Jump to content
  • 0

Yokai Ephemeral Warriors


Question

If a Yokai uses it's bonus action, gaining a Flicker Token, and uses From Beyond to get a + for the duel, gaining another Flicker Token, does Ephemeral Warriors trigger twice after the action is completed, allowing you to place within 3" twice?

Similarly, if the Yokai uses it's attack action with a bonus from From Beyond, and then triggers Unnatural Speed, gaining an additional Flicker token, does the Yokai get to place within 3" twice before resolving the extra Attack Action?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 1
4 hours ago, Scoffer said:

Such effects are resolved only once after resolving an action, regardless of how many flicker tokens were gained during that action.

No they don't, that's why hazardous includes the (to a maximum of once per action or ability). Effects resolve for every time the effect gets generated unless otherwise stated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

No they don't, that's why hazardous includes the (to a maximum of once per action or ability). Effects resolve for every time the effect gets generated unless otherwise stated.

According to FAQ two instances of the same effect on the same model are not cumulative (see FAQ 12.3).

 

  • Respectfully Disagree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
4 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

That's a question of how Last Breath works, not regarding a general rule.

I think it's the only official ruling from Wyrd more or less applicable for this situation. It's better than nothing.

  • Respectfully Disagree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
6 minutes ago, Scoffer said:

According to FAQ two instances of the same effect on the same model are not cumulative (see FAQ 12.3).

This is what that FAQ entry states:

Quote

3.  Lone Swordsman – If the Lone Swordsman takes the Last Breath Action twice in an Activation targeting the same model, are the effects cumulative?
a) No. However, if The Lone Swordsman targets two different models with the Last Breath Action in the same Activation, it would resolve the effects of both actions separately.

That FAQ entry does not say that two instances of the same effect on the same model are not cumulative.  It says, instead, that Last Breath doesn't stack with itself.  You're trying to make up a principle from a FAQ entry that's addressing how a specific action was used during testing.

  • Respectfully Disagree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Agree with the above, and for a more detailed breakdown I see it as:

  • Pay cost of gaining a flicker token.
    • This generates Ephemeral Warriors 1, but it specifies after resolving the current action, so it has to wait.
  • Before performing a duel, the model gains a flicker token for From Beyond.
    • This generates Ephemeral Warriors 2, but it specifies after resolving the current action, so it has to wait.
  • The effect generates an Interact Action,
    • But we know generated actions have to wait until all other effects are resolved.
  • Generate and resolve the trigger if applicable (model heals and may end a condition).
  • Step 6 of action: Resolve Epheremal Warriors 1
  • Step 6 of action: Resolve Epheremal Warriors 2
  • Action and all effects resolved.
  • Resolve interact action (even if engaged).

Is that right? Seems weird, but I think that's how it orders.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
16 minutes ago, solkan said:

That FAQ entry does not say that two instances of the same effect on the same model are not cumulative.  It says, instead, that Last Breath doesn't stack with itself.  You're trying to make up a principle from a FAQ entry that's addressing how a specific action was used during testing.

We can't get an FAQ for every action, ability and effect, that's why we have to make principles from what we get from Wyrd.

If you say, that this particular FAQ entry is only and only for Lone Swordsman, and must be ignored for all other models, how would you resolve a situation with Zoraida hitting the same model twice with Poisoned Fate?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
11 minutes ago, Scoffer said:

We can't get an FAQ for every action, ability and effect, that's why we have to make principles from what we get from Wyrd.

If you say, that this particular FAQ entry is only and only for Lone Swordsman, and must be ignored for all other models, how would you resolve a situation with Zoraida hitting the same model twice with Poisoned Fate?

The reason I see the FAQ to be completely different is that one is asking:

  • This model uses the same action twice to generate a last breath/challenge/poisoned fate/etc. type effect on a model - do they stack?

While this is asking:

  • During a single action, a model gains a flicker token at two separate times. When the model gains a flicker token, it generates an effect. Does the effect generate and resolve twice?

So they seem like different questions to me.

I can't imagine there's any question that if the flickers were applied during two separate actions you'd gain two separate moves, so why don't you gain two in doing it in a single action?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
4 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I can't imagine there's any question that if the flickers were applied during two separate actions you'd gain two separate moves, so why don't you gain two in doing it in a single action?

For example, because it doesn't say "place X for each token gained"

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, Scoffer said:

We can't get an FAQ for every action, ability and effect, that's why we have to make principles from what we get from Wyrd.

I disagree - the rules can be updated and written in a way to be more clear across the game, for every game. Malifaux does have competitors that strive to support the rules and keep everyone playing the same game the same way, globally. Coming from one of those games, I am admittedly frustrated with some of the lack of clarity in the rules of Malifaux, especial the "peer review" of the rules forums, rather than official statements and support.

To the topic at hand, I can see both interpretations (place twice v place once) as legitimate. I would personally only place once because a placing twice would require more specific language, in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Long time Oni player, first time caller.  I'm in the "place once" camp. 

Since a number of Flicker Tokens is not listed in Ephemeral Warrior, it does not matter how many tokens were received in the action, only that you received a token.  Down vote me all you want, your hate makes me stronger.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Just now, Jesy Blue said:

Long time Oni player, first time caller.  I'm in the "place once" camp. 

Since a number of Flicker Tokens is not listed in Ephemeral Warrior, it does not matter how many tokens were received in the action, only that you received a token.  Down vote me all you want, your hate makes me stronger.

Wait, there's a downvote function??

The effect certainly feels more balanced with one token, so I'd not fault an opponent either way.

Do you also play the place happens before the interact?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Just now, Maniacal_cackle said:

Do you also play the place happens before the interact?

No, Ephemeral Warrior clearly states the place happens after the action that it gained a token from resolves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Just now, Jesy Blue said:

No, Ephemeral Warrior clearly states the place happens after the action that it gained a token from resolves.

But the bonus action is resolved (it just creates a second action, that of an interact). According to pages 34-35, generated actions have to wait until all other effects resolve.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

If folks want to let me get away with it, I'll let them... I already get flack for using that action to move on the turn it was summoned to get more movement even though I can't use the Interact on that turn, I'm not pushing for more.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 minutes ago, Jesy Blue said:

If folks want to let me get away with it, I'll let them... I already get flack for using that action to move on the turn it was summoned to get more movement even though I can't use the Interact on that turn, I'm not pushing for more.

Yeah, regardless of how the rules work, I don't think it was necessarily playtested that way.

According to my interpretation, you can walk, interact, bonus action move six inches, interact again. Pretty crazy!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 10/12/2020 at 4:42 PM, Maniacal_cackle said:

Agree with the above, and for a more detailed breakdown I see it as:

  • Pay cost of gaining a flicker token.
    • This generates Ephemeral Warriors 1, but it specifies after resolving the current action, so it has to wait.
  • Before performing a duel, the model gains a flicker token for From Beyond.
    • This generates Ephemeral Warriors 2, but it specifies after resolving the current action, so it has to wait.
  • The effect generates an Interact Action,
    • But we know generated actions have to wait until all other effects are resolved.
  • Generate and resolve the trigger if applicable (model heals and may end a condition).
  • Step 6 of action: Resolve Epheremal Warriors 1
  • Step 6 of action: Resolve Epheremal Warriors 2
  • Action and all effects resolved.
  • Resolve interact action (even if engaged).

Is that right? Seems weird, but I think that's how it orders.

So I suppose jury's still out on a final ruling for now, but I'm still inclined to think it works like this and haven't been convinced otherwise

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Reading this as if it were Magic: the Gathering, the check for a Flicker happens at the end the current action. If the answer is YES, a flicker token was gained, then it places. If it received 2 Flickers, the answer is still YES, and it places. Until Ephemeral Warriors uses the word "for each Flicker token", it should only place once, as the check happens at the end of the action, rather than adding to the stack as the flicker is gained.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, regleant said:

Reading this as if it were Magic: the Gathering, the check for a Flicker happens at the end the current action. If the answer is YES, a flicker token was gained, then it places. If it received 2 Flickers, the answer is still YES, and it places. Until Ephemeral Warriors uses the word "for each Flicker token", it should only place once, as the check happens at the end of the action, rather than adding to the stack as the flicker is gained.

I disagree. The wording doesn't say "if this model gained a flicker token do x" it says "when this model gained a flicker token do x after y" which implies you would do X for each flicker token gained but at the timing specified.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 hours ago, regleant said:

Reading this as if it were Magic: the Gathering, the check for a Flicker happens at the end the current action. If the answer is YES, a flicker token was gained, then it places. If it received 2 Flickers, the answer is still YES, and it places. Until Ephemeral Warriors uses the word "for each Flicker token", it should only place once, as the check happens at the end of the action, rather than adding to the stack as the flicker is gained.

Firstly, this isn't M:TG. Secondly, the ability doesn't say "After resolving an action, if this model gained a flicker token place it within 3"" it says "When this model gains a flicker token it places within 3", after resolving the current Action". The first is a boolean statement, it either did or did not gain a flicker token. The second is a delayed resolution effect. The triggering event happens, and then instead of immediately resolving it you are told to wait to resolve the effect of that event.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

Firstly, this isn't M:TG. 

Right - but that's an example of a very complex game (more so than Malifaux) where the rules are written in a clear way and actively supported by the company. :) That's all I ask. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 minutes ago, regleant said:

Right - but that's an example of a very complex game (more so than Malifaux) where the rules are written in a clear way and actively supported by the company. :) That's all I ask. 

The game was also developed in the 90s and has millions more in revenue 😜

But yes, I agree with the sentiment and would be annoyed if Wyrd isn't that developed within the next ten years or so.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Although also note that I think Malifaux is actually more complex. Not only do you have timing issues, but spatial issues as well.

Magic doesn't care if one card is within 2" of another card. Malifaux cares about a 2" measurement, and so WHEN you make that 2" measurement is a big deal (and complicated).

  • Agree 1
Link to post
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