Consolidated Multi-Model Replace Complaint thread

[solkan]

Some minor defects in the Replace rules handling of multiple models made it into publication.

Models that replace multiple models with one:

• Affected by Step 3 defect for Tokens and/or Summoning Upgrades.  
  • Abominations (three replaced by one)
  • Dust Storm (two replaced by one)
  • Malifaux Rat (Potentially many replaced by one)
  • Steam Arachnids (three replaced by one)
  • Coryphee (two replaced by one)
  • Sandeep's summoned gamin (two or more replaced by one)
• Affected by Step 7 defect not what happens if already activated, and making a mess of if already activating.
  • Coryphee Duet demise (one replaced by two, either during activation or outside of it)

-----

Step 3 Oversight

The rules for replacing multiple models with one model specifies this:

Quote

For step 3, the new model gains the highest value of every Condition on the original models (as well as every Condition without a value).

That covers approximately a third of the material specified in Step 3:

Quote

If the original model had any Conditions or Tokens, the new model gains those Conditions at the same value (if any) and all Tokens. These Conditions, if gained during the End Phase, do not resolve their effects. Any Summon Upgrades Attached to the original model are Attached to the new model; all other Upgrades are discarded.

The end result is that no action is specified for Summoning Upgrades or Tokens.  Because Step 3 specifies "Original Model" singular.

Do the Summoning Upgrades get left on the original models, along with the tokens, or do they transfer over?

Significantly, for the replacing multiple models wording:

Quote

For step 3, the new model gains the highest value of every Condition on the original models (as well as every Condition without a value).

the previous mechanic was to choose one of the models (so that all of the tokens, summoning upgrades and conditions are transferred over from only one of the original models).

But note that even in the published version of the rules, not all of the Burning (for instance) Condition on the replaced models gets transferred over to the final model.  Presumably that's to limit how easy it is to build up a huge amount of Focused on the final model, but it makes it completely unclear whether the rules omit Token and Summoning Upgrade transfer by accident or by design.

---

The rules for replacing one model with multiple models says, concerning Step 7:

Quote

If this happened during the original model’s Activation, choose one new model to continue the Activation as in step 7 (the other models are not considered to have Activated).

Step 7 says:

Quote

If the original model was Replaced during its Activation, the new model continues the Activation using any remaining Actions. If the original model has already finished its Activation for the Turn, the new model is also considered to have Activated this Turn.

So, a Coryphee Duet gets killed and as a result of its Demise effect, and two new models get put on the table.  Their controlling player has not yet the words "I'm going to activate this model" concerning either of those two models yet.  And there is no statement in the rules that says that they are considered to have Activated already.

 

--

I'm pretty sure there's no way to make a Steam Arcachnid take the Swarm Together action outside of its own activation because the action names models by name and every Obey-like effect is careful to exclude such actions.  But the combining actions demonstrate that it's possible to the seven steps and say "Apply all of these rules as if they were plural."

For instance:

1.  Coryphee A activates and walks into position.
2. Coryphee B gets pushed into position.
3. One of the two Coryphee takes Dance Together, replacing a model that has activated, and another that has not, with one model.  

If that were ever possible (because the guard words get left off), anyone reading Step 7 would be left asking "Which original model?"  

Instead, there's only the current case where it goes

1. Coryphee A activates and walks into position
2. Coryphee B activates and takes Dance Together.  The multiple-replace statement specifies the interaction, the single model version of Step 7 doesn't apply.

====

Disclaimer:  Anyone have the form so I can submit this three months ago?  

Edit:  New, additional complaint concerning Step 4:

Quote

If the new and original models belong to the same Crew, the new model becomes the target of any effects that targeted or chose the original model, such as Schemes, Leader designation, or lasting game effects. The new model is always considered a legal target for those effects.

The problem with the language in Step 4 is that while the first part says "new and original models", so by a coincidence in English it could be taken to cover all three scenarios (one to one, many to one, one to many), it refers to 'the original model' as singular.  And the multiple model replace paragraph doesn't say what to do, whether it's

* Every effect on all of the original models applies to the new model, with no limitations

or something else.  For Schemes and Leader designation, it's almost certain that all of those types of effects should transfer from any original model to the new model.

On the other hand, there's Hamlin, the Unclean Influence action, and the Turbo Rat Kings.

• Hamlin uses Unclean Influence in range of (for the sake of exaggeration), 8 rats.
  • All 8 rats move, and gain Focused +1 if the trigger was declared
  • Rats 1 takes the Tangle Together action, producing a Rat King with seven more unresolved 'may move up to 3" and take a non- Action" effects to resolve.
  • Remember, if Hamlin used the trigger, that Rat King has Focused +8.

P.S.  And, for heaven's sake, that first sentence is obnoxious because it's one of the few times in rules that word 'target' doesn't mean 'target' in the same sense used by almost every other rule in the game.  What it's trying to say is something like "If the new and original models belong to the same crew, the new model is substituted for it for any effects that noted, nominated, targeted, or otherwise involved the original model, such as Schemes, Leader designation, or lasting game effects."

and then the multiple model paragraph should note that Step 4 is applied to all of the original models in turn.

Edit:  Corrected Turbo Rat King scenario.

[Adran]

I think just about every issue is solved by default pluralising the singular when required, and doing the alterations required by the rules. 

[TheJoyInGaming]

Hope this thread-o-mancy is ok considering the initial post directly pertains to my question.

I am eventually going to play Hamelin into Sandeep, and I am concerned about the matter of multi-model replacing and Tokens. This section makes it clear that if one model should replace one model, the replacing model would gain an equivalent number of tokens had by the model being replaced ie if the original model had 3 Blight Tokens the replacing model would gain 3 Blight Tokens.

On 7/20/2019 at 2:24 AM, solkan said:

If the original model had any Conditions or Tokens, the new model gains those Conditions at the same value (if any) and all Tokens. These Conditions, if gained during the End Phase, do not resolve their effects. Any Summon Upgrades Attached to the original model are Attached to the new model; all other Upgrades are discarded.

The Step 3 alteration section lists the rules change concerning the case of multiple original models being replaced by one single model ie 3 Fire Gamin being replaced by a single Fire Golem.

On 7/20/2019 at 2:24 AM, solkan said:

For step 3, the new model gains the highest value of every Condition on the original models (as well as every Condition without a value).

As written, the fact that a new rule for Token Transferral isn’t introduced here seems to imply that the old rule for Token Transferral still stands ie if each Gamin had 1 Blight and were replaced by a Golem, he would gain 3. 

Besides possible unintended cheesiness, is this reading correct or am I missing something?

[solkan]

On 10/5/2019 at 6:12 PM, TheJoyInGaming said:

As written, the fact that a new rule for Token Transferral isn’t introduced here seems to imply that the old rule for Token Transferral still stands ie if each Gamin had 1 Blight and were replaced by a Golem, he would gain 3. 

The old rule that says that you transfer the tokens from the original model, singular?  

The issue is "How many tokens does the new model gain?"

1. It gains no tokens, because the rules do not specify that tokens are transferred.
2. It gains the tokens from one of the original models. (Interpolate from Conditions.)
3. It gains tokens from all of the original models. (Interpolate from Health.)
4. It gains the tokens from any one of the models.  (Go directly from the single model case.)

Does that make the case clearly enough?

You're looking at playing Hamlin.  Your choice now is "Guess whether multi-model replace is a way to escape Blight tokens."  

---

Likewise, the for out-of-activation multiple model replacement and the question of "Can the new model activate?"

Extraploate from the single model case:

Quote

If the original model has already finished its Activation for the Turn, the new model is also considered to have Activated this Turn.

1. It's a new model so it can activate. (Alternately, the sentence in the quote doesn't say anything relevant, so punt.)
2. If any of the existing models have activated, the new model is considered to have activated.
3. If any of the existing models have not activated, the new model is not considered to have activated.
4. Variant of 2 or 3 where you just care about the status of one model that you picked.

When I posted these complaints, I didn't give a damn about whether any of these results would be cheesy or not.  My complaint was entirely that there's no way to determine which is the correct answer.  

If you're playing Hamlin, that's probably the more important rules issue that you'll want an answer to.  Because

1. Activate Hamelin
2. Hamelin uses Unclean Influence on nearby Malifaux Rats
   1. All of the rats move (and gain Focused +1 if applicable)
   2. Malifaux Rat takes the Tangle Together Action, replacing X Malifaux Rats with one Rat King, outside of any of their activations.
   3. The Rat King then proceeds to take each of the queued actions that belonged to the other original models.
3. Hamelin's activation continues

is something you're reasonably going to try to do.

Then look at the logic that you'll want to try using for "Can the Rat King activate?" and explain any differences with the logic for "How many tokens does the new model get?"

 

[TheJoyInGaming]

I don’t think you can extrapolate any options for the Token Transferral by looking at health. I think the best way to look at the available options is to look at how Condition Transferral is handled given that Condition and Token Transferral are listed together in the replacement rules within Step 3. 

If we rewrote Step 3 with the amendments for this situation that Wyrd outlines, I think it would read as follows:

“If the original models had any Conditions or Tokens, the new model gains the highest value of every Condition on the original models (as well as every Condition without a value) and all Tokens. These Conditions, if gained during the End Phase, do not resolve their effects. Any Summon Upgrades Attached to the original models are Attached to the new model; all other Upgrades are discarded.”

So my trouble comes from interpreting the underlined portion. As written, all Tokens means all tokens, hence my reading of adding up all the Blight from the original models into one large stack of Blight on the new model. The only other option I can see would be to treat Token Transferral the same as Condition Transferral ie the replacing model gains an amount of Tokens equal to the original model that had the most, but it is hard to argue that when the rules specifically state the differences for Step 3, and the only difference outlined therein is with the transferral of Conditions. Given all of the above, I think the “most accurate” reading as written is a consolidation of all Tokens from all of the original models to the new model.

 

Edited October 6, 2019 by TheJoyInGaming

[solkan]

12 hours ago, TheJoyInGaming said:

So my trouble comes from interpreting the underlined portion. As written, all Tokens means all tokens, hence my reading of adding up all the Blight from the original models into one large stack of Blight on the new model. The only other option I can see would be to treat Token Transferral the same as Condition Transferral ie the replacing model gains an amount of Tokens equal to the original model that had the most, but it is hard to argue that when the rules specifically state the differences for Step 3, and the only difference outlined therein is with the transferral of Conditions. Given all of the above, I think the “most accurate” reading as written is a consolidation of all Tokens from all of the original models to the new model.

Right.  Ignore all of that and stop to consider one thing:  Why do you only take the highest value of each Condition for multiple-model replacement?  It's because if you don't, all of those negative conditions like Burning and Poison combine together and the combined model is doomed.

Now, look at the effects of tokens.  Are there any tokens that are actually beneficial to the player that has them on their model?  So you've got the same "negative thing concentration" effect.  

Example scenario:

• Put Nix over by a bunch of Gamin
• As each of the Gamin activate, they pick up Blight tokens.
• Those gamin combine, and now there's an Ice Golem with 3 Blight tokens on it.  That's now a very sad Ice Golem.

So you're arguing for a position that's going to directly benefit your crew and directly harm the other crew, and claiming that the "most accurate" interpretation just happens to be the one that benefits your crew the most.

If you want to talk a Sandeep player into that, the only way I could see that happening is if you looked at the Summoning Upgrade/Multiple Replace rules that they're going to have to deal with, and you were willing to make various concessions there.  See "What happens to the summoning upgrades on Replace?" and "Why on Malifaux does the Summon upgrade 'on attach' go off after Replace?"

 

[Mycellanious]

56 minutes ago, solkan said:

Right.  Ignore all of that and stop to consider one thing:  Why do you only take the highest value of each Condition for multiple-model replacement?  It's because if you don't, all of those negative conditions like Burning and Poison combine together and the combined model is doomed.

Now, look at the effects of tokens.  Are there any tokens that are actually beneficial to the player that has them on their model?  So you've got the same "negative thing concentration" effect.  

Example scenario:

• Put Nix over by a bunch of Gamin
• As each of the Gamin activate, they pick up Blight tokens.
• Those gamin combine, and now there's an Ice Golem with 3 Blight tokens on it.  That's now a very sad Ice Golem.

So you're arguing for a position that's going to directly benefit your crew and directly harm the other crew, and claiming that the "most accurate" interpretation just happens to be the one that benefits your crew the most.

If you want to talk a Sandeep player into that, the only way I could see that happening is if you looked at the Summoning Upgrade/Multiple Replace rules that they're going to have to deal with, and you were willing to make various concessions there.  See "What happens to the summoning upgrades on Replace?" and "Why on Malifaux does the Summon upgrade 'on attach' go off after Replace?"

 

I believe it is worded this way because there are positive tokens. For example, the Explosive Token. If you put 2 Explosives Tokens on a Duet, and have it Dance Apart, then Dance Together, if you only take "the highest value" of the tokens, you end up losing one Explosive Token, which is a huge deal because its the only way to score for that strategy and you cannot create new Explosive Tokens. Once its removed from the game, its gone forever. 

Edit: this scenario cannot occur because the rules state that when one model is Replaced by multiple, you only choose one model to gain all conditions and tokens. 

Edited October 6, 2019 by Mycellanious

[TheJoyInGaming]

20 minutes ago, solkan said:

Right.  Ignore all of that and stop to consider one thing:  Why do you only take the highest value of each Condition for multiple-model replacement?  It's because if you don't, all of those negative conditions like Burning and Poison combine together and the combined model is doomed.

Now, look at the effects of tokens.  Are there any tokens that are actually beneficial to the player that has them on their model?  So you've got the same "negative thing concentration" effect.  

Example scenario:

• Put Nix over by a bunch of Gamin
• As each of the Gamin activate, they pick up Blight tokens.
• Those gamin combine, and now there's an Ice Golem with 3 Blight tokens on it.

So you're arguing for a position that's going to directly benefit your crew and directly harm the other crew, and claiming that the "most accurate" interpretation just happens to be the one that benefits your crew the most.

If you want to talk a Sandeep player into that, the only way I could see that happening is if you looked at the Summoning Upgrade/Multiple Replace rules that they're going to have to deal with, and you were willing to make various concessions there.  See "What happens to the summoning upgrades on Replace?" and "Why on Malifaux does the Summon upgrade 'on attach' go off after Replace?"

 

I am not arguing to obtain a position that benefits me in my forthcoming match. I am trying to find out what the rules state as written, and as written there is no addendum in the rules for Token Transferral when multiple models are replaced by one. That means we look towards the original replacement rules for Token Transferral and see that it says all Tokens. Again, all means all.

The reason that we take the highest value of each Condition isn’t necessarily because of the impact on enemy models, but because the ease of which you can stack favorable Conditions on your own. In your previous example of the Rat King replacement, if the Condition Transferral addendum was not there I could easily form a Rat King with 4+ Focus. I do not know of any Token Transferral abuse that would be arise from my reading. In fact, the only thing that would happen in the coming match would be that the Sandeep player would have to actually consider whether or not they want to form a Golem. This is not a bad thing.

If the only way you can try and provide a counter argument is by ignoring the substance of my own, then you don’t have a position worth considering. Please provide some actual evidence from the rules for your argument. Your idea of bartering gray area rules is also highly flawed.

Edit: Also Diseased and With Our Powers Combined are both Start of Activation meaning that the Sandeep Player still has counter play because he can just form a Golem and then gain a single Blight from Nix in your scenario as opposed to each one activating, gaining a Blight, and then forming a Golem to have 3 Blight. 

Edited October 6, 2019 by TheJoyInGaming

[TheJoyInGaming]

5 hours ago, Mycellanious said:

I believe it is worded this way because there are positive tokens. For example, the Explosive Token. If you put 2 Explosives Tokens on a Duet, and have it Dance Apart, then Dance Together, if you only take "the highest value" of the tokens, you end up losing one Explosive Token, which is a huge deal because its the only way to score for that strategy and you cannot create new Explosive Tokens. Once its removed from the game, its gone forever. 

Edit: this scenario cannot occur because the rules state that when one model is Replaced by multiple, you only choose one model to gain all conditions and tokens. 

It cannot occur exactly like that, but your original point stands. It is possible to hire 2 Coryphee, give them each an Explosive Token, and have them Dance together.

Edit: I talked with the Sandeep player and she arrived at the same conclusion as I did, that the Tokens are consolidated from all the original models. 

Edited October 6, 2019 by TheJoyInGaming

[Ogid]

I think both have a point here. It would have more sense that the tokens worked as conditions for @solkan point about why condition doens't stack. But being tokens they follow the tokens rules (however the replace rules aren't 100% covered, so there is still room for errata here). 

With the rules we have now, it seems to work like @TheJoyInGaming described. It seems to be very good versus models that are replaced by one big model. But that can also be exploited in some cases, a duet for example can be replaced by a very sad coryphee and a very happy coryphee. Sandeep is a bit screwed versus him but he can always just summon 1 or 2 golems in turns 1 and 2 away from the blight handlers and then focus in summoning other gamins and not more golems.

[solkan]

Updated the first post with the Turbo Rat King problem.

 

[Ogid]

35 minutes ago, solkan said:

Updated the first post with the Turbo Rat King problem.

😂 Turbo Rat King lol. You got me with that one.

I guess with this one the rule of thumb of "if something may be resolved in 2 ways and one breaks the game, it's always the other" (the gaming equivalent to "Honey, if something that I said can be interpreted in 2 ways and 1 of them make you mad, I always meant the other").

However a FAQ pointing in the right direction would be appreciated.

Original question here:

[TheJoyInGaming]

56 minutes ago, solkan said:

Updated the first post with the Turbo Rat King problem.

 

Thanks for adding that! Also, I think the Rat King would still have Focused +1 because the Focused condition is given to all the Rats before the tangling happens.

Wouldn’t each Rat resolve the 3” move before any 1 Rat can take its queued action, or am I misunderstanding?

Edit: To clarify, I have always understood Unclean Influence with the Direct Control trigger resolving such that each Vermin in range first moves 3”, then each Rat gains Focused +1, and then each Vermin takes its queued Action. This is based off of my understanding of Actions Generated by Effects (pg.34 PDF).

Edited December 1, 2019 by TheJoyInGaming

[solkan]

16 minutes ago, TheJoyInGaming said:

Thanks for adding that! Also, I think the Rat King would still have Focused +1 because the Focused condition is given to all the Rats before the tangling happens.

Wouldn’t each Rat resolve the 3” move before any 1 Rat can take its queued action, or am I misunderstanding?

Yeah, you're right.  Each rat would be moved 3", gain Focused +1 (if the trigger was present); and then you'd resolve the queued actions.

Still, the sort of thing that I think a Hamlin player would really like to be able to demonstrate as the intended result before doing it the first time.  

[Domin]

Don't forget about Collodi, who can use Puppetmaster (or call a Changeling to do so) on Coryphee to make him do a Dance Together out of his activation. So if the " If any of the existing models have not activated, the new model is not considered to have activated" comes into play, the proper-built Collodi list can have a Duet to activate 7 times in a turn.

[solkan]

16 minutes ago, Domin said:

Don't forget about Collodi, who can use Puppetmaster (or call a Changeling to do so) on Coryphee to make him do a Dance Together out of his activation. So if the " If any of the existing models have not activated, the new model is not considered to have activated" comes into play, the proper-built Collodi list can have a Duet to activate 7 times in a turn.

👻  I wasn't paying attention to what Collodi (or models copying it) could do with Puppetmaster.

I'm going to have to see about reorganizing the main post, and make sure that both the puppets and rats get equal coverage.

[SoulGambit]

All of these are definately valid additions to an FAQ and I hope one is put out.

I definately want to know, for Replacement outside of an activation, does the new model get to activate if some of its composit models have activated but not all of them.

I also want to know, specifically for Malifaux Rats into Rat Kings, if the Mindless ability being removed allows the Rat King to act. [Edit: Found it in the rules, this doesnt work. It is an activated ability,  not a passive one, so Mindless being removed does nothing.]

My take on RAW with the other things, although it doesn't diminish the need for an FAQ and none of this is clear cut:

Unclean Influence doesn't target rats, so  it is not a game effect that targets or chooses a model, Turbo Rat King definately does not work.

Right now RAW supports a model replacing multiple models getting all tokens on all of the original models. Since the rules for replacing multiple models modify the normal replace rules, and the way the core replacement rules are written say that the new model gains all of the tokens, and the replacing multiple model rules specifically call out Conditions but not tokens, RAW is all of the tokens are added together. I would argue this is intent because otherwise you could wind up losing Explosives Markers in Plant Explosives.

The most RAW reading is that if any of the composit models have acticated a new model replacing multiple models can not activate. However, that requires an almost programming language reading of the rules and it becomes a bit counterintuitive in light that models replaced during their activation continue. I'd go with can't activate until an FAQ says otherwise.

 

 

[Ogid]

1 hour ago, Domin said:

Don't forget about Collodi, who can use Puppetmaster (or call a Changeling to do so) on Coryphee to make him do a Dance Together out of his activation. So if the " If any of the existing models have not activated, the new model is not considered to have activated" comes into play, the proper-built Collodi list can have a Duet to activate 7 times in a turn.

Lol. That's actually true! I'm not playing DMH so this one totally went under my radar. It's risky because splitting the duet early in the turn could lead to the other player killing one of the coryphees and stopping that combo in its tracks and it require a bubble to keep the coryphees near of Collodi, but it's still a very good catch...

A crew with Collodi around this idea that would be this one. "Tango de la muerte" :

• Collodi, Marionette (x4), Candy (EM), Vasilisa, Duet, Changeling (x3). 4SS

Collodi, Vasi and 3 Changelings could make the duet dance together 5 times, plus the one the unactivated coryphee in its own activation, and we have to add the first duet activation before splitting... So yep, 7 activations (14 actions). It'd be wise skiping 1 Changeling to include 1 Manequin to protect the splitted duet from dangerous attacks tho.

Funny thing: Fast may be passed to the unactivated coryphee when it splits, so Candy may be used to give fast to the coryphee (using Glimpse of Insanity to get extra range, then remove stunned with Dispel Magic). The best moment would be after giving it Shielded with Collodi to avoid the damage, in that case Collodi would have to activate early in the turn. Anyway, in that case, we'd be talking about 21 actions per turn in the best scenario...

Wow! So there is a crew that gives it more actions than the Hoffman's 12 actions duet...