Smuggler Colette

[Plaag]

5 hours ago, trikk said:

And the one missing is the one supposed to be super OP

because most of good players just feel like not good person to play with such op 

[Thatguy]

12 hours ago, Plaag said:

also i think she can summon 2 doves-because we can command decoy and target make an action

I think "as though it were this model" stops 1 per activation stuff like the summon or multiple charges.

[Plaag]

5 hours ago, Thatguy said:

I think "as though it were this model" stops 1 per activation stuff like the summon or multiple charges.

i think it just make marker become model for a while, but not make it same model

[eddy]

24 minutes ago, Plaag said:

i think it just make marker become model for a while, but not make it same model

While i agree with you. It is for sure thing that requires FAQ

[Jordon]

I sort of feel like the intent was to only allow one summon per turn, regardless of decoy activation. Otherwise what would even be the point of the clause to begin with? 

However I do agree that it's a bit confusing and could use some further clarification.

[Thatguy]

I agree it needs a faq.

But it seems to me that it would say: "target takes an action as if it were a model with this model's stat cards" if it was meant to be a temporary double instead of Colette doing the thing at range. 

The double interpretation is stronger I think. Decoy's couldn't use focus but you could use them for 3 charges or multiple summons a turn, and not have to worry about getting damaged or gaining conditions.

[dancater]

So, interesting question here. Definitely needs an FAQ to clearly clarify.

The wording of Routine Performance is, the target decoy marker takes an action (here including the attack Phantasmal Prism) "as though it were this model". 

One way to read this is that as though it were the model means it is treated in all ways as that model, which would limit the action to once/turn. No issue, one dove summon/turn from Colette (and an additional possible from Cassandra, see below, as a different model entirely). This limits the Colette/Cassandra combo to either summon 2 decoy markers and a dove or 2 doves and a decoy marker.

But it would also mean the targeted Decoy Marker would have all the auras and conditions that Colette has (it is the Colette model, if only temporarily), anything which happens to it would happen to Colette.

Also Colette could not attack with a  action while engaged and thus neither could illusory Colette, regardless of the decoy markers board status. 

Sadly I do think by strict language as written this is the correct interpretation. It makes sense in some ways and not in others. It is clearly less powerful in regards to Colette's options and flex.

Alternatively;

So another way to interpret this language is the decoy marker takes the action as if it was the model, it is not the actual model. The decoy becomes an quasi-Colette, as I stated earlier an illusory version of Smuggler Colette with her stats and the relevant general and attack action options, but the decoy is not the model. 

Thus, it does not have the the bonuses or negatives Colette herself has from conditions or auras (unless the decoy is within an aura, obviously it cannot have a condition at all). 

Interestingly this should also mean, because Routine Performance can apply from any decoy marker regardless of range or LoS (and is not a  action), an engaged Colette can still use Routine Performance to generate a Phantasmal Prism attack from a illusory decoy even when Smuggler Colette is herself engaged.

The 3E rules clearly state A model can only take an Action or Ability that is once per Turn once on any given Turn, and that multiple models with the same action can each use it. The decoy marker takes the action as though it was, it is a different model, Colette and the illusion exist simultaneously.

So by this reading you could use Phantasmal Prism with Colette and through Routine Performance through temporary illusions through her decoy markers and once each time the  trigger to summon a Dove would be live.

And of course Doves count as decoy markers, so by my reading you could, assuming Smuggler Colette is by herself with no decoy markers or Doves on the table: activate Colette Bonus Action Smoke and Mirrors to drop a Decoy Marker, 1-AP Phantasmal Prism +  trigger to summon a Dove, then 2nd AP Routine Performance (targeting either the decoy marker or dove) Phantasmal Prism +  trigger to summon a Dove, then 3rd AP Routine Performance (targeting either the decoy marker or dove) Phantasmal Prism +  trigger to summon a Dove. In one turn, by herself, summoning a Decoy Marker (needs 3 any suit), a Dove (needing a target within 8" and to hit with ), then Routine Performance another Dove (needing an unsuited 4 then a a target within 8" and to hit with ), then Routine Performance another Dove (needing an unsuited 4 then a a target within 8" and to hit with ). So you can summon a decoy marker and 3 doves needing, at a minimum, 6 cards, an unsuited 3+, two unsuited 4+ and three Attacks 6+ card (needing ) vs Wp attacks.

Cassandra also can also use Upstage to either burn 1-AP and her Bonus to summon a Decoy Marker or to use 1-AP to use Routine Performance then Phantasmal Prism +  trigger to summon a Dove (max 3 on table).  (corrected per Jordan).

So on a table with no decoy markers or doves Colette and Cassandra could with the right table state and cards summon 2 Decoy Markers and 3 Mechanical Doves for the cost of 7 cards total, 3 of which must be (likely high) 's for the requisite trigger. Leaving Cassandra with her Nimble move AP and one other AP available.

This interpretation is clearly more powerful. It also makes narrative/theme sense in some ways, but not in others, especially when you consider the Shell Game trigger on her I discussed earlier. I actually prefer how this one works in terms of what I think is actually happening, regarding the decoys being separate quasi-Colette's.

We 110% will need this clarified, even outside the summoning trigger it has consequences regards engagement, conditions and auras.  

 

[Jordon]

33 minutes ago, dancater said:

Cassandra also can also use Upstage to either burn 1-AP and her Bonus to summon a Decoy Marker or to use 1-AP to use Routine Performance then Phantasmal Prism +  trigger to summon a Dove (max 3 on table).

 

 

I'm pretty sure when Cassandra copies Routine Performance, the decoys would use Cassandra's abilities and not Colette. So they wouldn't have access to Phantasmal Prism, but they could use breath of fire.

[dancater]

2 minutes ago, Jordon said:

I'm pretty sure when Cassandra copies Routine Performance, the decoys would use Cassandra's abilities and not Colette. So they wouldn't have access to Phantasmal Prism, but they could use breath of fire.

Yep good point, will correct this in my long copied post in the Rules Question forum.

[dancater]

I felt that questions raised here needed to be moved to the rules forum. So I placed this post there:

Two issues (so far) raised by the forthcoming Smuggler Colette.

 

[Trimasel]

5 hours ago, dancater said:

Leaving Cassandra with her Nimble move AP and one other AP available.

Unfortunately, upstage usage on bonus actions counts for Cassandra bonus action usage per activation. So if Cassandra uses Upstage to creates Decoy Marker, she can't use Nimble😢. Due to this action counts as action AND bonus action. 

[dancater]

13 minutes ago, Trimasel said:

Unfortunately, upstage usage on bonus actions counts for Cassandra bonus action usage per activation. So if Cassandra uses Upstage to creates Decoy Marker, she can't use Nimble😢. Due to this action counts as action AND bonus action. 

True this. I always flash back to earlier editions where Nimble simply provided +1 Walk AP.

[dancater]

Either way, check out the Smuggler Colette thread in the rules discussion forum.

Current interpretation is such that Colette cannot repeatedly summon Doves using her Phantasmal Prism. She becomes the illusion during Routine Performance, it 'is' Colette, her once/turn remains applicable.

She does carry conditions across with Routine Performance (they attach to her and she "becomes" the illusionary decoy for the duration of the action).

She is not impacted by area effects (auras and engagement) on her model Colette position during Routine Performance, instead as stated, during Routine Performance the decoy marker 'becomes' Colette. So any engagement areas or auras which would effect Colette from the location of the decoy marker will immediately take effect and any consequences apply, also any consequences (damage, conditions etc) which impact Colette as a result of making the attack as an illusion effect Colette the model, so still apply when the Routine Performance action ends and Colette returns to her original non-illusory body (and location).

It actually seems pretty simple when you wrap your mind around the difference between Colette the model (which teleports) and the space occupied by Colette the model (which is two distinct areas, the one she teleports from [and back to] and the one she teleports to [occupied by the decoy/dove, during Routine Performance]. Certain game effects are applied to Colette the model regardless of where that model is located in the game space (conditions for example travel 'with a buried model), and certain other game effects are applied to a model depending on the location that model occupies on the table (for example a buried model cannot be affected by an aura). The 3E rules (p33) actually pretty clearly differentiate between the model and the position of the model. 

[Jinn]

11 minutes ago, dancater said:

Either way, check out the Smuggler Colette thread in the rules discussion forum.

Current interpretation is such that Colette cannot repeatedly summon Doves using her Phantasmal Prism. She becomes the illusion during Routine Performance, it 'is' Colette, her once/turn remains applicable.

She does carry conditions across with Routine Performance (they attach to her and she "becomes" the illusionary decoy for the duration of the action).

She is not impacted by area effects (auras and engagement) on her model Colette position during Routine Performance, instead as stated, during Routine Performance the decoy marker 'becomes' Colette. So any engagement areas or auras which would effect Colette from the location of the decoy marker will immediately take effect and any consequences apply, also any consequences (damage, conditions etc) which impact Colette as a result of making the attack as an illusion effect Colette the model, so still apply when the Routine Performance action ends and Colette returns to her original non-illusory body (and location).

It actually seems pretty simple when you wrap your mind around the difference between Colette the model (which teleports) and the space occupied by Colette the model (which is two distinct areas, the one she teleports from [and back to] and the one she teleports to [occupied by the decoy/dove, during Routine Performance]. Certain game effects are applied to Colette the model regardless of where that model is located in the game space (conditions for example travel 'with a buried model), and certain other game effects are applied to a model depending on the location that model occupies on the table (for example a buried model cannot be affected by an aura). The 3E rules (p33) actually pretty clearly differentiate between the model and the position of the model. 

I don't think this interpretation is correct. I don't see how it is possible for the decoy to share some effects (such as damage and conditions) with Colette but not others (such as auras and engagements), the rules don't support that AFAIK. If these two models are treated as the same model for the purposes of health and conditions and the summon trigger, why aren't they treated as the same model for the purposes of auras, engagements, and the Shell Game trigger, which would be broken?

The issue with the action is that there is no wording that supports the original Colette actually teleporting or treating her position as identical to the targets position, the target is simply treated as though it were Colette. If it isn't a copy (with all the other problems that might entail) then it simply must be affected by the position of the original Colette. So if OG Colette is engaged then the actual model "Colette" is affected by the Engagement rules, and something that is treated as her must still be affected by that.

Quite simply this needs an FAQ. You need to stretch and interpret the wording too much to conclude anything satisfactorily enough to have a proper consensus/ruling IMO.

I don't personally have much of an attachment to ruling it either way (copy or "the same model") or another way entirely, but what I do oppose is hazardous going through illusions and the summon tokens/insignificant from doves affecting interacts.

[dancater]

3 hours ago, Jinn said:

I don't think this interpretation is correct. I don't see how it is possible for the decoy to share some effects (such as damage and conditions) with Colette but not others (such as auras and engagements), the rules don't support that AFAIK.

Buried establishes there is a difference between the model itself and its position, or not, on the table. Damage and conditions are persistent effects which follow a model as it moves, a model has damage and/or conditions until the damage is healed or as long as the specific condition lasts until it is resolved or removed. This is true regardless of the models location on the table, even if the model is 'located' off the table due to buried.

In contrast, again referencing buried, the model is impacted by auras and engagement area depending upon where it is on the table and what area of effects exist in relation to that location. So a buried model, while it can have conditions and can be damaged, cannot be engaged and is not subject to auras, pulses, blasts or other area effects.

The two models are not the same. There is only one model, and a simulacrum of a model, the decoy marker which is treated "as though it were this model". Because it is treated as though it was the model it carries the purely model related effects, such as wounds and conditions. But because the model is in a different physical location on the table it is effected by only those location areas of effect, such as auras and engagement range, which would impact the relevant model at the relevant location. A huge aspect of this working is the very small (single action sequence) period of timing that the 'two' Colette's (real and simulacrum) exist. If something caused this to be extended the house of cards collapses, as you identify having an actual copy of Colette is a rules black hole chaos tempest nightmare. But I don't think this currently can happen (but ??? not certain on that), no effect should extend Routine Performance that I'm aware of.   

Because it is treated as the model if Colette has already used the Phantasmal Prism trigger to summon a dove then the decoy marker cannot perform an 'extra' dove summon. But Routine Performance could use Phantasmal Prism and include the  trigger, providing this was the first (and only) use of that summon trigger in the turn. 

3 hours ago, Jinn said:

what I do oppose is hazardous going through illusions and the summon tokens/insignificant from doves affecting interacts.

Not sure what this references.

Hazardous can effect Doves, and can to a more limited degree effect destructible decoy markers, depending on the type of effect hazardous terrain has. Certainly if Colette used Routine Performance on a dove/decoy in hazardous terrain that dove/marker would be treated "as though it were this model" and being in the hazardous terrain would suffer the effects. At least on my current interpretation.

As for doves/decoys affecting interacts. Well no, they are only treated as Colette for the duration of Routine Performance during her activation and the use of that Tactical Action and the subsequent resolution of the General or Attack Action which results. So with Don't Mind Me Smuggler Colette could Routine Performance a decoy/dove and interact, regardless of whether that dove/decoy is inside an engagement range, but that is about the limit.

3 hours ago, Jinn said:

Quite simply this needs an FAQ. You need to stretch and interpret the wording too much to conclude anything satisfactorily enough to have a proper consensus/ruling IMO.

Generally I agree. I don't think my interpretation stretches the rules to breaking point but it does draw from sources not intended to be applied to this circumstance. I think it works here, but across all the models I am uncertain of the implications of doing the same thing with a slightly different model/rule/event and getting a wildly different and inappropriate outcome. I don't think that is the case, but I doubt I've seen even 5% of the possible this model + this model + this action + this outcome combinations available in Malifaux, so no idea. Better a formal Smuggler Colette limited ruling.    

[Jinn]

9 minutes ago, dancater said:

Not sure what this references.

Hazardous can effect Doves, and can to a more limited degree effect destructible decoy markers, depending on the type of effect hazardous terrain has. Certainly if Colette used Routine Performance on a dove/decoy in hazardous terrain that dove/marker would be treated "as though it were this model" and being in the hazardous terrain would suffer the effects. At least on my current interpretation.

Oh, that was just my hopes for the inevitable FAQ. My issue with your interpretation (or how I understood your interpretation, I think your stance might actually be closer to mine than I thought) from a "fluff" perspective (so not any issues I might have with the actual rules arguments) is that Colette's illusory double taking damage from hazardous shouldn't cause Colette to take damage from hazardous.

I've seen some people argue (and I thought this was your position) that the relationship between Colette and the obeyed Colette is a two way street, which in my view is incompatible with the whole different auras and engagements thing. So according to this view if the target takes the summon trigger then Colette counts as having taken it, and if the target marker or Dove charges into Hazardous then the outcome would be two damage from Hazardous onto the real Colette. They would also argue (and I agree the alternative may be unbalanced) that if Colette has Focused +1 and uses Routine Performance then the target expending focused also expends it from Colette.

I've also seen some people argue that targeting a Dove means you treat the Dove as the Colette model in addition to the Dove model, meaning that a summon token on the Dove model would block interacts using Routine Performance, although they never seem to bring up Insignificant so maybe I'm misunderstanding their position. My take is that the model taking the action is an exact copy of Colette, and so doesn't have any Summon token because Colette didn't have one.

Honestly the dozen different arguments about different parts of this model just bothers me and I am just really desperately hoping it gets an FAQ or rewrite ASAP.

FYI some of your text is hard to read in dark mode (grey text with a white background), when copy/pasting I think there is an option to paste as plain text which fixes it.

[PiersonsMuppeteer]

57 minutes ago, Jinn said:

Oh, that was just my hopes for the inevitable FAQ. My issue with your interpretation (or how I understood your interpretation, I think your stance might actually be closer to mine than I thought) from a "fluff" perspective (so not any issues I might have with the actual rules arguments) is that Colette's illusory double taking damage from hazardous shouldn't cause Colette to take damage from hazardous.

I've seen some people argue (and I thought this was your position) that the relationship between Colette and the obeyed Colette is a two way street, which in my view is incompatible with the whole different auras and engagements thing. So according to this view if the target takes the summon trigger then Colette counts as having taken it, and if the target marker or Dove charges into Hazardous then the outcome would be two damage from Hazardous onto the real Colette. They would also argue (and I agree the alternative may be unbalanced) that if Colette has Focused +1 and uses Routine Performance then the target expending focused also expends it from Colette.

I've also seen some people argue that targeting a Dove means you treat the Dove as the Colette model in addition to the Dove model, meaning that a summon token on the Dove model would block interacts using Routine Performance, although they never seem to bring up Insignificant so maybe I'm misunderstanding their position. My take is that the model taking the action is an exact copy of Colette, and so doesn't have any Summon token because Colette didn't have one.

Honestly the dozen different arguments about different parts of this model just bothers me and I am just really desperately hoping it gets an FAQ or rewrite ASAP.

FYI some of your text is hard to read in dark mode (grey text with a white background), when copy/pasting I think there is an option to paste as plain text which fixes it.

Relationship between Colette and marker Colette is a two way street for permanent effects, like conditions, but not temporal or positional effects like engagement or auras. Otherwise, Colette can mostly ignore stun by just using triggers through the marker (seems overly strong to me) and the ability becomes an even weaker Ice Mirror in most cases (wording is so different that can’t be the case).

I also wouldn’t say that a Dove marker Colette has the summon token because you use Colette’s model/stat card to perform the interact, and she does not have a summon token. However, that specific interaction is certainly very open to interpretation.

[Jordon]

Is there a suggested way of re-wording this in a way that works within the supposed intent? 

The best way it makes sense in my mind is to imagine Colette teleporting herself onto a decoy and then teleporting back after resolving the action. With that in mind here is what I expect from a decoy.

• Decoys can use the interact general action
• Decoys cannot bypass the once per turn Close-Up Magic trigger 
• Decoys cannot bypass the once per turn charge general action 
• Decoys carry over any conditions such as focus or distracted 
• Decoys are only engaged if the marker itself is within engagement range
• Decoys would suffer any affects during it's activation and pass those affects onto the real Colette after resolving
• Decoys only benefit/suffer from board states if the marker itself is within those states (hazardous, auras, etc)
• Shell game trigger is from the perspective of the Decoy marker declaring the trigger
• Decoy markers and/or Doves chosen by Routine Performance, cease to exist for the duration of that action

This is how I'll be playing it until we get a more official clarification. It seems to make the most sense in my mind and seems the least abusive. I know it's not perfect but I don't think we can achieve a consensus until we get clarity. 

If this is indeed how the devs intended it to work, then it should be reworded to support more of a temporary replacement that ignores the position of the "real" Colette for the duration of that action. 

[PiersonsMuppeteer]

2 hours ago, Jordon said:

Is there a suggested way of re-wording this in a way that works within the supposed intent? 

The best way it makes sense in my mind is to imagine Colette teleporting herself onto a decoy and then teleporting back after resolving the action. With that in mind here is what I expect from a decoy.

• Decoys can use the interact general action
• Decoys cannot bypass the once per turn Close-Up Magic trigger 
• Decoys cannot bypass the once per turn charge general action 
• Decoys carry over any conditions such as focus or distracted 
• Decoys are only engaged if the marker itself is within engagement range
• Decoys would suffer any affects during it's activation and pass those affects onto the real Colette after resolving
• Decoys only benefit/suffer from board states if the marker itself is within those states (hazardous, auras, etc)
• Shell game trigger is from the perspective of the Decoy marker declaring the trigger
• Decoy markers and/or Doves chosen by Routine Performance, cease to exist for the duration of that action

This is how I'll be playing it until we get a more official clarification. It seems to make the most sense in my mind and seems the least abusive. I know it's not perfect but I don't think we can achieve a consensus until we get clarity. 

If this is indeed how the devs intended it to work, then it should be reworded to support more of a temporary replacement that ignores the position of the "real" Colette for the duration of that action. 

I can’t think of a way without physically swapping Colette and the marker during resolution, but that makes hazardous effects extremely punitive. She should already take 2 dmg if hazardous is able to affect her and the marker (RP resolution and RPs gen’d action res), and swapping would likely boost that to 4 dmg from two additional Places. 

[eddy]

3 hours ago, Jordon said:

Decoys would suffer any affects during it's activation and pass those affects onto the real Colette after resolving

I dont want to see this. I guess this is incredibly stupid fluff wise like Perdita is shooting back at decoy and suddenly Colett on other side of board takes bullet from no where. If this was intendend why they did not use wording like "Collet can take action as if she was in place of decoy" Instead they use "target may take action" So all hazard effects shoul affect only decoy. Imo decoys shouldn be able to spend Colett resources, they just gain Colett stat card for duration of action. Whole once per activation stuff in game is not working properly and should be errated separately

[Jordon]

43 minutes ago, eddy said:

I dont want to see this. I guess this is incredibly stupid fluff wise like Perdita is shooting back at decoy and suddenly Colett on other side of board takes bullet from no where.

I guess the same could be said about Now You See Me. Fluff wise the attack is hitting an illusion but somehow Colette is still taking damage. 

This made more sense back in M2E when she placed in contact with a scheme marker and reduced the damage to 0. Right now it feels more of a retreat rather than hitting an illusion. 

[Jinn]

4 hours ago, PiersonsMuppeteer said:

Relationship between Colette and marker Colette is a two way street for permanent effects, like conditions, but not temporal or positional effects like engagement or auras. Otherwise, Colette can mostly ignore stun by just using triggers through the marker (seems overly strong to me) and the ability becomes an even weaker Ice Mirror in most cases (wording is so different that can’t be the case).

I also wouldn’t say that a Dove marker Colette has the summon token because you use Colette’s model/stat card to perform the interact, and she does not have a summon token. However, that specific interaction is certainly very open to interpretation.

She couldn't do that if it is a one way relationship, if the marker is treated as though it were her but not vice versa. If a Routine Performanced marker is an exact copy of her model then it would also copy a detrimental condition like Stunned, but if it triggered a defensive trigger that gave it stunned then Colette should have no reason to gain it, as she is not treated as though she were the target.

What makes no sense is if you are applying that sort of two way street logic (i.e. she actually does take hazardous and other effects that her decoys trigger) while also making a distinction based on position which has no rules basis. If they're considered to be literally the same model, which is required for this kind of damage to be put on the real Colette model, then by rules if a model is engaged it can't take projectile actions, even if one half of its base is not engaged (the decoy). If it's in an aura then only one part of its base is required to overlap the aura for it to apply the effect to the model. Worst of all the Shell Game trigger is referring to a model that exists in two places on the board, which allows for insane kidnapping range.

I don't like and strongly disagree with that interpretation, but it is the only one that makes sense for the position of Colette receiving any detrimental effects the obeyed decoy triggers.

[Thatguy]

I agree.

I get the 1 model in 2 places interpretation.
And while I don't like it I get the 2 separate models interpretation.
The 1 model and 1 projection that is that model in some cases and not in others, seems really hard for me to wrap my head around.

[PiersonsMuppeteer]

12 minutes ago, Jinn said:

She couldn't do that if it is a one way relationship, if the marker is treated as though it were her but not vice versa. If a Routine Performanced marker is an exact copy of her model then it would also copy a detrimental condition like Stunned, but if it triggered a defensive trigger that gave it stunned then Colette should have no reason to gain it, as she is not treated as though she were the target.

What makes no sense is if you are applying that sort of two way street logic (i.e. she actually does take hazardous and other effects that her decoys trigger) while also making a distinction based on position which has no rules basis. If they're considered to be literally the same model, which is required for this kind of damage to be put on the real Colette model, then by rules if a model is engaged it can't take projectile actions, even if one half of its base is not engaged (the decoy). If it's in an aura then only one part of its base is required to overlap the aura for it to apply the effect to the model. Worst of all the Shell Game trigger is referring to a model that exists in two places on the board, which allows for insane kidnapping range.

I don't like and strongly disagree with that interpretation, but it is the only one that makes sense for the position of Colette receiving any detrimental effects the obeyed decoy triggers.

Being “engaged” is entirely based on the position of the model, conditions already applied to a model are not. I’m saying the two way street exists except when considering maker Colette’s position. The big thing in my mind is that the ability says to use Colette’s stat card, so her current health definitely applies to the marker while RP is resolving.

[Thatguy]

13 minutes ago, PiersonsMuppeteer said:

I’m saying the two way street exists except when considering maker Colette’s position.

I guess the question is why. Why isn't Colette both where the Colette model is and where the target of RP is?
It seems to me Colette would be effected by engagement and auras as if she were in both positions. If you don't consider the marker's location to count, how could you draw range and LoS from it?