A Kaeris bird

[Peturd]

Well this is pleasant. Kaeris is a little beast, and there is some nice tricks there. Especially with how easy it is to get everyone up to burning 3. And now with Deacon, they can stay on fire! Let’s break out the golem and gamin!!!

[Jordon]

This looks great! Still very pyre marker focused but I think that was to be expected.

She's still seems all about mobility and board control, but this time she's a bit more up close than her previous version, which primarily focused on run and gun.

I feel like she's a bit more killy but a bit less survivable. Loosing armor (and potentially positive flips on Df) and staying primarily at range. Compared to gaining H2W and a heal and needing to play closer. Pyre markers also seem easier to generate in this version. 

I had some questions:

1. Does Wings on Fire allow her to charge while engaged?

2. Does her Rampage trigger also prompt her Wings on Fire? Basically getting double duty from the trigger?

3. What counts as the "area in between" for her Eruption of Flame? Is it a line from the edges of her base to the edges of the pyre marker? 

[touchdown]

8 minutes ago, Jordon said:

1. Does Wings on Fire allow her to charge while engaged?

No, you ignore models when moving but not when declaring actions. You still can't declare a charge while engaged.

[PiersonsMuppeteer]

23 minutes ago, Jordon said:

3. What counts as the "area in between" for her Eruption of Flame? Is it a line from the edges of her base to the edges of the pyre marker? 

I would say any legal line drawn for LoS from her to the pyre marker defines the area for “in-between”. If one of those LoS lines touches another model’s base, that model would be considered in base contact with the area in-between.

[Thatguy]

17 minutes ago, touchdown said:

No, you ignore models when moving but not when declaring actions. You still can't declare a charge while engaged.

I think you're right. I initially thought she could. 

Still if you stack enough burning, you could potentially triple Rampage for three charges a turn. Lol

[Bobsnextdoor]

For the Hand of Immolation and Eruption of Flames actions, are the pyre markers dropped still 50mm hazardous (burning) or are they just 30mm pyre markers since the actions in question don't specify that?

[Raising]

guaranteed suit means ataking a weak enemy(def 4) and destroy the enemy hand with the mask trigger. or jump across the map charging 3 times in a row

also moving anyone next to a burning 3 wildfire(no range or lov) is also brutal

[Korrok]

Giving out suits to burning 3 friends makes a good chunk of her keyword hand out burning 3 per hit due to the double blaze trigger. 

[Jordon]

I'm also really liking Deacon. He's decently costed and provides something that wildfire desperately needed. I don't know how many times my golem got obliterated due to condition removal. Mind you it's still going to be tough ensuring the golem and Deacon stay close to each other, but at least it's an option when facing condition removal now.

Aside from that, I feel like Deacon is better suited for Kaeris. His Translocation Ritual looks really nice but the required tome is a pain. Luckily it's less of an issue thanks to Burning mans Gift / Soulstone Cache. Crazed Ramblings could also be pretty nice as well. 

[Peturd]

So can Melting Point pulse from multiple sources at once? Like 4 friendly models have burning 3 so any models in pulse 3 of any of those 4 suffer the effects?

assuming the above is correct, it’s still just one ability so over lap gives no benefit 

[Jordon]

Can the damage from Scorching Radiance be reduced to 0 when passed off onto a fire gamin/golem? If so, would that cause her to reduce the burning condition by 0? 

[Maniacal_cackle]

14 minutes ago, Jordon said:

Can the damage from Scorching Radiance be reduced to 0 when passed off onto a fire gamin/golem? If so, would that cause her to reduce the burning condition by 0? 

I don't believe it counts as burning damage. Scorching radiance is doing the damage, and unlike abilities like blood poisoning, there's nothing to say "suffers damage from the burning condition equal to..." for example.

[Rufess]

25 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I don't believe it counts as burning damage. Scorching radiance is doing the damage, and unlike abilities like blood poisoning, there's nothing to say "suffers damage from the burning condition equal to..." for example.

Isn't the word "...that damage..." mean it is the same damage entity with same amount and same source(burning) that Kaeris would suffer?

[Maniacal_cackle]

4 minutes ago, Rufess said:

Isn't the word "...that damage..." mean it is the same damage entity with same amount and same source(burning) that Kaeris would suffer?

Oh, that could make sense!

[Engorn]

9 hours ago, Bobsnextdoor said:

For the Hand of Immolation and Eruption of Flames actions, are the pyre markers dropped still 50mm hazardous (burning) or are they just 30mm pyre markers since the actions in question don't specify that?

You have the answer to that on the FAQ. Section 6. Arcanists. 

Quote

Banasuva – What Height are Ice Pillars placed by Banasuva’s Demise (Elemental Breakdown) Ability?
a) Height 4. All Markers of a single name share all of the same terrain traits.

So they're still 50mm Hazardous (Burning) Pyre Markers.

 

8 hours ago, Jordon said:

I'm also really liking Deacon. He's decently costed and provides something that wildfire desperately needed. I don't know how many times my golem got obliterated due to condition removal. Mind you it's still going to be tough ensuring the golem and Deacon stay close to each other, but at least it's an option when facing condition removal now.

I understand that you you are saying that with Hillcrest's Flare Up Ability you don't reduce the Burning Condition on the Fire Golem when it uses the Flaming Body Ability... I'm not sure if this is correct since Flare Up says that is only for enemy effects, and the effect reducing the Burning Condition is the Flaming Body Ability, not the enemy attack itself...

[Jinn]

37 minutes ago, Engorn said:

I understand that you you are saying that with Hillcrest's Flare Up Ability you don't reduce the Burning Condition on the Fire Golem when it uses the Flaming Body Ability... I'm not sure if this is correct since Flare Up says that is only for enemy effects, and the effect reducing the Burning Condition is the Flaming Body Ability, not the enemy attack itself...

No, they're saying that after they stack 9 burning on the Fire Golem it won't be able to be directly removed by an enemy model's action while in Hillcrest's aura, which would leave you without any defenses.

That aura will make it so that any matchups where you face Immolate (the Burning expunge) become very dangerous near Deacon Hillcrest. If Sonnia gets him to +5 burning, or anyone else in his aura, she can just keep hitting Immolates for five damage and be unable to reduce the burning. Same for the new Reva.

[Engorn]

If a model with exactly Burning +3 and the Blaze of Glory Ability (Elijah, Hillcrest or a firebranded) performs a duel, it can first add any one suit to its final duel and then reduce the Burning Condition to gain a ? I understand that the answer is not since I assume that the reduction of the Burning Condition is before performing the duel and the addition of the suit is after performing the duel. But...

[Engorn]

21 minutes ago, Jinn said:

No, they're saying that after they stack 9 burning on the Fire Golem it won't be able to be directly removed by an enemy model's action while in Hillcrest's aura, which would leave you without any defenses.

That aura will make it so that any matchups where you face Immolate (the Burning expunge) become very dangerous near Deacon Hillcrest. If Sonnia gets him to +5 burning, or anyone else in his aura, she can just keep hitting Immolates for five damage and be unable to reduce the burning. Same for the new Reva.

He is saying is good to have the golem near Hillcrest (and I don't agree or I don't understand why). You are saying is bad to have the golem near Hillcrest (and I understand why and I agree).

Also... Would the Embrace the flame Ability from Firebrandeds work in the Flare Up aura?

[Jinn]

53 minutes ago, Engorn said:

He is saying is good to have the golem near Hillcrest (and I don't agree or I don't understand why). You are saying is bad to have the golem near Hillcrest (and I understand why and I agree).

Also... Would the Embrace the flame Ability from Firebrandeds work in the Flare Up aura?

Golem near Hillcrest is great (it can't even take damage from Immolate). It's other models (like Deacon Hillcrest) that are screwed.

I really don't want to invest AP into making the Fire Golem have armour only for it to be removed with a 1-action from an opponent. The Fire Golem should have that aura baked into its card.

[HomelessOne]

Find myself initially quite enthused by Kaeris2 and Deacon. Gives me high hopes for what they do with Raspy and Markus.

[Jordon]

11 hours ago, Rufess said:

Isn't the word "...that damage..." mean it is the same damage entity with same amount and same source(burning) that Kaeris would suffer?

That is sort of how I was reading it as well. She can shrug off the damage caused by burning, which counts as damage from the burning condition, which the golem/gamin could reduce to zero. 

What is less clear is whether she then has to reduce her own burning condition or not. For example, say she has burning +3 and at the end of the turn, she passes 1 damage off onto the golem, which he reduces to 0. Does Kaeris then reduce her burning condition to 2, or does she remain at 3?

My thinking is that she's still have to reduce since the golem still "suffered damage", despite him reducing that damage.

[Maniacal_cackle]

Just played against @Zilthas with him using new Kaeris and me using McMourning.

My first impression is that she is at least on English Ivan power level - build around her or die.

First turn I managed to avoid being nuked by her unresisted 4 damage with last moment shenanigans (so she passed it to Elijah), and I managed to kill his lodestone carrier with McMourning.

Second turn it all fell apart. I ended McMourning's activation within 13" of Deacon, so McMourning got translocated into killing distance of Kaeris. Kaeris killed him in one activation through stones (although she did get a red joker from memory). Also easily killed my dead rider (I think with Elijah).

Then end of turn 2, Kaeris one-shot a nurse with 6 damage with Scorching Radiance (which we ruled as ignoring hidden martyrs, since it was 'instead of' the burning damage? Not sure). By this point in the game it was just impossible to not have something near her, so letting a nurse die seemed fine.

Definitely some mispositioning issues on my part, but we called it on turn 3 after the Kaeris activation. She activated and did something like 11 damage in her activation as well as spewing out a ton of pyre markers.

Her damage potential is insane, being a built in min-4 in many circumstances. There's some ways to counter it, but if she starts her activation unengaged in a pyre marker, she melts everything near her.

I swapped to trying to kill her (possibly too late?) but between her self-healing, her shielded and counterspell from magical training, her mobility, and hard to wound, she was actually extremely difficult to make progress on.

Would be interesting to face her with Molly (who is extremely solid into the Kaeris matchup), but my first impression is I'd probably put her at least in Ivan's ballpark - possibly not broken, but very powerful.

[Maniacal_cackle]

I do also think that she is terrible game design as she stands now.

"Don't let me end near any of your models or take 6+ damage, no resist" is just ridiculous game design IMO. And we're not talking the turn 1, 15 damage super novas. She can build up to 6+ damage with very little effort since she is trying to end every action in a pyre marker anyway.

It is something I could beat in a tournament for sure (although I play activation control molly...), but I hate this sort of design, and I'm not sure I could beat it with any crew BUT molly.

Capping the damage transfer at 3 unresisted would probably be a good thing to do (although then what happens to the leftover damage, does she take it?) She could still do insane damage with her built-in triggers, but then at least she doesn't just 1-shot models with no flip.

[Maniacal_cackle]

Oh, I should note she did FAR more damage by attacking. It was like 20-30 damage from attacks over the course of the game, and only 6 damage from the unresisted part (although would have done another ~6 by the end of turn 3).

But I don't mind masters doing a lot of damage with attacks, and I'd probably have taken less damage from attacks if I didn't have to also play around her unresisted pings xD

[Thatguy]

I think you may be right. It may be a design oversight. They might not have thought of the damage potential of the ability to shift burning damage to other models on a model that can stack 5+ burning a turn on itself. 

It seems like condition removal is a must. Though I also like the idea is burying her or pushing her out of range of other models after stacking 16+ burning so she self immolates. Lol