Uncovered case: replace outside activation by activated and unactivated model.

[Ogid]

To give a bit more visibility to this question (so it has more chances to be covered in the next FAQ because right now it is buried under a Henchman leader discussion), I'm going to post this here: There is an uncovered niche case in the rules about replacements:

2 models, one activated and the the oter not-activated, which outside of their activations, take an action to be replaced by 1 new model. The original idea was using Vasilisa's Pulling the String to make a coryphee duet dance together after activating the duet and spliting it (hence having 1 activated and 1 inactivated); if this gave an unactivated coryphee, said coryphee would gain the ability to dance apart and together again.

The original discussion is here: https://themostexcellentandawesomeforumever-wyrd.com/topic/146876-hinamatsu-is-she-a-worthy-leader/#comments

The rules discussion starts at this post (click on the arrow in the upper right corner to go directly to that part):

On 9/13/2019 at 3:36 PM, Adran said:

The multiple replace rules are a little vague on this.

I think that because one of the models you replace has finished its activation, the duet will count as having finished its activation. The amendment for multiple models is that if the model replaces during its activation then the new model continues the activation.

The rules don't say that if you replace a model that hasn't activated the new model counts as not having activated, but rather if you replace a model that has activated, the new model counts as having activated. So here you are replacing a model that hasn't activated and a model that has, so according to step 7 the duet counts as having activated.

 

[solkan]

Just sayin.   

[Ogid]

Hehe, the prophecy become true!

In this case, as suggested in the thread, making plural the statement applied to single models (step 7) the duet would be inactivated: It doens't happens during their activation, so it's not that case; the original models (both) haven't finished their activations, so the new model isn't activated... hence it's unactivated.

As described in the link it's quite hard to perform and there are ways to do it even better with the mechanical rider, so it doesn't seem to be broken... but it's still a generalization of a rule, which may lead to an unintended result, so a FAQ covering it would be great.

[Adran]

1 hour ago, Ogid said:

 

As described in the link it's quite hard to perform and there are ways to do it even better with the mechanical rider, so it doesn't seem to be broken... but it's still a generalization of a rule, which may lead to an unintended result, so a FAQ covering it would be great.

My answer is already here. I just want to say is it is really easy to do. You play Hamlin and make an activated rat do the combine action to form a rat king. 

[Ogid]

31 minutes ago, Adran said:

My answer is already here. I just want to say is it is really easy to do. You play Hamlin and make an activated rat do the combine action to form a rat king. 

That doesn't break the game in any way... if at least 1 of the rats are unactivated, it gives 1 unactivated rat king; if all are activated, then it gives 1 activated rat king. (Disclaimer: following that unoficial generalization of the rule pending of FAQ).

Instead of creating the rat king with the rat and then obey with Hamelin (for a total of 2 actions with the king), you can create the rat with Hamelin's obey and then activate the king (again 2 actions with the king).

 

With the Duet one you are gaining 1 normal action (2 extra Duet actions minus 1 action to drop the scheme), but you need to move 1 model there to put the scheme and have Vasilisa near (6'') so depending on the situation you could be just moving efective actions from 1 model to others... with fast on the duet it become much better, but the only model being able to do it is Candy with an ability of 2'' of range that needs a trigger and deals damage... so you need a very specific team to do that, time the activations perfectly, bubble, keep the coryphees vulnerables... It's far from easy to do or even effective.

[Adran]

Also, I intended that it would be if any if the original models had activated then the new model counts as activated. Since inactivated is only achieved if none if the other conditions are met. ( If "activated" was a token or marker then as long as one original had, the new would have it). 

[Ogid]

34 minutes ago, Adran said:

Also, I intended that it would be if any if the original models had activated then the new model counts as activated. Since inactivated is only achieved if none if the other conditions are met. ( If "activated" was a token or marker then as long as one original had, the new would have it). 

This is the reason a FAQ is needed, it's an uncovered case that can be argued in both ways and the rules support none of them. The above isn't stated anywhere in the rules (your reading) and making an statement intended for single models plural can't be done and called a day (my reading)... However conditions and activation state are treated very differently in the rules, so I'm not sold with that one. But neither can I prove my point within the rules... so this is a stalemate.