this model and attach them to the target."

 

 

Apparently there is a call out box in the rulebook that says something to the effect of "rules on cards trump rules in the book" (at work so cannot reference specifics), but this means the Wastrels can pass upgrades all day, ignoring the restrictions.

 

And for 2 AP it really should work that way anyways.

 

The call out box specifes that the contradicting model rule must explicitly contradict the rules, and there is not nothing in the castoff text that explicitly allow you to attach an upgrade to a model that wouldn't normally be able to attach the upgrade.

 

As much as I would like to daisy chain badge of speed through a bunch of wastrels, cycling cards all along the way, sadly I think its just a pipe dream. 

[Dirial]

 

Castoffs doesn't take upgrades it gives upgrades.  The rules text is:

"Target another friendly model within 6". Heal 2 damage on

the target, or remove all Upgrades attached to this model and attach them to the target."

 

As much as I would like to daisy chain badge of speed through a bunch of wastrels, cycling cards all along the way, sadly I think its just a pipe dream. 

 

I think, your interpretation of the rules is correct, although likely unintended. I see an errata coming.

[zFiend]

I think, your interpretation of the rules is correct, although likely unintended. I see an errata coming.

I would think so as well.

[Makrar]

I think a lot of  the upgrade rules are only in effect upon hiring so once you start the game effects that move upgrades around dont have to follow these restrictions and so you just follow what the card says. (except i think the limit of 1 2 or 3 for enforcers/henchman/masters remain if it doesnt specify otherwise)

 

(Page 11, 66 and 90 small rulebook) 

[Dirial]

I think the upgrade rules are only in effect upon hiring so once you start the game effects that move upgrades around effectively ignore the restrictions and so you just follow what the card says.

 

(Page 11 and 90 small rulebook) 

 

Hm. Then why do so many upgrade actions list that they ignore restrictions? In this case, I see an FAQ coming.

[Makrar]

Hm. Then why do so many upgrade actions list that they ignore restrictions? In this case, I see an FAQ coming.

 

 I could well be wrong (it really wants to work how i think it does for 2ap!!)

[MasterDisaster]

(2) Cast-offs (Ca 5 / TN: 11): Target another friendly model within 6". Heal 2 damage on

the target, or remove all Upgrades attached to this model and attach them to the target.

 

So that's Cast-offs. It doesn't specify a particular type of model (Enforcer, Henchman or Master) yet it also doesn't say anything about ignoring the usual restrictions. RAW I'd assume you can target any model within 6" and either heal them or remove all the upgrades currently on the Wastrel then attach them to the target. RAI only Justin can really say for certain I guess but I'd assume it's to be taken on face value as the passing of upgrades is McCabe's shtick and I'd say his Wastrels are meant to be able to do this aswell... Bring on the FAQ! 

[The Godlyness]

Makes you wonder how Jack daw attaches things. Or I am missing a vital piece of wording.

[Ausplosions]

Makes you wonder how Jack daw attaches things. Or I am missing a vital piece of wording.

Did we just break Jack Daw?

[PraetorDragoon]

I think that restrictions only matter when purchasing them at the start of the game. Otherwise, a lot abilites/tricks that belong to the core identity of masters. (such as Jack Daw's curses passing). 

 

Why are there so many threads attempting to break the game, by the way?

[zFiend]

Why are there so many threads attempting to break the game, by the way?

I don't know. Good question.

[Dirial]

 

Why are there so many threads attempting to break the game, by the way?

 

They are not. They are trying to get the rules right, so that ambivalent wording doesn't disrupt the game. The question should thus be: Why are there so many people who think so hard about the rules that they discover every little wonky wording? Because it's a great game, that's why.

[MasterDisaster]

They are not. They are trying to get the rules right, so that ambivalent wording doesn't disrupt the game. The question should thus be: Why are there so many people who think so hard about the rules that they discover every little wonky wording? Because it's a great game, that's why.

 

I agree, I don't see it as them deliberately trying to break the game. It's more a case of trying to clarify obscure wording in rules so that the game isn't broken. It's ensuring people understand how the rules are meant to be played which benefits the entire community. 

[The Godlyness]

Not me I want it to break. Cause I am a meany.

[Bengt]

It says on page 22 that restrictions defines who can have an upgrade attached to them.

[Math Mathonwy]

I think that in Jack Daw's case the intention of the rules makers is crystal clear but in Wastrel's case I suppose it could go either way. It's not an unreasonable restriction that they could only return them to McCabe and not throw them out to anyone they fancy. OTOH them being allowed to give them to anyone isn't brokenly powerful, so that works, too.

[Bengt]

I think that in Jack Daw's case the intention of the rules makers is crystal clear but in Wastrel's case I suppose it could go either way. It's not an unreasonable restriction that they could only return them to McCabe and not throw them out to anyone they fancy. OTOH them being allowed to give them to anyone isn't brokenly powerful, so that works, too.

Considering the wording of McCabe | Loan it seems pretty pointless to spend 2 AP to give them back.

[The Godlyness]

Did we just break Jack Daw?

Pretty sure he was broken. But now his innards are leaking out and he wordlessly screams out for an errata.

I think that in Jack Daw's case the intention of the rules makers is crystal clear...

Yes intention is very clear. But rules wise he does nothing lol.

[scarlett fever]

So no resolution to this? Can Wastrels pass upgrades to anyone?

 

I was also wondering about Bravado.

"When this model declares an Action that will cause a duel, it may discard a card to add any suit to the final duel total of the Action. If this model has an Upgrade attached, draw a card after resolving the action".

 

I assume both Simple Duels and Opposed Duels count as duels.

 

Say I have a Wastrel with the Glowing Sabre;

• Must I discard a a card to draw a card? I assume so although you could read the sentences as 2 seperate occurances
• If I charge does this mean I'm declaring an Attack Action (causing a duel) and then a second Attack Action (causing a duel) thereby allowing me to discard and draw 2 cards? I assume not (given the wording on pg 37 of big rulebook), that the Charge Action is the only declared Action and the Attack Actions are just results. However did the Charge Action itself cause a duel, or did it just cause 2 discrete Attack Actions?
• Given all this I assume if you Declare any Attack Action that results in a Duel (Sh or Ml) you are able to discard and draw a card each time.

Apologies if these questions are answered elsewhere, I couldn't find them.

[Myyrä]

Q: Some Actions/Abilities allow models to attach Upgrades during the game. Do these Actions/Abilities need to adhere to the restrictions listed on the Upgrade, or can they be attached to any model?

A: Upgrade restrictions only affect the hiring process, and have no in game effect, so these Upgrades may be attached to any model. If there are any restrictions they will be noted in the Action or Ability’s description. It is worth noting some such Actions and Abilities bother noting “ignoring restrictions” but this is simply reminder text which was put on when there was space available. (11/1/14)

[Ludvig]

I think discarding is a requirement for the action but I can't remember exactly where to find proof of that.

 

Passing upgrades: It's in the FAQ that restrictions are only when hiring models, never during the game. You can pass to anyone.

 

Multiple duels from a charge: You can discard for each attack. The box on p 38 "actions causing actions" says that abilities forcing you to do something counts each new action as a separate action, this leads me to assume that abilities you "may" take have the same rules.

 

Hope that helps and that others agree.

[scarlett fever]

 

 

Thanks, my bad, I was looking for a specific answer in the FAQ and totally missed this.