Unclean Influence

[James Dyson]

When Hamelin uses Unclean Influence effecting X Malifaux Rats, and the first rat chooses to use Tangle Together, what happens to the rest of the generated actions?

A- lost due to the rats being replaced into the Rat King, or 

B - the Rat King can now take X-1 actions, as the generated actions are carried over into the Rat King.

I can't find a clear definition of 'lasting game effects'.

[Azahul]

5 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I think this is the point of difference, in that the rules actually say a model may only declare one bonus per activation.

There's nothing that makes you 'get' a bonus action to spend.

But I think that's probably just an unresolvable difference, though it does also point to how fragile the replace rules are. And doesn't address all the other once per activation issues that will arise from not transferring them.

The Replace rules don't refer to Action Limits either, so this reading is starting to become so ungenerous that you could pretend Clause 7 does nothing at all and you could happily refresh your actions entirely on every Replace. I can't see any reason a Bonus Action would be treated differently to an Action.

I agree that it doesn't necessarily address the once per activation limitations (or at least that the wording is much more ambiguous), but thus far the most egregious effect is allowing a model to charge, replace, charge, which doesn't strike me as distorting the rules all that much. Probably less of a distortion than Unclean Influence allowing AP to transfer to Kings to be honest.

[Maniacal_cackle]

26 minutes ago, Azahul said:

I agree that it doesn't necessarily address the once per activation limitations (or at least that the wording is much more ambiguous), but thus far the most egregious effect is allowing a model to charge, replace, charge, which doesn't strike me as distorting the rules all that much. Probably less of a distortion than Unclean Influence allowing AP to transfer to Kings to be honest.

I think it is a bigger distortion, rules wise, but the main thing I'm interested in is establishing if that's how it works.

It does start to unlock things - for instance, now if you agree that Once Per Activation/turn doesn't apply, Myranda can use replace tricks to stack upgrades twice as fast, making her the only model in the crew that can have four upgrades by turn 2.

[Azahul]

5 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I think it is a bigger distortion, rules wise, but the main thing I'm interested in is establishing if that's how it works.

It does start to unlock things - for instance, now if you agree that Once Per Activation/turn doesn't apply, Myranda can use replace tricks to stack upgrades twice as fast, making her the only model in the crew that can have four upgrades by turn 2.

I'll note that I don't know if I agree that Once Per limitations do or don't carry over. I haven't dug into the rules all that deeply. All I am confident of is that bonus actions don't carry over regardless of how you read Clause 4.

I'm assuming upgrade stacking on Myranda is a Marcus2 thing? I can't think of a way to do it in Marcus1.

[Maniacal_cackle]

Just now, Azahul said:

I'll note that I don't know if I agree that Once Per limitations do or don't carry over. I haven't dug into the rules all that deeply. All I am confident of is that bonus actions don't carry over regardless of how you read Clause 4.

I'm assuming upgrade stacking on Myranda is a Marcus2 thing? I can't think of a way to do it in Marcus1.

Yeah, Marcus 2.

Also it'll unlock multi-charging with her blade rush, mobile warrior, and charge through abilities which is pretty huge.

[Azahul]

2 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Yeah, Marcus 2.

Also it'll unlock multi-charging with her blade rush, mobile warrior, and charge through abilities which is pretty huge.

Sure, if it ends up being decided that it works that way. Though not as huge as Unclean Influence stacking for Hamelin1.

[Maniacal_cackle]

1 minute ago, Azahul said:

Sure, if it ends up being decided that it works that way. Though not as huge as Unclean Influence stacking for Hamelin1.

Well, I'll reiterate my previous position - the most reasonable way to block the Unclean Influence interaction is just to say "no, that's dumb, not allowing it on reasonableness grounds."

Rather than trying to block it with the rules xD

[Azahul]

3 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Well, I'll reiterate my previous position - the most reasonable way to block the Unclean Influence interaction is just to say "no, that's dumb, not allowing it on reasonableness grounds."

Rather than trying to block it with the rules xD

To be honest yes, I'm happy to do that. Besides this new Winged Plague thing is more than enough compensation for Hamelin 

[Maniacal_cackle]

The big issue for all of these though is if Wyrd does an FAQ, they need to ensure they avoid these side effects.

[Maniacal_cackle]

Ugh, another thing that will come up if you restrict it to effects that target or select the model.

There's a difference between target (noun) and target (verb) in the game... So, since the replace rules use the verb form, things with a noun target won't transfer over either?

That creates another mess.

Just listing this stuff here in case Wyrd takes notice. I hope it'll just be some errata to clarify and clean up, rather than an FAQ that breaks more things.

[PiersonsMuppeteer]

14 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Ugh, another thing that will come up if you restrict it to effects that target or select the model.

There's a difference between target (noun) and target (verb) in the game... So, since the replace rules use the verb form, things with a noun target won't transfer over either?

That creates another mess.

Just listing this stuff here in case Wyrd takes notice. I hope it'll just be some errata to clarify and clean up, rather than an FAQ that breaks more things.

That is leading back to the argument that no effect targets (verb), which leaves either effects that affect a target (noun) do target (verb) or the entire clause of the new model becoming the target is ignored and you transfer all effects.

[Maniacal_cackle]

2 minutes ago, PiersonsMuppeteer said:

That is leading back to the argument that no effect targets (verb), which leaves either effects that affect a target (noun) do target (verb) or the entire clause of the new model becoming the target is ignored and you transfer all effects.

xD as i said, a thorny issue.

Just wanting to list out some of the specifics.

[Saviouress]

Not sure how Wyrd uses their forums, but I upvoted the original question/thread to improve visibility.

The only thing I miss about playing Warmachine was the Infernals, that gave you official rulings in the forum. Instead of arguing endlessly and hoping Wyrd answers your questions once a year.