Teach me about Titania

[Maniacal_cackle]

1 hour ago, Chris Rivers said:

Just to be clear, Killjoy still counts as killed for schemes and strategies (ie Reckoning) right?

A buried model doesn't count as killed, except at the end of the game, I believe.

So no, you can't claim points for triggering demise. The model has to be actually dead. The exception being turn five, when buried models are killed from memory.

[Barmution]

On 8/25/2019 at 2:01 PM, santaclaws01 said:

No it doesn't. If it has any stipulation of naming a model it is listing a model by name. Doppleganger can't copy Dreamer's summon and do it better than he can.

Are you sure about this? I thought the restriction that keeps Mimic etc. from working on most summoning actions was the "doesn't attach upgrades" and "non-master" parts? I have been interpreting "listing a model by name" the same way as Ogid.

Edit: Searched and found the relevant FAQ in the rules forum and you're right.

Edited September 5, 2019 by Barmution
Searched the rules forum

[Ogid]

8 hours ago, Chris Rivers said:

Just to be clear, Killjoy still counts as killed for schemes and strategies (ie Reckoning) right?

As @Maniacal_cackle said, it is buried nor dead (and as the demise heal after killing, it's no longer count as killed). However the model sacrificed to being able to unbury Killjoy would count. The only way to kill Killjoy is ignoring his Demise ability.

4 hours ago, Barmution said:

re you sure about this? I thought the restriction that keeps Mimic etc. from working on most summoning actions was the "doesn't attach upgrades" and "non-master" parts? I have been interpreting "listing a model by name" the same way as Ogid.

Edit: Searched and found the relevant FAQ in the rules forum and you're right.

Yeah, the wording isn't clear but it makes sense as it could be quite powerful when considering summoners, there are a few summoners who doesn't add upgrades nor are leaders... However AFAIK there is no FAQ for the third edition yet, the one you found is probably from the M2e. If they used the exact same wording it'd probably work the same in M3e; but there isn't confirmation to M3e yet.

 

[Nikodemus]

2 minutes ago, Ogid said:

The only way to kill Killjoy is ignoring his Demise ability.

Anything that stops him from healing will also do the job.

[Barmution]

1 hour ago, Ogid said:

Yeah, the wording isn't clear but it makes sense as it could be quite powerful when considering summoners, there are a few summoners who doesn't add upgrades nor are leaders... However AFAIK there is no FAQ for the third edition yet, the one you found is probably from the M2e. If they used the exact same wording it'd probably work the same in M3e; but there isn't confirmation to M3e yet.

The wording on both parts, ie. summoner and mimic, are near identical as that in 2e. There's very little reason to believe that they will change anything about the interpretation in 3e.

[Ogid]

13 minutes ago, Barmution said:

The wording on both parts, ie. summoner and mimic, are near identical as that in 2e. There's very little reason to believe that they will change anything about the interpretation in 3e.

I agree, and it's probably as discused before. But making the M2e rulling relevant for M3e is a dangerous path; it's better if it's confirmed for M3e.

[Hawkoon]

23 hours ago, Ogid said:

I agree, and it's probably as discused before. But making the M2e rulling relevant for M3e is a dangerous path; it's better if it's confirmed for M3e.

In lack of an official 3E ruling, the rulings from 2E are still good guidelines for similar issues in how to interpret rules i situations like this. As long as the similarities are sufficient and not in obvious conflict with other 3E rules of course.

[Nagi21]

On 9/5/2019 at 1:12 AM, Maniacal_cackle said:

A buried model doesn't count as killed, except at the end of the game, I believe.

So no, you can't claim points for triggering demise. The model has to be actually dead. The exception being turn five, when buried models are killed from memory.

Killjoy would still not count for either Reckoning or Take prisoner (if killed by allies), since EOG happens after the turn.

[AngelRogue]

I've been playing Titania since closed beta and just recently really thought to question a couple of things.

 

First, are Underbrush markers able to be removed by Molly? My main opponent plays Molly but we have not treated Underbrush as removable. 

 

Second, do underbrush markers count as terrain for Search The Ruins? I have played it as not terrain, as I think it makes Fae super cheesy easy on this scheme. But I can see the argument that underbrush markers are set as terrain, too, and could count as long as the markets are on the opponent's side of the board. 

Thoughts?

[Adran]

Yes, Molly can remove any non strategy marker with her action.

Yes, the markers do count as terrain, so I would say they can count for Search the ruins. This does work both ways, if they are putting undergrowth markers on their own half, then you can also use them to score.

[Graf]

35 minutes ago, AngelRogue said:

First, are Underbrush markers able to be removed by Molly? My main opponent plays Molly but we have not treated Underbrush as removable. 

Why? Molly's ability reads: "Remove target Marker". Abundant Growth generates a "Concealing, Severe Underbrush Marker", no mention of it being unremoveable.

 

35 minutes ago, AngelRogue said:

Second, do underbrush markers count as terrain for Search The Ruins? I have played it as not terrain, as I think it makes Fae super cheesy easy on this scheme. But I can see the argument that underbrush markers are set as terrain, too, and could count as long as the markets are on the opponent's side of the board. 

p. 28:  "Unless otherwise noted, Markers do not count as terrain and have no vertical distance (i.e., Height or Size). Markers that count as terrain will have one or more Terrain Traits (such as a Concealing, Severe Dust Cloud Marker)."

[AngelRogue]

Why? Doesn't say destructible and we are both so casual that it didn't matter much to us. Also, thanks for looking it up. 

[Graf]

15 minutes ago, AngelRogue said:

Why? Doesn't say destructible and we are both so casual that it didn't matter much to us. Also, thanks for looking it up. 

Ah, I see. Not having the Destructible trait doesn't mean a piece is indestructible. Destructible just gives models the Action necessary to destroy and remove them (p.37).

[Nagi21]

I don't know why you guys are saying Mimic can copy Gorar's ability.  It has to copy an ability of a model with a higher cost.  Mimic is 4, Gorar is 2.

Also they fixed search the ruins so markers don't count anymore.

[Ogid]

Mimic can copy Gorar's abilities (except the one that lists models by name); it's "just like you" (Changeling) the one that needs a more expensive target.

What I have doubts is if the chain copy is legal (this is, Doppleganger copy an ability from a model and then a changeling use "just like you" in that copied ability)

[Maniacal_cackle]

20 minutes ago, Ogid said:

Mimic can copy Gorar's abilities (except the one that lists models by name); it's "just like you" (Changeling) the one that needs a more expensive target.

What I have doubts is if the chain copy is legal (this is, Doppleganger copy an ability from a model and then a changeling use "just like you" in that copied ability)

I don't believe you could.

Doppleganger says 'this model' may treat it like it is printed on the card (so as far as other models are concerned, it is not on the card). Just Like You doesn't even put it on the card, it just lets the changeling take the action.

[Nagi21]

27 minutes ago, Ogid said:

Mimic can copy Gorar's abilities (except the one that lists models by name); it's "just like you" (Changeling) the one that needs a more expensive target.

What I have doubts is if the chain copy is legal (this is, Doppleganger copy an ability from a model and then a changeling use "just like you" in that copied ability)

As much as I would love that, I already see the counterargument being the "this model may treat the selected action" on the doppelganger.  Although my counterpoint would be why else would you leave it "until end phase" rather than putting "until end of activation".  To which the answer would be, it can still be used for Obey and Issue Command, which I don't have an argument for.  Technically, other than that point it looks perfectly legal.  

It also wouldn't be any good because "Just like you" would be casting off of the doppelganger's 7, reduced to 5, and Mold requires 10m plus cost... so a rougarou would cost a 13 mask, a knight 12 mask, and beyond that it's not AP or cost efficient by any stretch.

[Ogid]

29 minutes ago, Nagi21 said:

As much as I would love that, I already see the counterargument being the "this model may treat the selected action" on the doppelganger.  Although my counterpoint would be why else would you leave it "until end phase" rather than putting "until end of activation".  To which the answer would be, it can still be used for Obey and Issue Command, which I don't have an argument for.  Technically, other than that point it looks perfectly legal.  

It also wouldn't be any good because "Just like you" would be casting off of the doppelganger's 7, reduced to 5, and Mold requires 10m plus cost... so a rougarou would cost a 13 mask, a knight 12 mask, and beyond that it's not AP or cost efficient by any stretch.

The wording isn't 100% clear for me, it seems legal; but there are a few nuances that make me doubt... the model has that extra ability until the end of the turn; so if he is obeyed or commanded, then he can use it because is the model performing the action. But is that ability targeteable by other models?

To make a comparison, the wording is similar to Gunfighter (This model may treat any of its  Actions as a having a range of1'') It's clear that if someone obey the model and force him to use the ability with a range, it would be legal. But, can a model mimic the ability with the range?

The whole ability case seem more likely to be legal than the above because it's not and ability modifying an action; but the model considering he has a new action for the turn. However it's not really clear how the modified abilities interact with abilities that copy or mimic these.

Maybe I should take this to the rules forum...

[Nagi21]

20 minutes ago, Ogid said:

To make a comparison, the wording is similar to Gunfighter (This model may treat any of its  Actions as a having a range of1'') It's clear that if someone obey the model and force him to use the ability with a range, it would be legal. But, can a model mimic the ability with the range?

The whole ability case seem more likely to be legal than the above because it's not and ability modifying an action; but the model considering he has a new action for the turn. However it's not really clear how the modified abilities interact with abilities that copy or mimic these.

Maybe I should take this to the rules forum...

The comparison would result in the obeyed model taking the action, which falls under the "This model" portion of the ability.  A model mimicking that would not have the corresponding ability, as abilities are not copied.  Mimic and Just Like Me only copy the action as written, not abilities on the model copied.  The doppelganger can take an action and put it on her card, resulting in the abilities on her card affecting that, but not from the original card.

[Ogid]

1 minute ago, Nagi21 said:

The comparison would result in the obeyed model taking the action, which falls under the "This model" portion of the ability.  A model mimicking that would not have the corresponding ability, as abilities are not copied.  Mimic and Just Like Me only copy the action as written, not abilities on the model copied.  The doppelganger can take an action and put it on her card, resulting in the abilities on her card affecting that, but not from the original card.

That isn't that clear. Mimic and Just like me target "one of the target's X" not "one of the printed target's X". Mimic say the model treat the action as being printed in his card. So a modified/copied action could be legal to be copied/targeted.

Then, there are thing that modify the actions with different wordings that may be treated differently by these mechanics: Mimic (new "ghost" ability), Gunsfighter (model may treat an ability as X) upgrade mutations (his actions gains a trigger)...

[Nagi21]

4 minutes ago, Ogid said:

That isn't that clear. Mimic and Just like me target "one of the target's X" not "one of the printed target's X". Mimic say the model treat the action as being printed in his card. So a modified/copied action could be legal to be copied/targeted.

Then, there are thing that modify the actions with different wordings that may be treated differently by these mechanics: Mimic (new "ghost" ability), Gunsfighter (model may treat an ability as X) upgrade mutations (his actions gains a trigger)...

Mimic specifically states that "This model" treats the action as being printed on its card.  That's just about as specific as it gets.  If you control the model you can take the action, but other models don't treat it as having that action.

The abilities not printed on the card that is Mimicking do not apply as the only thing it Mimics is the action.

[Ogid]

24 minutes ago, Nagi21 said:

Mimic specifically states that "This model" treats the action as being printed on its card.  That's just about as specific as it gets.  If you control the model you can take the action, but other models don't treat it as having that action.

It depends on the reference point. Mimic/just like me says: "Target one of the target's...". From the target's point of view, the copied ability is one of its own until the end of the turn.

30 minutes ago, Nagi21 said:

The abilities not printed on the card that is Mimicking do not apply as the only thing it Mimics is the action.

That's not what Mimic say, that ability is not restricted to the model printed actions. Another copied action or an action with an extra trigger thanks to a mutation upgrade are still "one of the Target's non- actions" (I have more doubts about the gunfighter case, but it could be also legal)

I can see your reading tho. I'll bring this to the rules forum to give it visibiliy.

[Nagi21]

My counterpoint to that would be that "Select one of the target's" not "the target" is how Just Like Me reads. 

 

Also there is now way the gunfighter case is legal as those are completely different things.  That would be like saying you get black blood off copying black blood pustule.

[Ogid]

On 10/31/2019 at 12:47 PM, Nagi21 said:

Also there is now way the gunfighter case is legal as those are completely different things.  That would be like saying you get black blood off copying black blood pustule.

It's not the same case... BB is a requisite for targeting of BBP; it doesn't interact with that ability in any way. Gunfighter is modifying an ability that it could be copied after. However the gunfighter is the one that I doubt the most.

The mutation trigger case and the Mimicked ability are probably legal (these are adding things to the "non-printed"/"modified card" of that model); actions that can be picked off that "modified card" later.

However in the gunsfighter case it's probably not legal because the wording implies the model can treat his  abilities differently. So the way it's probably intended to work is that model using the ability in a different way when he is going to use it (that can't be copied), instead of the model gaining a copy of that ability with a 1'' range (that could be copied).

However this seves to ilustrate my point. How abilities that copy other are intended to work isn't very clear.

EDIT: The question in the rules forum: 

[ShinChan]

I've been struggling a bit with the Fae crew, specially with the lack of healing, so I'm thinking about adding Serena Bowman to my lists. She will suffer a bit from not having unimpeded, but I can switch the Emissary for the Rider and it should be fine. What do you guys think?

Also, how do you handle the lack of card draw in the crew? I usually go with 1-2 Ancient Pack, which are going to provide me with 4-10 extra cards during a game, but I'm not 100% sold on that.