Immune to Slow, and Slow Stacking

[Mr_Smigs]

Popped into my head on the way to work...

Guild have those lovely models that "Remove Slow, and Make you immune to Slow...." (Drill Sgt IIRC)

Rules Manual says:

A model immune to or able to ignore X cannot be affected or modified by X when resolving the effect

but doesn't say you can't have X effect on the model. Just that it does not change the model... so secondary effects that are reliant on it (Alps) could, in theory, still affect the model...

1. If you have a "stack" of slows on the model, and they give this power, what happens?

2. If you have "immune to slow" and you activate around an alp, do you still test for slow?

3. If you have "immune to slow" and another model would put slow on you with an Effect, what happens?

[Hatchethead]

I suppose the only point of contention then is whether an Immune to Slow model:

Receives the Slow token but ignores the effects upon activation, thus making her susceptible to Smother and Feed on Dreams, also causing her to lose Fast when summoned into range of her Prey.

OR

Simply does not receive the token. Smother forces a Wp duel, sure, but so what? She can't receive Slow tokens. She still gains Fast if summoned close to Prey as no Slow token exists to negate it.

[Ciaran]

I suppose the only point of contention then is whether an Immune to Slow model:

Receives the Slow token but ignores the effects upon activation, thus making her susceptible to Smother and Feed on Dreams, also causing her to lose Fast when summoned into range of her Prey.

OR

Simply does not receive the token. Smother forces a Wp duel, sure, but so what? She can't receive Slow tokens. She still gains Fast if summoned close to Prey as no Slow token exists to negate it.

Okay, THAT sounds like a reasonable question.

You're not so bad after all....

[Hatchethead]

You're not so bad after all....

:peace:

[Mr_Smigs]

so, was there ever a decision/ruling on this?

[Golden]

But, as per the example given, and the current conversation, wouldn't the removal of a "Fast" token be a modification and a model with immunity is not subject to modifications from the stated ability?

[jmp_mydog]

I almost wonder if action mods (page 34) should officially be granted tokens with rules associated (as per page 19 of the RM). It seems this is how they are meant to be played, with multiple instances of Slow piling up or being removed by multiple applications of Fast. Same for Reactivate/Paralyze. Though it's somewhat rare to see multiple applications of anything, it's coming to a point where visual aids would be beneficial if only to track instances outside of activation.

New turn, add a Fast token to Perdita, removed when she chooses to spend her extra general AP. Flesh Construct, player opts to keep his control card, Franky is Dumb and gains a Slow token, removal of one or more indicates the Passing of a general AP. Shikome is summoned, add a Slow token? Nope. She's Immune. Near her Prey? Add a Fast token. You have a model suffering with three instances of Slow, gains a Fast? Still has two Slow tokens.

One less thing to keep track of in a game where keeping track of stuff is a full time job.

It would also go a long way toward differentiating "action modifiers" from "specific AP" (page 33) like Instinctual, Melee Expert, etc.

This is what I do when effects are granted. Put a Slow(Fast) or Spell Effect Marker down then there's no question during the game.

[Mr_Smigs]

This is what I do when effects are granted. Put a Slow(Fast) or Spell Effect Marker down then there's no question during the game.

but the question is, do you place the token in the first place.

"Clear token without resolving"

and "Do not place token" are two different things.

Immune doesn't clearly define which you do,

and since other rulings (the previously mentioned Slow "pile up") make it further unclear,

we're left with the basic question.

some Tokens (IE: Poison) clearly state you don't put more, but replace with max effect...

what does that mean for others?

[Mr_Smigs]

ok, given a link that recently popped up...

Ignore allows you to temporarily remove an ability from a card so you act as if it wasn't there. Eg Perdita can act as if Pandora didn't have Emotional Trauma on her card and shoot her without making a WP check.

Immune means you don't take the effects from the thing your immune to. EG. If I'm immune to Poison, I would just not take the counter.

ok, this ruling, which could've solved this off the bat if it had been somewhere handy...

basically covers that Immune doesn't "take" the "Slow" effect waiting to be resolved...

but...

does not cover most of the OP....

1. If you have a "pile" of slows on the model, and they give this power, what happens? (We've established, there's no resolve, but the slow pile, is it still there?)

2. If you have "immune to slow" and you activate around an alp, do you still test for slow? (For card-burning purposes)

[Q'iq'el]

I'd say that an immune model simply wouldn't be affected by Slow. It wouldn't test around Alps and Slow would never stack up on it. All the spells applying Slow would simply fizzle, if targeting such a model.

That'd be per analogy to how Immune to Influence works, I think.

[Mr_Smigs]

I'd say that an immune model simply wouldn't be affected by Slow. It wouldn't test around Alps and Slow would never stack up on it. All the spells applying Slow would simply fizzle, if targeting such a model.

That'd be per analogy to how Immune to Influence works, I think.

problem there is, Slow isn't causing the cards to be tested.

a different ability is causing the duel, and if the duel fails, then slow...

where does it say the spell auto-fizzles against Immune to Influence? (is this in the new definition, or the old?)

[Q'iq'el]

problem there is, Slow isn't causing the cards to be tested.

a different ability is causing the duel, and if the duel fails, then slow...

where does it say the spell auto-fizzles against Immune to Influence? (is this in the new definition, or the old?)

Writing from memory right now, but I believe the old definition was the spell couldn't even target the immune model. Now it fizzles.

It isn't all that different a case - if you cannot apply something to model it fails. A Rst:Wp spell will fail against ItI target at the initial stage of the duel. A spell or talent causing Slow (cast against model immune to Slow of course) would go all the way to the apply effects stage and then one of its effects (Slow) would fail.

There already has been a ruling (in other cases) that if you cannot apply one of the effects, the entire spell/talent fizzles.

[Mr_Smigs]

There already has been a ruling (in other cases) that if you cannot apply one of the effects, the entire spell/talent fizzles.

if you can find, please let me know... I'll be searching for this...

but, as established elsewhere (by you) A TALENT is not a SPELL. so it may follow different rulings...

[Q'iq'el]

if you can find, please let me know... I'll be searching for this...

but, as established elsewhere (by you) A TALENT is not a SPELL. so it may follow different rulings...

Forums are rather slow where I'm at the moment, so I can't use search effectively. But I remember the last argument when this issue appeared as it was quite relevant for me:

The question was about using Marcus' Alpha to control a Coryphée and then trying to Dance Together. The idea was, that since controlled models cannot summon, only the sacrifice part of the spell would be applied, thus destroying both of the opponent's Coryphée.

The ruling was that if one part of the talent/spell cannot be applied, for whatever reason, and thus fails, all the other effects fail as well.

I believe this is also spelled in the rules for applying effects. I'll look for page reference and post it later.

Edited October 31, 2011 by Q'iq'el

[Mr_Smigs]

so, did we ever find where an ability fizzles if the target is immune?

[Keltheos]

If a model cannot be affected by, or is immune to an Action Modifier that means the Modifier is not applied to the model. For example, a Shikome affected by Fast could not have the Fast negated by an application of Slow because it cannot be affected by Slow due to its Relentless Ability.

The above clarification does apply to the Alp’s Feed on Dreams Ability. A Slow model receiving Slow is affected by Feed on Dreams, and the current Slow is replaced by the new one. There is no conflict in how it is written and the Modifiers stacking ruling.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Keltheos

[Mr_Smigs]

very cool. thanks for the clarification!