Samael Hopkins stupid strong!?!

[lame0]

So I’ve been mostly looking at my gremlins but I noticed Sam got the exact buff that I thought he needed to work. He is now potentially super great with Hoffman in my eyes. 

The list would be something like :

 Declared Faction: Guild 
Crew Name:  50ss 
Leader: C. Hoffman - Cache:(3)
   Pneumatic Upgrades 2ss 
   On Site Assimiliation 2ss 
   Improved Harness 1ss 
Mechanical Attendant 2ss 
Samael Hopkins 8ss 
   Lead Lined Coat 1ss 
   A Debt To The Guild 1ss 
Brutal Emissary 10ss 
   Conflux of Amalgamation 0ss 
Monster Hunter 6ss 
Monster Hunter 6ss 
Brutal Effigy 4ss 
Wastrel 4ss 

So basically Hoffman makes Sam a construct and potentially gives him extra upgrades so he gets to Armor +2 & nimble. This makes Sam stupid strong letting him set up and rapid fire with his 3/4/5 12 inch gun and 4/5/6 when he uses a debt to the guild. (the extra armor can go on anyone and I think it’s best on Hoffman but what’s great is you choose in game.)

I think most important is his 1 tactical action flaming bullets. That is easily one of the strongest abilities in the faction.... when Hoffman casts it. Due to Hoffman’s stupid speed he can position himself in such a way to get a huge portion of the enemy crew and make them  def flips if they fail a wp 15 duel!!! Throw in the fact that because of the ability power conductors he could very easily increase the range from 8 inch bubble to 12 inch bubble or 16 inch bubble for an extra ap which means he can set up Sam and other powerful models like monster hunters to nuke the board. An Aura of that magnitude that can effect 24- 32 inches of a table is crazy.

I think that Sam at least with Hoffman is probably the best buff to guild (besides guild guard) this errata since now for 10ss (instead of 12ss) you get a great shooting model with some resilience and one of the best tactical actions we have available to us. Armor 1-2 on a henchman that cant be ignored is super strong as a defensive deterrent and so I think Sam finally has a place. 

Just to talk about the rest of the list choices: 

Wastrel: is a super flexible piece that is usually rush of magic x 2. It can help place cyborg upgrades or heal or it can shoot pretty well or even scheme run in a pinch. Hoffman and friends are rather card dependent so getting to see two extra cards helps a ton.

Burtal Effigy: great model, great buff to Hoffman, good scheme runner and he is a great Hoffman caddy/ power loop target.

Brutal Emissary: Very important to get more scrap markers turn 1 since it’s basically the only way we can do it without Joss. He is a good power loop target. He is a construct from the start which helps a bunch. To me he is clearly the softest pick in the list but even so he has three attacks (two with his normal attack and his (0) that does two damage and makes a scrap marker). Due to his (0) it means he does basically the same damage as Francisco with a better spread on his normal attack of 2/4/6. Hoffman can give him an extra ap or 2 when needed to get more stuff done. Also since Hoffman almost always has powerloop the emissary gives him  to attack flips when he’s close enough. Lastly the cyborg upgrade for rams can be placed on this guy by the wastrel so it can do some extra damage. This guy could easily turn into Fransico, The jury, or the judge with lead lined coat + debt or some other upgrade but given all his positives I still think he’s a little ahead.

monster hunter: great power for the price and if you make one a construct it can take advantage of targeting system to get the free crit strike after your turn one stalks.

6x stones: this gives Hoffman and Sam much more resilience. You could take three of them and get a guild guard but I think I prefer the stones.

I think the lead lined coat upgrade / captain dashel / the judge point decrease helps Hoffman more than anyone because getting more access to armor henchmen is huge for him. Making phiona, the judge, the jury or Fransico armor 1-2 on top of their current defense is pretty sweet (the judge and jury being my favorites after Sam.)

[Ludvig]

If you gain armour from another source the Lead lined coat stops giving you armour because of how it is worded so never more than armour 1 I'm afraid.

[trikk]

56 minutes ago, lame0 said:

So basically Hoffman makes Sam a construct and potentially gives him extra upgrades so he gets to Armor +2 & nimble.

Ludvig Pointed, you can get max Armor +1. How do you give extra upgrades as you don`t have Field Mechanic?

 

56 minutes ago, lame0 said:

I think most important is his 1 tactical action flaming bullets. That is easily one of the strongest abilities in the faction.... when Hoffman casts it. Due to Hoffman’s stupid speed he can position himself in such a way to get a huge portion of the enemy crew and make them  def flips if they fail a wp 15 duel!!! Throw in the fact that because of the ability power conductors he could very easily increase the range from 8 inch bubble to 12 inch bubble or 16 inch bubble for an extra ap which means he can set up Sam and other powerful models like monster hunters to nuke the board. An Aura of that magnitude that can effect 24- 32 inches of a table is crazy.

O.S.A has an 8" range which means you have to jump in and be within 8" and LOS of Sam and then not die. You also have to drop all the loops to have the range boost.

 

Its not a bad tactic. I was thinking about it but I wanted Nino because with Extra Rams and Fast he seems like a pain to play against (with Debt you can have min 4 for a turn with 3 shots)

[Tris]

2 minutes ago, trikk said:

How do you give extra upgrades as you don`t have Field Mechanic?

Cyborg Upgrade let`s you attach mods to yourself I suppose.

[trikk]

1 minute ago, Tris said:

Cyborg Upgrade let`s you attach mods to yourself I suppose.

"So basically Hoffman makes Sam a construct and potentially gives him extra upgrades so he gets to Armor +2 & nimble."

[Myyrä]

1 minute ago, trikk said:

"So basically Hoffman makes Sam a construct and potentially gives him extra upgrades so he gets to Armor +2 & nimble."

Semantics 

[Tris]

2 minutes ago, trikk said:

"So basically Hoffman makes Sam a construct and potentially gives him extra upgrades so he gets to Armor +2 & nimble."

okok, point to you^^

I guess it`s probably bad phrasing, but I´ll let the OP answer that

[trikk]

6 minutes ago, Tris said:

okok, point to you^^

I guess it`s probably bad phrasing, but I´ll let the OP answer that

Well, giving Armor and Nimble are 2x 0s that require an 8. And it doesn`t even work

[Ludvig]

Doesn't the emissary gain construct in Hoffman? You could get it up far turn one and save Hoffman's fast for turn 2 by puppeting it to bury Sam after it went turn 1. Might set up a pretty decent turn 2 by walking up and draining their fresh t2 hand to the release Sam and some construct for pretty decent damage burst.

[lame0]

Actually  lead lined coat is pretty clear “this model gains the following ability if it does not already have the armor ability” so if you don’t have the armor ability when this is attached then armor is added to the card since you met it’s criteria and it didn’t have armor. There is nothing in its rule that says that if it gains more armor after the fact that it loses its armor ability. 

 Then you make a bunch of models cyborgs with Hoffman (needs a 5). Then you use  version update to get patchwork plating on sam or whoever. Additionally if you want to get use out of nimble on the first turn you can simply use version update on the wastrel and then pass nimble to the real target.

You can make up to 3 scrap markers turn 1 (You are Only ever going to make 2) but it allows for you to get both nimble and armor up and they could both potentially be on the same model on turn 1.

The combination of the wastrel and the emissary allow for the upgrades to go online turn one so that you can get the set up complete in the first turn and them you can focus on fighting and winning on turn 2.

in terms of cards it’s not bad at all (2-3) cyborg is 2-3 5+(you should get 1-2 normally) if you want someone besides Hoffman to have armor you need 2 8+ for the two good upgrades. The wastrel needs a 6+ to pass the upgrade but it can easily cycle 1-2 cards looking for the medium cards you need.

last thing is that you don’t need to drop all the power loops if your worried about Hoffman you can pick and choose so even dropping 1-2 gives it a 21-25 inch bubble which means for A (0) + a little you get that very strong tactical on most of the board. 

[trikk]

1 minute ago, lame0 said:

Actually  lead lined coat is pretty clear “this model gains the following ability if it does not already have the armor ability” so if you don’t have the armor ability when this is attached then armor is added to the card since you met it’s criteria and it didn’t have armor. There is nothing in its rule that says that if it gains more armor after the fact that it loses its armor ability. 

This isn`t a hiring criteria. Its an effect criteria. You have the Armor ability from Modification so you don`t get LLC bonus.

[lame0]

 

5 minutes ago, trikk said:

This isn`t a hiring criteria. Its an effect criteria. You have the Armor ability from Modification so you don`t get LLC bonus.

Where does it say it checks again after it is initially applied.  

Example if English:

If a person doesn’t have a lollipop give that person a lollipop.

Based on that sentence where does it inform us if you give them another lollipop the first is taken away. The ability says absolutely nowhere that it checks more than once.

[trikk]

7 minutes ago, lame0 said:

 

Where does it say it checks again after it is initially applied.  

Example if English:

If a person doesn’t have a lollipop give that person a lollipop.

Based on that sentence where does it inform us if you give them another lollipop the first is taken away. The ability says absolutely nowhere that it checks more than once.

Because the upgrade says it only gives the ability when you don`t have Armor. It doesn`t say "when hiring" so it only gives the ability under a certain condition. When the condition is not met it stops working.

 

If you remove the upgrade does it still give Armor +1? You already got the Armor +1.

 

Quote

"Headline: Guild Destined for Victory!": If the
opposing Crew has less VP than this Crew, friendly
models in this Crew heal 1 damage when they
Activate and gain to their Wp duels.

If after T1 I`m up and then you tie do I lose the bonuses?

 

If there was a restriction on the bottom "models without the Armor ability" I would agree with you. When hiring you don`t have it so its legal. Then you can bump it. But its an ongoing effect.

[Adran]

10 minutes ago, lame0 said:

 

Where does it say it checks again after it is initially applied.  

Example if English:

If a person doesn’t have a lollipop give that person a lollipop.

Based on that sentence where does it inform us if you give them another lollipop the first is taken away. The ability says absolutely nowhere that it checks more than once.

Because if Upgrades don't ever check again, Hans Ping ability is less useful, and upgrades that have discard effects are even better because you don't remove their other effects. 

Do over becomes a lot better if you keep the do over ability even after you trade in the upgrade for cards as an example...

[lame0]

41 minutes ago, Adran said:

Because if Upgrades don't ever check again, Hans Ping ability is less useful, and upgrades that have discard effects are even better because you don't remove their other effects. 

Do over becomes a lot better if you keep the do over ability even after you trade in the upgrade for cards as an example...

I’m not here arguing that you don’t lose the ability when the card is discarded (ability is tied to the card) what I’m saying is that I don’t constantly recheck the initial clause of the ability because that’s not how it’s stated. If the card said if you gain armor during the game this armor is not applied then fine that would be clear. That clause on lead lined coat is to prevent models that already have armor from being able to purchase the upgrade. This is flipping it on its head and giving it more armor after the fact. 

52 minutes ago, trikk said:

Because the upgrade says it only gives the ability when you don`t have Armor. It doesn`t say "when hiring" so it only gives the ability under a certain condition. When the condition is not met it stops working.

 

If you remove the upgrade does it still give Armor +1? You already got the Armor +1.

 

If after T1 I`m up and then you tie do I lose the bonuses?

 

If there was a restriction on the bottom "models without the Armor ability" I would agree with you. When hiring you don`t have it so its legal. Then you can bump it. But its an ongoing effect.

It doesn’t need to say when hiring. I gave a perfect example. 

If you have no cookies then gain one cookie.

does that statement anywhere say that you lose the initial cookie if you get more cookies. No it doesn’t. It would have to be much more specific if it wanted that to be the case and it is not stated at all in the language whatsoever. That is the same for armor in this case. Like wise the ability to get armor has a timing:

“this model gains the following ability” 

Nowhere in the card text does it say loses ability based off of this card it can only gain armor based off of its conditional requirement. Once it succeeds there is no condition to lose the armor other than the upgrade being removed.

abilities that can lose their utility are quite specific ex: three headed

[trikk]

7 minutes ago, lame0 said:

I’m not here arguing that you don’t lose the ability when the card is discarded (ability is tied to the card) what I’m saying is that I don’t constantly recheck the initial clause of the ability because that’s not how it’s stated. If the card said if you gain armor during the game this armor is not applied then fine that would be clear. That clause on lead lined coat is to prevent models that already have armor from being able to purchase the upgrade. This is flipping it on its head and giving it more armor after the fact. 

It doesn’t need to say when hiring. I gave a perfect example. 

If you have no cookies then gain one cookie.

does that statement anywhere say that you lose the initial cookie if you get more cookies. No it doesn’t. It would have to be much more specific if it wanted that to be the case and it is not stated at all in the language whatsoever. That is the same for armor in this case. Like wise the ability to get armor has a timing:

“this model gains the following ability” 

Nowhere in the card text does it say loses ability based off of this card it can only gain armor based off of its conditional requirement. Once it succeeds there is no condition to lose the armor other than the upgrade being removed.

But you already have the ability so why would it stay? If the upgrade gave you an ability you have that ability. It doesn`t say you have to recheck it after the upgrade is discarded.

Same with Nellie. If you don`t recheck stuff like that Nellies ability on Editor In Chief doesn`t work.

[lame0]

Even if I concede rechecking and it does constantly recheck then it’s better.... There is no way of losing the armor nowhere in its clause does it state you can lose the armor ability it just says you can gain it.

“this model gains the following ability if it does not already have the armor ability” 

Its conditional and nowhere does it have a clause to lose armor. So it’s almost better because it can potentially gain more armor if you could remove the armor ability till end of activation or turn or something (generating an extra armor). Nowhere in the clause does it say you can loose armor by having armor. Only that you can gain armor if you don’t have it.

[Ludvig]

@lame0

What are you talking about? Check to see if the model has armour. If it does not have armour from another source the upgrade grants in +1 armour. If you do have armour from another source you aren't allowed to add it from the upgrade. You don't loose your armour, the upgrade stops granting it. Abilities are only active if they say they are active, it doesn't need to make you loose it because it simply says it doesn't grant it if you already have it. It is basically wording making it completely impossible to stack the armour fromthis upgrade.

[trikk]

Ok, this is as pointless as the last "Wastrel does not discard upgrades" debate so Ill pass...

There are countless abilities that work "if a condition is met". If the condition is suddenly not met, you lose the ability. Like with Nellies Editor In Chief: if you have more VP you get abilities. Once you don't you dont get them.

[Ludvig]

Abilities are always active, they constantly recheck. This ability is conditional on other effects, the no armour thing isn't a giring redtriction.

[Gnomezilla]

Prior to wave 5, I was testing out Samael-in-the-box flaming bullets, for greater threat range and durability. There was still the problem of having my follow-up shooter survive until the next activation, and I don’t think I ever got the combination to fire more than once in a game. The potential was there to delete a single target...but only once in three times did I accomplish it. [Mind, one of the survivors was a Viktoria: if I had wiped her out before she activated, I’d be calling this experiment a success.]

With the board positioning as I usually leave it, and the desire to hire the child instead of the attendant, I estimate two spare power loops for an extra 4” range on the debuff bubble. Does make me giggle, so I’ll try it.

[4thstringer]

Except for the LLC debate (which I agree it won't work), I love this thread.  Great work @lame0!

[lame0]

Olay maybe I’m not articulating my thoughts. what I mean is the following: the ability does not state in any way that you can lose the armor ability once it’s gained.

It says 

“this model gains the following ability if it does not already have the armor ability” 

So what I mean is that according to the ability It gains The Armor +1 ability if it doesn’t have it. There is no clause to losing the armor if it gets the armor ability From somewhere else after the fact. So again if it was written like 3 headed and said something along the lines of: this model gains the armor +1 ability when no other source provides it the armor ability. then you would be correct but it instead say this model gains the following ability if it does not already have the armor ability.

So my other example was just to reflect if there was a means to remove the armor ability from a model with LLC short term then it would actually be granted armor again since it again fulfill the requirement in the top clause. A perfect example is do over where if a specific circumstance happens then you get to declare an extra action. 

Again the key is that the intro sentence on this card says that it GAINS an ability if it doesn’t have something not that it can lose the ability in anyway if it gets armor. So what it means to me is the only thing preventing this ability from granting the model 10000000 armor is that the first successful occurrence of the ability stops it from happening again.

So for example:

The ability goes on the model -> it asks does the model have the armor ability -> it doesn’t -> add armor +1 -> it asks again does the model have the armor ability -> yes because this upgrade applied the armor ability thus satisfying the loop until armor is removed in some way or the game ends.

With this infinitely recurring ability it would be granted only one time because it has armor after the first application. If all armor abilities were removed for some reason it would grant the model one armor again because it met the conditional statement. 

The whole ability is the conditional statement. Armor is just the outcome in some circumstances.

So basically

anytime you don’t have a cookie get a cookie. From this ability you can only gain a max of one cookie. But if you get an extra cookie you don’t lose the first. If you eat all the cookies or your dick bag friend eats them you get one cookie back because you you always get provided one.

That’s the only way the sentence can be read and be constantly rechecked because of how it is worded. Very logical but not intuitive.

[Ludvig]

But when you then add armour from the other source like a Hoffman upgrade you go and check this upgrade to see if it applies armour. Do I have armour? Yes I do do I do not add more armour from this ability?

[lame0]

18 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

But when you then add armour from the other source like a Hoffman upgrade you go and check this upgrade to see if it applies armour. Do I have armour? Yes I do do I do not add more armour from this ability?

Cyborg applies armor well after the initial check so....at that point it already has armor +1 so then the other ability adds a second armor. Like I said nowhere on the upgrade does it say you lose armor if x it just say you gain armor if x. So the recheck isn’t to see if you lose armor because of something but to check if you gain more armor. It’s just asking the same question forever but it doesn’t ask.....do you have armor if so lose armor.

Like other conditionals in the game it asks you did x happen if so y. Not if x happens then y never happened or disappears. It’s like if an attack trigger that grants an extra attack doesn’t happen do you lose the initial attack? The answer is an obvious no.

You check for things that have an effect. for LLC it has an effect anytime the model doesn’t have the armor ability. It’s just like how Nellie and lucious upgrades check if you are winning. Would I tell the nelie player they lose health because the condition to gain health wasn’t met this turn so they lose the benifit they got last turn? No that doesn’t make sense. I’m going off the same reasoning. You don’t retroactively change something because it isn’t happening now instead of when the effect took place unless it is explicitly in the rules of the upgrade or model (like three headed).