Quick executioner question

[Smokey616]

But how can that be so? Snow hasn't been taken off the board when exe gets his STD, otherwise he would have his wounds back. So he gets to strike snow?

[Akujie]

A battle of Two Executioners (Ex1 and Ex2) (Compliments og Goblyn)

• Ex1 attacks
  
• Ex1 deals enough damage to ex2 to bring executioner 2 to 0 wounds.
  
  • Ex2 triggers StD (lol)
    
  • Ex2 attacks and deals enough damage to Ex1 to bring Ex1 to 0 Wounds
    
  • Ex1 triggers StD
    
    • Ex1 Attacks again doing nothing, Ex2 is already at 0 wounds
      
    • Ex2's state is checked
      
    • Ex2 is killed and removed from the game
      
      • Ex1 triggers LtJ
        
      • Ex1 Heals to full completing LtJ
        

      [*]Ex1 Attack is complete

    [*]Ex1's StD is complete

    [*]State Check on Ex1

    [*]Ex2's attack is complete

    [*]Ex2's StD is complete

Ok, so the STD action can target the model on the board, but will fail because the model is at 0 wounds, but will cause that model to check its status BEFORE executioner checks his status.

[Smokey616]

Why though, just because someone is on 0 wd, can you not hit them again? Playing this ruling makes logical the tactic of walking to to your enemy and just waiting for him to hit you. Kinda strange that these two rampaging beasts should really just stand circling each other.

[Akujie]

right, which is why they ruled A lives and B dies. Strike first and you win wait for them to strike you and you lose. It makes the most sense I think, why punish them for taking an action when they have the exact same ability (STD) that the target has.

[Smokey616]

So I suppose a simple way of remembering then is; last one to use STD is resolved first. The old mtg ccg mantra "last in first out"

[Ratty]

OK

Quote:

A battle of Two Executioners (Ex1 and Ex2) (Compliments og Goblyn)

• Ex1 attacks
  
• Ex1 deals enough damage to Ex2 to bring Ex2 to 0 wounds.
  
  • Ex2 triggers StD (lol)
    
  • Ex2 attacks and deals enough damage to Ex1 to bring Ex1 to 0 Wounds
    
  • Ex1 triggers StD
    
    • Ex1 Attacks again doing nothing, Ex2 is already at 0 wounds
      
    • Ex2's state is checked
      
    • Ex2 is killed and removed from the game
      
      • Ex1 triggers LtJ
        
      • Ex1 Heals to full completing LtJ
        

      [*]Ex1Attack is complete

    [*]Ex1's StD is complete

    [*]State Check on Ex1

    [*]Ex2's attack is complete

    [*]Ex2's StD is complete

Ok, so the STD action can target the model on the board, but will fail because the model is at 0 wounds, but will cause that model to check its status BEFORE executioner checks his status.

Was written quite a while before the Rules Manual. It's no longer completely correct.

It should actually break down as follows..

• Ex1 attacks
  
• Ex1 deals enough damage to ex2 to bring executioner 2 to 0 wounds.
  
  • Ex2 triggers StD
    
  • Ex2 take StD Action. attacking and deals enough damage to Ex1 to bring Ex1 to 0 Wounds
    
    • Ex1 triggers StD
      
    • Ex1 take StD Action. Attacking and doing nothing as Ex2 is already at 0 wounds
      
    • Ex1's StD Action is complete
      
    • Ex1's state is checked
      
    • Ex1 is killed and removed from the game
      
      • Ex2 triggers LtJ
        
      • Ex2 Heals to full completing LtJ
        

      [*]Ex1's StD resolved.

    [*]Ex2's StD Action is complete

    [*]Ex2's state is checked

    [*]Ex2 has gained Wds so does not die.

    [*]Ex2 StD resolved

So the important things to note are this.

1. When a model is killed and has Slow to Die, the moment of death is postponed while it takes a (1) Action.
   
2. Only when a Slow to Die model completes it's (1) Action do you check to see if it still is marked for death.
   
3. If Slow to Die comes into effect, the action that caused it is interrupted. You complete the (1) Action and Check the models state (removing it as dead if necessary) before restarting the action.
   

Edited September 23, 2011 by Ratty

[Stern]

OK

Was written quite a while before the Rules Manual. It's no longer completely correct.

It should actually break down as follows..

• Ex1 attacks
  
• Ex1 deals enough damage to ex2 to bring executioner 2 to 0 wounds.
  
  • Ex2 triggers StD
    
  • Ex2 take StD Action. attacking and deals enough damage to Ex1 to bring Ex1 to 0 Wounds
    
    • Ex1 triggers StD
      
    • Ex1 take StD Action. Attacking and doing nothing as Ex2 is already at 0 wounds
      
    • Ex1's StD Action is complete
      
    • Ex1's state is checked
      
    • Ex1 is killed and removed from the game
      
      • Ex2 triggers LtJ
        
      • Ex2 Heals to full completing LtJ
        

      [*]Ex1's StD resolved.

    [*]Ex2's StD Action is complete

    [*]Ex2's state is checked

    [*]Ex2 has gained Wds so does not die.

    [*]Ex2 StD resolved

So the important things to note are this.

1. When a model is killed and has Slow to Die, the moment of death is postponed while it takes a (1) Action.
   
2. Only when a Slow to Die model completes it's (1) Action do you check to see if it still is marked for death.
   
3. If Slow to Die comes into effect, the action that caused it is interrupted. You complete the (1) Action and Check the models state (removing it as dead if necessary) before restarting the action.
   

Thanks for the clear breakdown... nice to know we have been playing it right

[Smokey616]

Thanks for the clear breakdown... nice to know we have been playing it right

But then, by that logic, it does make perfect tactical sense to walk into melee range and not attack! Jus stand there and wait for them to hit you because in hitting first your inviting death! Doesn't seem to make sense. Would make more sense to reward the aggressive playstyle that the executioner begs for

[Sliver Chocobo]

But then, by that logic, it does make perfect tactical sense to walk into melee range and not attack! Jus stand there and wait for them to hit you because in hitting first your inviting death! Doesn't seem to make sense. Would make more sense to reward the aggressive playstyle that the executioner begs for

Unles your opponent has another model next to the executioner, or your on enough Wd not to die in one hit

[Cadilon]

But then, by that logic, it does make perfect tactical sense to walk into melee range and not attack! Jus stand there and wait for them to hit you because in hitting first your inviting death! Doesn't seem to make sense. Would make more sense to reward the aggressive playstyle that the executioner begs for

Personally, this is my problem with it too. The game, IMHO, should favor the risk taker and the player taking action. In this case, that should be Ex1.

In defense, I think it's just a quirk in an otherwise solid system. I am lazy and haven't taken the time to walk this through every model and situation, but my sense is that to change this it'd have adverse ripple effects throughout the system.

[Q'iq'el]

Personally, this is my problem with it too. The game, IMHO, should favor the risk taker and the player taking action. In this case, that should be Ex1.

The very purpose of Slow to Die is to make attacking that model risky.

Taking risk rewards you every time you attack a normal model. But if the model is Slow to Die, it will hit back (bar exceptional self-healing cases) and you'll be exposed.

I'd say it fits the system perfectly, that in case of Slow to Die models attacking them while at low health is detrimental to the attacker.

[Akujie]

Yeah except the previous ruling basicly went (yeah executioners STD and LTJ trump your one ability), now any one of several abilities will trump BOTH LTJ and the executioners STD.

But Im looking it at a ruling within only this context, Im guessing the problem that could be created is the precedent of attacking a model at 0 wounds could open a can of worms.

Well not pleased by the answer, but glad it was answered, thanks for taking the time to address it ratty.

[Cadilon]

The very purpose of Slow to Die is to make attacking that model risky.

Taking risk rewards you every time you attack a normal model. But if the model is Slow to Die, it will hit back (bar exceptional self-healing cases) and you'll be exposed.

I'd say it fits the system perfectly, that in case of Slow to Die models attacking them while at low health is detrimental to the attacker.

I am not understanding these threads' obsession with Slow to Die. I am seeing little support given for preserving the intent of Love the Job from an attacker's standpoint. StD is a great ability. But LtJ is a more defining characteristic of the Executioner. LtJ applies every time a model is killed, whether StD is involved or not. The tone of all these conversations seem to imply that StD is a prerequisite for LtJ, but its not. Its just a happy interaction of the two abilities.

I understand what you are saying about the threat of attacking a model with StD; and with every other model out there I'd agree with you. But LtJ should still count for something for the attacker is such situations.

Here is my difficulty in a nutshell: The Ex has killed a model. That model is dead and (in 99% of cases) is not coming back. All the requirements of LtJ on the Ex's end have been met. Why does application of LtJ then hinge on whether that dying model can also strike back and kill the Ex? The requirements of LtJ have been met, period.

I appreciate the conversation regarding this. Frankly, I've tried to let this go but each time it comes up it needles me a little more. Its the one burr under my saddle, so to speak, in this game. I do understand that things aren't always going to work like one "thinks they should" in a system as complex as this. I just appreciate being heard on the matter.

[Q'iq'el]

Here is my difficulty in a nutshell: The Ex has killed a model. That model is dead and (in 99% of cases) is not coming back. All the requirements of LtJ on the Ex's end have been met. Why does application of LtJ then hinge on whether that dying model can also strike back and kill the Ex? The requirements of LtJ have been met, period.

The requirements for LtJ are not killing the model, but removing it from play.

They are not met if the model is not removed from play.

Also, I think you exaggerate the issue. Against most models in the game LTJ gives very clear advantage - they must have enough Wd to survive Executioner attacks if they want to go in, and he can heal up whenever he goes in.

Against another Executioner it doesn't really matter which way it goes - it's LTJ vs LTJ so one side has to give in.

Against models with ability to damage the opponent when being killed (either some pulse or attack through StD) the Executioner still is an intimidating target to attack - when these models go in, they still may get hit and killed in return, healing the Executioner.

Only when he attacks such a model, his LTJ becomes useless.

I think it is perfect solution. Executioner is a hard hitting self-healing model, difficult to kill and a juggernaut when on the offensive. He has to watch for the traps though, which makes it more interesting.

[Cadilon]

I think it is perfect solution. Executioner is a hard hitting self-healing model' date=' difficult to kill and a juggernaut when on the offensive. He has to watch for the traps though, which makes it more interesting.[/quote']

Points well taken.

[Akujie]

I suppose so, I guess bright side is, if he isn't killed by there STD/explosion/etc. then he will be at full life when the enemy croaks, thus negating their ability in some sense with LTJ

[dgraz]

I think it is perfect solution. Executioner is a hard hitting self-healing model, difficult to kill and a juggernaut when on the offensive. He has to watch for the traps though, which makes it more interesting.

I agree with this assessment.

[Oshova]

The last few times I've played against an Executioner I have used a simple tactic to avoid this kind of problem from coming up. Namely shooting the living daylights out of it before it gets within a moderate threat range.

But on topic, I'm of the opinion that StD should cause the StD-ing model to be removed from play after finishing the action. And I honestly thought that was how it worked until the first time I played against Von Schill . . . in a GT . . . There was a little bit of quiet outrage and frustration on my part. Especially as a Resser player, who uses StD day in, day out.

Oshova

[Therapist]

I agree. My initial assumption, long long ago after reading the rules and before discovering the forums, was that slow to die menat you were dead and even LtJ couldnt save you. You could heal but you were already dead so you were still gone. After all, how can you take your slow to die action if you weren't dead?

How wrong that was.

[Smokey616]

So in that light shouldnt LtJ be called likes the job

[Akujie]

Therapist, yeah but you can heal off slow to die and not be dead. SS healing flips for those lucky enough to have STD and use SS, LTJ for exec on a STD...so you arn't really that dead

[Dracomax]

Therapist, yeah but you can heal off slow to die and not be dead. SS healing flips for those lucky enough to have STD and use SS, LTJ for exec on a STD...so you arn't really that dead

I guess He was just mostly dead...Where's Miracle Max when you need him?

[Fetid Strumpet]

If you play Ressers what are you using to shoot the living Daylights out of an Executioner with?

[Q'iq'el]

If you play Ressers what are you using to shoot the living Daylights out of an Executioner with?

Hans? Convict Gunslinger?

I guess you'll find some ranged attacks among Rezzer models too - Decay, Flintlock, Cave In, Guild Autopsies even bring some guns.

And if you Paralyze someone, he doesn't get StD action either and Rezzers are good at Paralyzing stuff.

[Akujie]

Also ton of ressers have STD, so use this thread, wear him down and kill him on a STD, or blitz him with something that can survive his one STD hit.