Jump to content
  • 0

A Por El chaining multiple times


Mycellanious

Question

Can the ability the Family has to chain activate be taken multiple times in a row? The rule books says chain activations can only occur once in a row, unless it is from the dame effect. Does this count as the same effect since the action has the same name, or because it occurs at different times from different models do they count as separate effects?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 1
45 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

Can the ability the Family has to chain activate be taken multiple times in a row?

What ability to chain activate?

The last few words of "!A Por El!" says "may discard a card to take an Action."

That's not Activating those models.  If you've got the situation:

  • Francisco Ortega activates
  • Franscisco Ortega goes to "End Activation"
  • Abuela Ortega uses "!A Por El!" to take an Action (It's Francisco's copy of the ability that lets Abuela discard the card to take an action.  In case there's a situation where the distinction matters.)

Abuela Ortega didn't Activate.  You go through "Resolving Actions" for that action, you don't go through the Activation sequence.

Stuff like Accomplice (which does cause another model to Activate) got really cut back in the new edition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
6 hours ago, solkan said:

What ability to chain activate?

The last few words of "!A Por El!" says "may discard a card to take an Action."

That's not Activating those models.  If you've got the situation:

  • Francisco Ortega activates
  • Franscisco Ortega goes to "End Activation"
  • Abuela Ortega uses "!A Por El!" to take an Action (It's Francisco's copy of the ability that lets Abuela discard the card to take an action.  In case there's a situation where the distinction matters.)

Abuela Ortega didn't Activate.  You go through "Resolving Actions" for that action, you don't go through the Activation sequence.

Stuff like Accomplice (which does cause another model to Activate) got really cut back in the new edition.

Oh sorry, my opponent said it was a chain activation. My b.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
17 hours ago, solkan said:

No worries.  I'm sure there's a certain amount of "I don't remember that changing!" going around.  :)

In a similar vein, would that rule apply to Companion or Accomplice? My opponent claims that if the ability has the same name then it is the same effect, even if it is on different cards. So for example, a model could Companion, then another model could Companion, then another model could companion, etc, or a model could Accomplice a model, who then Accomplices a  model, who then Accomplices a model, etc, so long as you had the cards to discard, but you could not Companion a model then Accomplice with that model.

I thought the rule was designed to stop that from happening and instead referred to pulse effects, like the old Mech Rider's utlimate, or Kirai's M2E ability where every Spirit in 6" could take an action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 minute ago, Mycellanious said:

In a similar vein, would that rule apply to Companion or Accomplice? My opponent claims that if the ability has the same name then it is the same effect, even if it is on different cards. So for example, a model could Companion, then another model could Companion, then another model could companion, etc, or a model could Accomplice a model, who then Accomplices a  model, who then Accomplices a model, etc, so long as you had the cards to discard, but you could not Companion a model then Accomplice with that model.

I thought the rule was designed to stop that from happening and instead referred to pulse effects, like the old Mech Rider's utlimate, or Kirai's M2E ability where every Spirit in 6" could take an action.

I'm not even sure what rules your opponent thinks they're quoting here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 minute ago, santaclaws01 said:

I'm not even sure what rules your opponent thinks they're quoting here.

My digital copy of the Rulebook has a description of Chain Activation on page 21 (the page with Activation Phase at the top and a picture of a terror tot I think). 

The page states, "Some effects can cause models to Activate after another model. If a model would Activate this way, immediately go back to the start of Step C. Players may not Activate more than two models in a row this way, unless they are Activated by the same effect."

So he claims because the name of the Ability is the same (both models have Companion or both models have Accomplice) it is the same effect, so the maximum chain activation of two in a row does not apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
20 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

My digital copy of the Rulebook has a description of Chain Activation on page 21 (the page with Activation Phase at the top and a picture of a terror tot I think). 

The page states, "Some effects can cause models to Activate after another model. If a model would Activate this way, immediately go back to the start of Step C. Players may not Activate more than two models in a row this way, unless they are Activated by the same effect."

So he claims because the name of the Ability is the same (both models have Companion or both models have Accomplice) it is the same effect, so the maximum chain activation of two in a row does not apply.

Ah. No. Having the same effect and being the same effect aren't the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 minute ago, Mycellanious said:

My digital copy of the Rulebook has a description of Chain Activation on page 21 (the page with Activation Phase at the top and a picture of a terror tot I think). 

The page states, "Some effects can cause models to Activate after another model. If a model would Activate this way, immediately go back to the start of Step C. Players may not Activate more than two models in a row this way, unless they are Activated by the same effect."

So he claims because the name of the Ability is the same (both models have Companion or both models have Accomplice) it is the same effect, so the maximum chain activation of two in a row does not apply.

The counter example to that claim is how the Abilities rules are written, where it talks about determining whether two instances of an Ability combine or the second gets ignored.

The Aura rules and the Hazardous Markers rules use names to limit effects.  But how does someone claiming that all effects of the same name are the same effect even make sense of the statement “If a model would be affected by multiple Auras of the same name”?  If they’re all the same Ability it would only ever be possible for it to be one aura.  Yet the rules say to pick “one such Aura” to affect each model.  It says that because they’re still separate effects.

Same thing goes for Companion and Accomplice.

Once upon a time, there were effects that said some variation of “Pick some group of models.  All of those models Activate.”  That’s what the language in Chain Activation is providing for.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
40 minutes ago, solkan said:

The counter example to that claim is how the Abilities rules are written, where it talks about determining whether two instances of an Ability combine or the second gets ignored.

The Aura rules and the Hazardous Markers rules use names to limit effects.  But how does someone claiming that all effects of the same name are the same effect even make sense of the statement “If a model would be affected by multiple Auras of the same name”?  If they’re all the same Ability it would only ever be possible for it to be one aura.  Yet the rules say to pick “one such Aura” to affect each model.  It says that because they’re still separate effects.

Same thing goes for Companion and Accomplice.

Once upon a time, there were effects that said some variation of “Pick some group of models.  All of those models Activate.”  That’s what the language in Chain Activation is providing for.

 

I think his counter argument would be that the reason they dont stack is because they are the same effect. If they were different effects than each instance would affect the model

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information