Fast, Slow, Spellbreaker

[Mr_Smigs]

Ok,

if a model that is naturally Fast is hit with Slow it loses Fast right?

what happens if that model is then hit with Spellbreaker?

it doesn't have Slow... it just doesn't have Fast either...

[Keltheos]

Yes.

Autofast and slow cancel out before the activation.

Still has two slows stacked on it afterward.

Start of the model's activation one of the two remaining slows cancels out the fast and then the remaining slow is applied.

[Mr_Smigs]

Yes.

Autofast and slow cancel out before the activation.

Still has two slows stacked on it afterward.

Start of the model's activation one of the two remaining slows cancels out the fast and then the remaining slow is applied.

and a model with a "remove one effect per [suit]" it has to have one suit for each slow on it?

[Keltheos]

Correct.

So if Spellbreaker has two suits it can pull off those two slows before she activates she gets her Fast as normal when activated.

[Ciaran]

That makes sense. It also has the benefit of being consistent with the rules as written.

It IS almost like someone was paying attention when they were designing the game...

[Ciaran]

sadly, that's all blacked out in my copy...

That explains a lot.... the diagrams and examples do help create the total understanding of the rules.

[Mr_Smigs]

That explains a lot.... the diagrams and examples do help create the total understanding of the rules.

I guess i'm just confused about page 20's Stacking effects where it says an ongoing effect does not stack,

and that we should ignore additional applications of the same named effect to that model...

since, SLOW is not applied immediately (it waits until the model activates) doesn't that make it an Ongoing Effect?

similarly, since "action modifiers with the same name do not stack" (page 34) doesn't that also mean that you can't have multiples of the same action modifying effect?

why does it say the effects are removed in addition to canceling out?

for that matter

why does it say a model cannot be affected by both Fast and Slow at the same time,

when the explanation given above basically says "the model has both fast and slow until it activates"

[Ciaran]

Think of it as a buffer. The effects don't happen until there's a reason to clear that buffer. (hell, use slips of paper with the effect names written on them)

So, 17 Slows on a model before its activation? Sure, we'll use that as an example.

When that model activates ONE of them affects it, the rest are thrown away.

The model has Fast normally? One Slow takes the Fast effect away for that turn, another makes the model Slow for that turn, the rest are thrown away. Fast returns to the buffer, waiting for the next time the buffer is cleared, in order to add the effect the next time the model is activated.

The model was given Fast for that turn? One Slow counteracts Fast, they're both discarded. Another gives the model Slow for its activation, the rest are discarded.

Spellbreaker allows the model to discard two effects, before its activation? Two instances of Slow are removed from the buffer, the rest affect the model as normal.

The general rule is: Things don't affect a model until there's a reason to. If there's an effect that decreases Df it makes no sense to deal with it until it's being attacked. If something affects AP it doesn't matter, until AP's are being used. Etc...

What stacking means in the case is: 17 Slows reduces the model to 0 AP. That's what this system doesn't allow. That's the sort of ongoing affect that doesn't stack. (Specifically Slow never stacks, and that's been discussed quite a bit on these forums.) As "the stack" isn't created until it's necessary, it doesn't matter how many specific instances were added, until it's time to activate. That's how it looks like things are being added to the model before it activates. It's waiting for the model, and not resolved, until it's time to resolve it.

The Stacking Examples on the page make a lot of sense, and clear it up pretty well. A hard copy of the book is a good idea.

I didn't address the "Is Fast or Slow and Ongoing Effect?" Part of your questions. To be candid, I'm not sure, and I doubt it matters, as they're a known quality without that definition.

[Mr_Smigs]

ok, so back to shrug off...

if the excess is thrown away after the activation starts,

how many rams are needed to shrug off the slow?

if they're an ongoing effect, they would be ignored after the first.

if they're an instant effect, then they stack with other sources.

the definition between the two is important because if the Slow is "ongoing" then RAW, you ignore multiple instances, and thus a fast model will never suffer slow as they are not resolved until activation.

if they are instant effects, then the first application of Slow removes fast at the application (not the activation), and others can stack after (as you explain) but this means the "effect" of slow is applied immediately...

which brings us back to "if fast is removed because of slow, immediately, then does Spellbreaker bring back a removed effect"?

got a hard copy.

the example doesn't help, as it says the model immediately loses fast, and will get the -1ap on its activation,

lilith "loses" fast, not "will lose at her next activation"

implying the application of Fast/Slow is immediate, not a stack that hangs around.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Mr_Smigs

[Ciaran]

Only addressing Shrug Off as everything else was quite well explained in the ruling and explanation we were given a page ago. Coupled with the rules, and the example, it makes solid, logical sense.

First, as explained, the AP is lost at the model's activation. That would mean that Shrug Off wouldn't affect that. Second, why would you send an AP to try to gain an AP, coming out even in AP, and down in cards?

Edited September 16, 2011 by Ciaran
not sure why i have a wink there, certainly didn't mean to!

[Mr_Smigs]

Only addressing Shrug Off as everything else was quite well explained in the ruling and explanation we were given a page ago. Coupled with the rules, and the example, it makes solid, logical sense.

First, as explained, the AP is lost at the model's activation. That would mean that Shrug Off wouldn't affect that. Second, why would you send an AP to try to gain an AP, coming out even in AP, and down in cards?

hypothetically,

if you had a way to generate multiple suits on each casting and needed to burn off multiple negative effects.

additionally, because this clarification would carry over to other similar events,

such as a model being hit with Paralysis multiple times.. (Like Miranda spamming Covering Fire from a beast gunslinger)

[Ciaran]

It depends on when the effects are resolved. AP effects are resolved with the model activates, so no. Df effects are resolved when the model is attacked, so yes.

As was stated a couple of times, effects aren't resolved until they affect what's going on directly. That would mean that as long as the effect hasn't been resolved it can still be manipulated. The rest of these questions are very easily answered by working from that logic, as Goblyn explained.

[Mr_Smigs]

so...

basically, this means that if a model has multiple instances of "slow"

and we Obey it to have them Shrug it Off,

they'll most likely still be Slow because there are mulple "slow" counters on them waiting to resolve

and despite them all being the same named effect,

each is treated as a different effect,

and thus only some of them will be removed.

correct?

[Ciaran]

Yes. That sounds right. They're not resolved until that model activates, that would remove a specific amount of instances for that effect.

[Mr_Smigs]

A model is Slow, it just doesn't have any actual influence on the model's AP count until its activation.

A model is only assigned AP during its activation, therefore although it is Slow the -1 AP won't take effect until that point.

so... if the model is slow, before it's activation,

why does it get multiple stacks of slow?

(Alps special rule not included)

[Keltheos]

Slows stack, but do not resolve. The EFFECT of Slow (-1 AP) doesn't occur until the model activates.

[Mr_Smigs]

Slows stack, but do not resolve. The EFFECT of Slow (-1 AP) doesn't occur until the model activates.

whoa...

so, if a model is hit with "Slow" ... it's not an effect until activation?

so if a model has slow from a spell/ability, and is popped with Spellbreaker, it will not lose slow?

[Keltheos]

nope.

Sorry, forgot someone would use the word 'effect' against me.

Emphasized it to clarify that Slow is active on the model outside of its activation. What Slow does to the model doesn't occur until it activates.

[Q'iq'el]

Haha, sometimes it seems as if people read the rules hypertechnically, looking to catch some sort of contradiction or hidden conflict, as if doing so wins you a special prize from Wyrd.

This seems pretty straightforward:

Model A has Fast (from effect or ability).

X gives Model A Slow.

IF Y Spellbreaks or Dispels the Slow before Model A activates, then Model A should still have fast.

If not, then when Model A activates the Slow negates the Fast and Model A loses one AP that turn. Spellbreak or Dispel would not do anything because the Slow cancelled the Fast (effect or ability, it shouldn't matter).

I mean, rules are generally meant to work in a way that makes sense. If possible, avoid hypertechnical reading and just play the game in a manner that makes common sense.

The problem is this interpretation is all wrong. It may be simple, but it messes up the rules to no end.

According to the book, you are supposed to be able to apply Slow to a Fast model, and then apply it again to make it Slow. The effects do not stack, but according to the rules you can do it, because Slow and Fast cancel each other immediately.

But if they cancel each other only when the activation starts, then you never can cast the Slow twice, because it won't stack with the effect already on the model. This is not how this is supposed to work.

I can't recall any ability affecting Slow or Fast models right now, but if there is any, it'd be completely unusable in this "flux" state before the activation. It isn't supposed to be like that - models are either normal, Fast or Slow regardless of the point in time, when you check their status.

The answer doesn't make things simple, it makes them horribly difficult to untangle.

[nilus]

so...

basically, this means that if a model has multiple instances of "slow"

and we Obey it to have them Shrug it Off,

Can't Obey someone to use (0)Shrug Off.

Obey is only (1) actions or a Charge

[Q'iq'el]

nope.

Sorry, forgot someone would use the word 'effect' against me.

Emphasized it to clarify that Slow is active on the model outside of its activation. What Slow does to the model doesn't occur until it activates.

OK, the original question was about dispelling Slow though. So, the effect Slow, which causes the model to lose one General AP when it activates, can be dispelled before it activates, as it isn't applied immediately and is an ongoing effect on the model, active until the model forfeits that 1 AP?

I must say I'm a bit disturbed by the ruling Slow can stack. Before it was just a unique case where effects can cancel each other, so one could be reapplied. Now it is an exceptional effect allowed to stack. Never good to create exceptions, when there are better reasons for things to work that way.

Does that mean, if a minion has two or three cases of Slow on itself, you need to Dispel it three times to remove the effect? Or is one cast of dispelling spell enough to remove all three instances?) (because you declare the effect you want to remove and they all are the same effect).

[Akujie]

Oh the fun Rules Marshalls must have (hearts out to you all)

[Q'iq'el]

And more importantly, does it apply to other effects too?

Most buffs are (0) spells, but if I can cast twice, let's say, identical effect of Massive Dose from two nurses, can I thus protect it from Spellbreaker and such? (to the extent, that the opponent will have to dispel twice to remove the effect?

[Q'iq'el]

It doesn't stack. They're each unique instances of it, none are resolved until the model activates. The first would take away fast (assuming the model has fast) the second would make the model slow, any others are discarded.

It's the same as any other condition that adds effects to any model in the game, at any point. They exist as a potential until there's a reason to resolve it. At that point they affect the model, hence are called effects.

RAW, and it seems RAI, before the model activates it takes separate dispels to get rid of the instances of Slow. Once the model has activated, it's Slowed, and the effects apply as has been discussed ad nauseam.

This exact logic works throughout the game as explained. It's pretty elegant.

I see how it works, but it really is a sneaky change of one of the most basic mechanics:

Before: Effects don't stack, which means If you apply a new instance of the same effect, it just replaces the old instance on the card.

Now: Effects don't stack, which means you always apply the results of a single instance of the same effect on the model, but there may be many instances of the effect on the model.

All good and great, but you see what it does to dispelling mechanic? And to spells applying effects? Before it made no sense to apply effect twice, because there still would be only one instance of the effect on the target.

Now I can activate Lost in Dance on both Coryphée, Dance Together and have two instances of Lost in Dance on the Coryphée Duet. Useless in terms of effect, because only 1 will count, but a protection from dispeling mechanics, because now opponent has to dispel two effects to get rid of them.

And perhaps we can stack instances of less useful effects on the top of the ones we want to protect, so that they don't get removed?

Same with Massive Dose I've quoted in my previous posts.

It really strikes me as a very far reaching change to explain something which isn't really all that important or difficult.

It'd be much easier to say:

Fast & Slow are abilities and if they were applied by spell, they are effects. If model has one of those only, as an effect, it can be removed until the model activates. At the moment of activation it either adds 1 General AP or forces the model to forfeit one General AP and it goes away.

If model with Fast effect/ability receives Slow or vice versa, they cancel each other immediately and there's no effect on the model, till the end of its next activation, thus nothing can be removed.

The only quirky area here is that we have "no effect" status with duration attached to it, which isn't how that normally works. But that is a small exception that has already been allowed for by the Slow and Fast rules and that's how everybody played it.

Instead here comes a ruling that really puts a question mark on how we play the entire ruleset.

Edited September 17, 2011 by Q'iq'el

[Ciaran]

Q: I see your point.

It's a shame that this whole thing might have been a bunch of people trying to deal with one set of repeated inane questions :/

I think I'm going to have to think this through before I come up with so much as an opinion on it. I can't imagine what the Rules Marshals are going through

[Ciaran]

Yes, that's exactly what it means, at least in the explanation Keltheos gives in the other thread a bit earlier.

Thinking back through the Rules Manual, and the rulings made since the RM came out, this makes a LOT more sense. It's a bit of the unifying theory that solidifies how everything should have been working. It might well explain why some things didn't quite make sense before.