Aversion and models with scamper..?

[Maniacal_cackle]

Is it just me, or is this a crazy defensive combo?

Aversion force a high WP duel when you move in, and if you cheat to pass it they get to scamper away before you land the hit.

Has anyone tried this? It seems like a massive stealth buff to Pandora (against melee crews).

[Regelridderen]

Trouble is, I can’t find the stones for an aversion in the first place. The lack of any conditions to hand out is a huge detriment for me.

And at 8-10 points, there are plenty of other models I’d rather take - Hinamatsu, Wrath, Doppleganger - but paying that price ‘just’ to guard other models, I’d rather go for models with an offensive potential.

-

But I’d love to hear from people who sweat by aversions, cause they’re fun models. 

[Maniacal_cackle]

I wouldn't say Aversion just guard things. Frightening reminder is super good, giving an extra 4" of move a turn.

But I've not had a chance to see them on the table yet.

 

[diki]

It obviously depends on the crew you are facing but it doesn't stop anyone just shooting your 8 stone 6 hp model 🤷‍♂️

I'm thinking I like scamper on Pandora or any terrifiying model though

[Maniacal_cackle]

To clarify, I'd think you'd put IR on another model (for example Pandora), and then an aversion nearby makes it super hard to kill Pandora.

[diki]

Sorry @Maniacal_cackle , I'm having a bad reading day :D, that makes a lot more sense.

When does antipathy resolve with a charge though. Is charge resolved before the generated attack action or after it?

[Maniacal_cackle]

2 minutes ago, diki said:

Sorry @Maniacal_cackle , I'm having a bad reading day :D, that makes a lot more sense.

When does antipathy resolve with a charge though. Is charge resolved before the generated attack action or after it?

Charge > antipathy and move > attack

Generated actions happen after generated effects.

For terrifying, the attack still goes off since you're halfway through it when you take the check.

[Maniacal_cackle]

So with antipathy + scamper, a move will go off if they fail OR if they cheat, likely resulting in being out of range of the attack.

[ShinChan]

I think 1 aversion is great when the Strategy is all about positioning (Symbols and Corrupted Ley Lines) or when there are Schemes like Claim Jump (allow you to score it and/or deny it to the enemy).

However, I do agree their printed actions could have at least 1 trigger to deliver a condition...

[Regelridderen]

39 minutes ago, ShinChan said:

I think 1 aversion is great when the Strategy is all about positioning (Symbols and Corrupted Ley Lines) or when there are Schemes like Claim Jump (allow you to score it and/or deny it to the enemy).

However, I do agree their printed actions could have at least 1 trigger to deliver a condition...

I’d guess as much, but...

Then I look at Misery and look at how easy it is to bounce models around with Sorrows and other Woe. 

For Claim Jump, I just look at Candy or Serena, and suddenly and suddenly those Aversions just have a hard time competing. 

I see a use in them, but unless your game takes place on Ht4 pillars of Terrain connected by rickety bridges over Hazardous Lava streams, I really have a hard time justifying their use - in theory.

So what do you think justifies their use?

[ShinChan]

16 minutes ago, Regelridderen said:

I’d guess as much, but...

Then I look at Misery and look at how easy it is to bounce models around with Sorrows and other Woe. 

For Claim Jump, I just look at Candy or Serena, and suddenly and suddenly those Aversions just have a hard time competing. 

I see a use in them, but unless your game takes place on Ht4 pillars of Terrain connected by rickety bridges over Hazardous Lava streams, I really have a hard time justifying their use - in theory.

So what do you think justifies their use?

Not for being the target of Claim Jump! For pushing everybody away of the center for the first point for example. Scatter is great for that, for preventing the model with the lodestone to control one of the strategy markers and to prevent a model from getting a Symbol of Authority. All of that thanks to not require any sort of duel or even get a TN.

[Ogid]

On 9/9/2020 at 12:49 PM, Maniacal_cackle said:

To clarify, I'd think you'd put IR on another model (for example Pandora), and then an aversion nearby makes it super hard to kill Pandora.

I hadn't thought about it, it's quite creative...

However it's still not that hard to play around, the push is "away from" and it's an . The model only has to charge putting himself between the Aversion and pandora (if it loses the duel, it'll be pushed towards pandora), position to get pushed into another model or piece of terrain still into range to attack or use the model getting attacked to break LoS with the Aversion.

My problem with them are the same than @Regelridderen; they never make into my lists, not having a condition is a huge detriment in a Pandora crew and in NVB there are other very good versatiles and OOK competing for that spot in the crew.

[Maniacal_cackle]

I guess what I love about them is that in card-hungry crews I'm always looking for models that can do their job with no cards fed into them. Aversion get close to that (only needing a card for frightening reminder).

17 minutes ago, Ogid said:

 

However it's still not that hard to play around, the push is "away from" and it's an . The model only has to charge putting himself between the Aversion and pandora (if it loses the duel, it'll be pushed towards pandora), position to get pushed into another model or piece of terrain still into range to attack or use the model getting attacked to break LoS with the Aversion.

You can position so that there isn't a gap big enough for the model, but the LOS issue is definitely one I haven't found a solution for (other than still stopping 40/50mm bases). It'd be ideal if Pandora was incorporeal, so you could just push the enemies through her xD

[Ogid]

9 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I guess what I love about them is that in card-hungry crews I'm always looking for models that can do their job with no cards fed into them. Aversion get close to that (only needing a card for frightening reminder).

You can position so that there isn't a gap big enough for the model, but the LOS issue is definitely one I haven't found a solution for (other than still stopping 40/50mm bases). It'd be ideal if Pandora was incorporeal, so you could just push the enemies through her xD

Unless the Aversion and Pandora are very close (kind of base to base or almost), the model could position to be thrown into padora, it just takes any part of the base moving into her to stop the push...

IDK... I haven't tried them yet for the reasons above, they never make into my lists; but I really don't like what I see in the card... the back card is all stat 5 without damage potential nor condition play or any sustain and the aura is easy to counter with proper positioning and could even be used by smart enemies against Pandora:

As the aura try to always go off (and if the model is close enough, it will go off twice for a 6'' push), the other player could use them to spinball models out of my bubble into safety, into my DZ to score or even into other models to get extra inches out of their charges (and as they are have mediocre damage and no stun, dangerous models won't get threatened by them)... I'm not paying 6SS for a model that an smart oponent will use against me.

If Scatter were super important in one game, I'd play Dreamer to summon 2 IM (or even hire him OOK) instead of including 2 Aversions tbh...

Anyway, I'd love to hear about players making good use of them, maybe I'm too negative about these.

[diki]

The potential for enemies to use them as a speed boost is annoying and like it probably should have been a May abilitiy, and the model does seem overpriced.

Antipathy raises a few questions for me though. I don't think it can double trigger, because it only does the movement after a action (not after other abilities)????

It hadn't occurred to me that scatter could trigger antipathy giving upto  6" push though, that's pretty cool

[Ogid]

1 minute ago, diki said:

Antipathy raises a few questions for me though. I don't think it can double trigger, because it only does the movement after a action (not after other abilities)????

Not 100% sure as wordings are sometimes tricky, but I'd say that part only prevents it to go off in the middle of an action, not forces it to only go off it it happens in the middle of an action.

As I read it, the trigger is ending a move within 4'' of it (other anipathy auras ignore that move, but this aura doesn't; hence double push is the first ends within range)

[solkan]

For what it’s worth, stuff like “Stand Back, It’s Evidence”, Scamper, Hold ‘Em, Weight of Guilt, and Shimmering Lights do say “after resolving the current Action or Ability”.

That does strongly suggest that “after resolving the current Action” won’t happen outside of Actions.

 

[Regelridderen]

On 9/11/2020 at 1:31 AM, Maniacal_cackle said:

I guess what I love about them is that in card-hungry crews I'm always looking for models that can do their job with no cards fed into them. Aversion get close to that (only needing a card for frightening reminder).

You have a decent point about the card drain - which is a huge part of the panda tactic - how do you feel they fare compared to other models e.g. Wrath?

[Maniacal_cackle]

1 minute ago, Regelridderen said:

You have a decent point about the card drain - which is a huge part of the panda tactic - how do you feel they fare compared to other models e.g. Wrath?

It's theoretical for me so far - I played Pandora before Aversion were released. My friend just picked them up so I'll be seeing them on the table soon and have more practical wisdom to share.

So I'll report back when I know more!

[Ogid]

15 hours ago, solkan said:

For what it’s worth, stuff like “Stand Back, It’s Evidence”, Scamper, Hold ‘Em, Weight of Guilt, and Shimmering Lights do say “after resolving the current Action or Ability”.

That does strongly suggest that “after resolving the current Action” won’t happen outside of Actions.

You might be right, but it's not a clear cut case. There are abilities triggering twice, like "Stand back, It's Evidence" reacting to a False Claim; but that one is 2 different triggers happening during the action getting queued to happen after the action tho; it's not the same case than here.

In most abilities that "after resolving the current action" is included not in the first sentence of the conditional (where the conditions usually are) but in the second... restrictions are usually more highlighted than that. But Antiphaty wording is a bit messy compared with the other abilities...

Wordings are tricky and that could well be an aditional restriction... is there anything ruled similarly in other editions? I think this may be FAQ material.

[Maniacal_cackle]

One argument in favour of double Antipathy is that it explicitly says "ignored by the Antipathy Ability of other friendly models."

If they meant for it to not apply twice, it would presumably say "ignored by the Antipathy Ability of friendly models" (dropping the other).

[Ogid]

9 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

One argument in favour of double Antipathy is that it explicitly says "ignored by the Antipathy Ability of other friendly models."

If they meant for it to not apply twice, it would presumably say "ignored by the Antipathy Ability of friendly models" (dropping the other).

Haha, Good one... I was looking for clues all over the differents abilities when this one explicitly states that this abilitiy's push (which happens outside of an action) doesn't trigger other auras with the same name. Which does sound like they are expected to trigger to movements outside of actions too and that clause is preventing it in this case.

[santaclaws01]

16 hours ago, solkan said:

That does strongly suggest that “after resolving the current Action” won’t happen outside of Actions.

 

No it doesn't, all it suggests is that it's resolution gets delayed if an action is being resolved.

 

1 hour ago, Ogid said:

You might be right, but it's not a clear cut case. There are abilities triggering twice, like "Stand back, It's Evidence" reacting to a False Claim; but that one is 2 different triggers happening during the action getting queued to happen after the action tho; it's not the same case than here.

In most abilities that "after resolving the current action" is included not in the first sentence of the conditional (where the conditions usually are) but in the second... restrictions are usually more highlighted than that. But Antiphaty wording is a bit messy compared with the other abilities...

Wordings are tricky and that could well be an aditional restriction... is there anything ruled similarly in other editions? I think this may be FAQ material.

In previous editions those kinds of text were never restrictions that it can only happen under that event, it just tells you to handle it different under those events than the default timing would suggest. Usually to prevent interruptions.

[diki]

If it can trigger multiple time: if an enemy model ends a move between an adze and an aversion, and in pandora's missery range

Shimmering lights (gives distracted 1) >> antipathy PUSH (ending against adze) >> shimmering lights (distracted 2) >> (pandora) misery PUSH(towards aversion or adze either counts as a move) >> shimmering lights (distracted 3) >> antipathy PUSH (ending against adze) >> shimmering lights (distracted 4)

Seems unintended?

[diki]

Actually if antipathy from a single aversion triggers mutliple times, wouldn't it trigger infinitly if the model is blocked from leaving the 4" aura?
As 0" push is still a move!