Multiple Paralysis

[Mr_Smigs]

If multiple events place Paralysis on a target,

when their activation rolls around, are all the (-all) counters resolved at once,

or does one activation have to pass for each Paralysis?

[Headcase2]

Action modifiers don't stack with themselves. Only 1 paralysis applies.

[Mr_Smigs]

Action modifiers don't stack with themselves. Only 1 paralysis applies.

but they do "stack" according to the Slow stuff discussed elsewhere, they just don't all resolve...

but since

When you would activate a Paralyzed model you forfeit (skip) its activation. Skip it. It does not get one.

if you SKIP your activation,

you don't get one.

you don't resolve the effects.

which means the stack would remain (since the other discussion says Slow and the like resolves during the activation)

[Ciaran]

but they do "stack" according to the Slow stuff discussed elsewhere, they just don't all resolve...

but since

if you SKIP your activation,

you don't get one.

you don't resolve the effects.

which means the stack would remain (since the other discussion says Slow and the like resolves during the activation)

Stacking refers to when the effects are resolved. They don't stack, they wait to be resolved. There is a world of difference.

[Mr_Smigs]

Stacking refers to when the effects are resolved. They don't stack, they wait to be resolved. There is a world of difference.

ok, there are multiple ones "waiting to be resolved..."

since the collection of "waiting to be resolved" stuff is resoved on activation (according to the Slow/Fast commentary)

why, oh why, does all the paralysis (another AP modifier) resolve outside of the activation?

[Ciaran]

ok, there are multiple ones "waiting toit be resolved..."

since the collection of "waiting to be resolved" stuff is resoved on activation (according to the Slow/Fast commentary)

why, oh why, does all the paralysis (another AP modifier) resolve outside of the activation?

It doesn't. Paralized is resolved in lieu of the model activates, so can be be considered its activation. In fact if you Googled it there's a discussion of how that works.

[pgbsamurai]

The only reason slow "stacks" in the other conversation is because you are dealing with Alps which have wording on their cards stating that state that if a model could be effected by slow multiple times the Alp effect goes off. Normally Slow does not "stack".

Page 34 of RM specifically states, "Action modifiers with the same name do not stack."

So a model that is Paralyzed is effectively immune to further Paralyze effects while it is under the effect of Paralyze.

From the way I understand it, there is only two ways for a model to be affected by Paralyze twice in one turn.

1. Model A is Paralyzed. Model B then gives Model A Reactivate which cancels out Paralyzed and Reactivate, putting Model A back in it's normal state. Then Model C give Model A Paralyzed again.

2. Model A is Paralyzed. Model A "activates", thereby resolving the Paralyzed effect. (Model A doesn't actually activate, you just nominate Model A as your model to activate, and then it passes back to your opponent to activate a model. See this thread.) Then Model B Paralyzes Model A and Paralyze is resovled in the next turn.

[karn987]

The only reason slow "stacks" in the other conversation is because you are dealing with Alps which have wording on their cards stating that state that if a model could be effected by slow multiple times the Alp effect goes off. Normally Slow does not "stack".

Page 34 of RM specifically states, "Action modifiers with the same name do not stack."

So a model that is Paralyzed is effectively immune to further Paralyze effects while it is under the effect of Paralyze.

From the way I understand it, there is only two ways for a model to be affected by Paralyze twice in one turn.

1. Model A is Paralyzed. Model B then gives Model A Reactivate which cancels out Paralyzed and Reactivate, putting Model A back in it's normal state. Then Model C give Model A Paralyzed again.

2. Model A is Paralyzed. Model A "activates", thereby resolving the Paralyzed effect. (Model A doesn't actually activate, you just nominate Model A as your model to activate, and then it passes back to your opponent to activate a model. See this thread.) Then Model B Paralyzes Model A and Paralyze is resovled in the next turn.

Exactly correct, put it better then I was. The RM is crystal clear about this with page 34: "Action modifiers with the same name do not stack."

Edited September 16, 2011 by karn987
Edit: pg put it better

[Mr_Smigs]

The only reason slow "stacks" in the other conversation is because you are dealing with Alps which have wording on their cards stating that state that if a model could be effected by slow multiple times the Alp effect goes off. Normally Slow does not "stack".

whoa.... who mentioned alps here?

or in my other question about slow for that matter.

i'm asking purely about the application of the effects.

Page 34 of RM specifically states, "Action modifiers with the same name do not stack."

which i've been told is different than effects waiting resolution

1. Model A is Paralyzed. Model B then gives Model A Reactivate which cancels out Paralyzed and Reactivate, putting Model A back in it's normal state. Then Model C give Model A Paralyzed again.

2. Model A is Paralyzed. Model A "activates", thereby resolving the Paralyzed effect. (Model A doesn't actually activate, you just nominate Model A as your model to activate, and then it passes back to your opponent to activate a model. See this thread.) Then Model B Paralyzes Model A and Paralyze is resovled in the next turn.

and I thought similar back to Slow, but appearantly not.

[Mr_Smigs]

yep... googled it... got a link that requires an admin password...

[pgbsamurai]

@Mr_Smigs

Thought you were referencing this thread in your second post. What post were you referencing that talked about Slow stacking?

[Mr_Smigs]

pgbsamurai

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.

appearantly, a model isn't actually slow until their activation...

same with paralysis... (although that leaves me wondering about all the "can't take any actions, or triggers" part of paralysis...)

[pgbsamurai]

Another way to look at it is like this. Paralyze = -1, Normal = 0, and Reactivate = +1. You can never be higher than +1 and you can never be lower than -1. Same can be said for Slow and Fast. Slow = -1, Normal = 0 and Fast = +1. Again you can never be higher than +1 or lower than -1.

So it just becomes some basic math. Lets say Model A gets Reactivate put on it once and Paralyze put on it 3 times in a turn. It would look like so.

+1 -1 -1 -1 = -2, but you can't be lower than -1 so the last Paralyze just gets dropped. The Paralyze don't stack, the Reactivate and the Paralyze cancel each other out.

+1 -1 = 0, not +1 - 1 = +1-1

[Keltheos]

pgbsamurai

appearantly, a model isn't actually slow until their activation...

same with paralysis... (although that leaves me wondering about all the "can't take any actions, or triggers" part of paralysis...)

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

Paralyzed is applied to a model just like Slow, but it has effect on the model outside of its activation.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Keltheos

[pgbsamurai]

pgbsamurai

appearantly, a model isn't actually slow until their activation...

same with paralysis... (although that leaves me wondering about all the "can't take any actions, or triggers" part of paralysis...)

This is I think were you are getting mistaken. Yes, a model is not actually Slow until their Activation, but Slow only deals with AP within an Activation. Paralyze is for the whole activation, so you have to deal with it on the Turn level, not the Activation level.

[Mr_Smigs]

that's what I thought...

but not how it's being explained.

it appears that it's actually,

+1 - 1 = +1 -1 until activation, at which point it finally becomes 0...

[Keltheos]

Ah, I see what you're looking for.

Paralysis, or Slow, or Fast, or Reactivate stack with themselves on a model. HOWEVER only one of the stack ever resolves, the rest are ignored when they would resolve.

So, 3 Paralysis stacked = 1 Paralysis since they would all resolve at identical times (meaning simultaneously, not sequentially). That's where the 'same named effects do not stack' they exist on the model, but they are not resolved.

So, 3 Paralysis = 1 Paralysis, the rest vanish

3 Paralysis - 2 Reactivate = 1 Paralysis

3 Paralysis - 1 Reactivate = 1 Paralysis

Stacking 1000 Paralyzed on a model = a net result of a single activation lost.

[Mr_Smigs]

ok... so if an effect would remove Fast, Slow, Reactivate, or Paralysis... does it remove ALL of the same named effect? (as it "resolves" that effect with cancelation)

because the other thread has said, no. and claims the 1-for-1 exchange in the rule book justifies it.... this isn't really addressed, and so is kinda unclear...

[Keltheos]

It removes one instance.