New Rules FAQ/Errata Website Discussion Thread

[Keltheos]

A place to discuss the updated Rules page on Malifaux.com.

Model Clarifications

Clarifications and Erratas

FAQ

Edited June 1, 2012 by Ratty

[edonil]

Right

[Seregon]

Now, this might just be me misunderstanding things as a new Malifaux player; but I find the Executioner vs Executioner example to make no sense.

Why is the attacking player penalized in the Slow to Die / Love the Job example? In this case, if both of the Executioners were low on wounds, none of the players would want to activate and attack the other Executioner since they'd then be in risk of not only suffering a Slow to Die action, but somehow having the defending player having their model being healed to full wounds and quite possibly their activation still remaining.

It seems wierd to promote a "pass" or "move" action instead of a "strike" when the two models are already engaged.

Though there may be some sound reasoning for this that I've just missed..

[Mydnight]

Now, this might just be me misunderstanding things as a new Malifaux player; but I find the Executioner vs Executioner example to make no sense.

Why is the attacking player penalized in the Slow to Die / Love the Job example? In this case, if both of the Executioners were low on wounds, none of the players would want to activate and attack the other Executioner since they'd then be in risk of not only suffering a Slow to Die action, but somehow having the defending player having their model being healed to full wounds and quite possibly their activation still remaining.

It seems wierd to promote a "pass" or "move" action instead of a "strike" when the two models are already engaged.

Though there may be some sound reasoning for this that I've just missed..

I believe the example is just that, an example. It's intended to show order of operations, and the way in which things resolve. As you noticed it probably isn't the best strategy to take.

[Cadilon]

Now, this might just be me misunderstanding things as a new Malifaux player; but I find the Executioner vs Executioner example to make no sense.

Why is the attacking player penalized in the Slow to Die / Love the Job example? In this case, if both of the Executioners were low on wounds, none of the players would want to activate and attack the other Executioner since they'd then be in risk of not only suffering a Slow to Die action, but somehow having the defending player having their model being healed to full wounds and quite possibly their activation still remaining.

It seems wierd to promote a "pass" or "move" action instead of a "strike" when the two models are already engaged.

Though there may be some sound reasoning for this that I've just missed..

I've philosophically disagreed with the outcome of this ruling for some time. But in my case, replace the defending Executioner with an exploding Electrical Creation and the scenario is not so far fetched. Just seems fundamentally unfair to me that the defending model gets to use its 'dying' action but the attacker does not.

Having said that, Wyrd obviously strives to maintain and shore up the fundamental foundations of their rules system. If having a couple of weird rules outliers like this is the price we have to pay for a more solid system all around, I am happy to accept that.

[dgraz]

Having said that, Wyrd obviously strives to maintain and shore up the fundamental foundations of their rules system. If having a couple of weird rules outliers like this is the price we have to pay for a more solid system all around, I am happy to accept that.

Quoted For Truth.

[dunce002917]

Love it especially the clear pictures and careful explanations on the clarifications page. This will be very help as we bring more people into the wonderful world of malifaux. I very much like the shikome and Stitched Changes. The Faq very solid and cleared up some points that we had argued in the past.

I love the simplicity of poison not giving credit to anyone for a kill. Very simple elegant and how my group has been playing it.

@rancor709 I guess the next episode of Cheated Fates Radio will cover these new development.

I still find the Executioner vs Executioner a bit funny... I guess in this case, the guy who shot first ends up dead... so in a way the attacking Executioner got Greedo'd... hehehe... while purists would argue the (Han shot first result) Defending Executioner should have died - since the attacking Executioner should have benefited from Love the Job but hey... it's an example... perhaps a debate topic on the Malifaux podcasts..

[Mach_5]

Really great to see!

If I could make one request, it'd be that a few of the model-specific FAQs be moved to the Model Clarifications document. Specifically, the Gamble Your Life FAQ, Pacify/Incite FAQ, and the Dreamer/LCB FAQ. In fact these seem to be perfectly suited for the heading "Note" within the Model Clarifications document.

[GrAYFoX]

Great work on the FAQ, Errata and Fixes. I'm very pleased with the changes as a whole.

Q. Can a model kill or sacrifice itself?

A. Yes. Unless the Talent/Spell causes a fixed number of wounds and those wounds would drop the model to 0 Wounds.

Having followed the Malifaux Rules Discussion forum closely, I have seen the last two rulings for models being able to kill/sac themselves and I'm a little unsure about the current wording.

Can models take actions with variable fixed damage profiles such as jumping off a HT3+ building or the Dg flip result from the Dumb luck trigger when even Weak Dg would result in the model being killed (Black Joker not withstanding)? What about actions that cause no wounds but sacrifice a model such as Drain Souls on a Master?

Cheers.

[Turbodog]

Outstanding question not in model clarifications or damage resolution....

Where does the Guardian's Protect Spell fit in?

My current thought (not necessarily correct) is that it fits in AFTER step 6 of damage resolution...as wounds are being applied to the model, after all other reductions/triggers/etc. and then puts the guardian IN at the wound conversion step (so the guardian can't use it's own armor to further reduce wounds).

In the case of a protect chain, the wounds then get (potentially) reduced by wound reducing effects then get again to step 6 where at the end protect kicks in. Key here is that if Hoffman is in the middle of the protect chain he could reduce wounds from protect with a soulstone flip before passing them along the chain.

Or am I wrong and protect kicks in at another point?

[Ratty]

Outstanding question not in model clarifications or damage resolution....

Where does the Guardian's Protect Spell fit in?

My current thought (not necessarily correct) is that it fits in AFTER step 6 of damage resolution...as wounds are being applied to the model, after all other reductions/triggers/etc. and then puts the guardian IN at the wound conversion step (so the guardian can't use it's own armor to further reduce wounds).

In the case of a protect chain, the wounds then get (potentially) reduced by wound reducing effects then get again to step 6 where at the end protect kicks in. Key here is that if Hoffman is in the middle of the protect chain he could reduce wounds from protect with a soulstone flip before passing them along the chain.

Or am I wrong and protect kicks in at another point?

You get to the point where you would apply Wounds, but instead of causing them you move them over to the Guardian. As they are applied as Wd not Dg, you would skip to that step and therefore you would not get Armour.

[Turbodog]

You get to the point where you would apply Wounds, but instead of causing them you move them over to the Guardian..

Okay...so is "apply wounds" HERE:

3. Convert the inflicted damage total into wounds. If wounds were being inflicted

instead of damage, begin here instead of Step 1.

---->Interrupt initial target resolution and pass wounds on to Guardian.

===========================================================================

Or do you mean here:

5. The model suffers any wounds remaining.

------->Interrupt initial target resolution and pass wounds immediatley to Guardian HERE.

Sorry, I'm a bit thick tonight I guess.

Also when the Guardian "takes" those wounds...is he HERE:

Guardian Proceeds to:

4. Apply wound reduction.

First, any Characteristics or Abilities which reduce wounds

do so now.

a.

Then, any Triggers which occur when inflicting wounds

occur now.

b.

A model able to Use Soulstones may now spend one to

prevent wounds.

i. First, the model spends one Soulstone.

Then, the model performs a Wound Prevention Flip. If any

wounds remain, continue on to Step 5, if no wounds

remain, skip to Step 6.

ii.

c.

5. The model suffers any wounds remaining.

First, reduce the model’s current Wounds by the number of

wounds it has suffered.

Any Triggers which occur after inflicting one or

more damage/wounds occur now.

i.

a.

Then, if the model has been reduced to 0 Wounds check to

see if it is Killed.

First, any Triggers which occur when the model is

reduced to 0 Wd occur now.

i.

Then, any Abilities which occur when the model

is reduced to 0 Wd occur now.

ii.

Finally, if the model now has more than 0

Wounds remaining it remains on the table and is

not Killed. If it has 0 Wounds remaining it is

Killed.

iii.

b.

6. Any Triggers which occur after resolving damage/wounds occur now.

=================================================================

Or is he HERE:

Guardian become the recipient of wounds and...

5. The model suffers any wounds remaining.

First, reduce the model’s current Wounds by the number of

wounds it has suffered.

Any Triggers which occur after inflicting one or

more damage/wounds occur now.

i.

a.

Then, if the model has been reduced to 0 Wounds check to

see if it is Killed.

First, any Triggers which occur when the model is

reduced to 0 Wd occur now.

i.

Then, any Abilities which occur when the model

is reduced to 0 Wd occur now.

ii.

Finally, if the model now has more than 0

Wounds remaining it remains on the table and is

not Killed. If it has 0 Wounds remaining it is

Killed.

iii.

b.

6. Any Triggers which occur after resolving damage/wounds occur now.

Thanks oh so much for quick response!

[Distaff]

A quick suggestion for the (exhaustive!) companion clarification. Make it expressly clear whether or not one model with companion can form companion pairs with multiple models with the required characteristics. None of the examples show this, but it was my understanding that it was allowed.

For example:

Model Y has Companion(Showgirl), Models X and Z have the characteristic Showgirl and are both within 6 inches of Y.

X ------Y------Z

X, Y ,and Z can activate simultaneously, correct?

[nilus]

X, Y ,and Z can activate simultaneously, correct?

Yes

[Sholto]

It looks like models with Assimilate (eg. Lazarus) cannot Assimilate Use Soulstone from a Master/ Henchman, as Use Soulstone is not printed on their card.

[magicpockets]

The rules manual says all Masters are to be classed as having Use Soulstone on their card

[Sholto]

The rules manual says all Masters are to be classed as having Use Soulstone on their card

Unless you can find a different quote, what the RM (pg.14) says is:

All Masters and Henchmen have the Use Soulstones Ability unless otherwise noted in their descriptions

[magicpockets]

I think the issue is that you are seeing the effect as sitting on the Pale Rider. The Effect from Auras sits on the model that the aura is on. IE the Guardian has an aura, with a defined end time, the resolve effect phase. If a model comes into the area of the aura they gain Armor +2, when they leave the aura they lose the Armor +2, they can't have it as there is no effect on the Pale Rider and it's not in the aura of the Guardians effect.

Sorry to come back to this late Alex, been hammered at work.

By the definition of an effect it would be an effect on the Pale Rider (btw, I get the intent but just pointing out the wording doesn't support it). from the rules, an effect meets all of the following criteria:

It is generated during an Encounter - the armour+2 is generated during the encounter

It sits 'on' a model - the armour +2 sits on the Pale Rider

Has a defined end time - it would end at the end closing phase

So I think that would mean it's an effect on the Rider and therefore wouldn't end when it left the aura. Perhaps the rule for auras should state that effects gained within aura's end once you leave the aura - but this ability certainly should.

Also, can I bump these for confirmation -

========

Kill Yourself

========

So this has changed again? Now Masters can Drain Souls on themselves and sacrifice themselves (Ramos/Hamelin) and we're back that models can kill themselves with certain DG? Also, this seems to now preclude that the chance of a spell going off doesn't matter - if it theoretically could go off you can't do it?

============

Hamelin and Crew

============

As we've now had a full model errata, can we assume there will be no other foreseeable changes to Hamelin and his crew? It would be cool to know that so people know whether to learn to play against him or if we have imminent changes which tone him down (I'm not saying if he needs them, just asking if they're coming)

^^ Re Hamelin, I know it was intimated that changes were coming, but with Book 4 and GenCon upcoming are they going to get to us soon? I'd guess they'll come in with aHamelin (who is hopefully toned down too), but it's almost impossible to know what you guys are planning

I'm just sick of not being able to play Hamelin without getting complaints because everyone is expecting huge changes and sees playing him right now as effectively cheating...

[Shawn Kehoe]

Regarding the new Bury rule that existing effects on buried models will resolve at their usual times:

Am I correct that this eliminates the old tactic / exploit of leaving a model buried during the end step to keep buffs from expiring and avoid negative consequences from effects like Burn Out or Massive Dose?

[Finnegan]

Yep, that was one of the main reasons for the rules change. No more eternal buffs.

[Shawn Kehoe]

Cool. And the bit about simulataneous activations targets the Dreamer / Daydreams Alpha Strike?

[nilus]

Cool. And the bit about simulataneous activations targets the Dreamer / Daydreams Alpha Strike?

Yeah it prevents you from companioning a model, burying it, then unburing it later in a sequence and still being able to activate it

[SpiralngCadavr]

Thanks a ton! The detailed descriptions of movement and ranges clears up a lot of questions I had.

[Turbodog]

Restating in this thread that I think C. Hoffman's Dampening Ability needs a clarification/FAQ/Errata treatment. Specifically clarifying:

1. Does it essentially nullify the Guardian's aura abilities (Disrupt Magic and now Errata'd Stalwart) if the Guardian stays near Hoffman.

2. Does it create odd circumstances like: A gamin is in base to base with Hoffman and another construct. If Hoffman machine puppets the construct to kill the gamin, it explodes due to shatter and damages Hoffman's crew. If Hoffman links in to the construct (or overrides edict on it) then it activates immediately following him, strikes the same gamin and if it kills it, the gamin does NOT shatter because it's not Hoffman's activation.

3. Another odd circumstance: Hoffman and a construct are near (within 3" - but not in melee with) a stitched together and a wicked doll (slightly behind the stitched). The stitched has fog up. If it's the construct's activation, he has LoS to the wicked doll and can shoot it because the stitched is within 3" of Hoffman and the fog is shut down due to Dampening. But if it's Hoffman's activation (and every model is in the same place), Hoffman could not machine puppet the construct to shoot the exact same doll in the same way, because the fog aura is up creating a "more than 3" obscurring" (= blocked LoS) situation.

I worry about the confusion the Dampening ability can cause.

[Twisted Metal]

Any chance we could get an answer to the question about a master using Drain Souls on itself. It has some pretty big implications if they can. If its something that's being reconsidered or looked over just let us know. Right it feels like its just being avoided.

Edited June 21, 2012 by Twisted Metal

[LordFett]

When these new erratas and fixes are added to the PDF could we either get a PDF with only the changes plus a PDF with everything, or the new stuff noted in red or a NEW icon for those of us that do not have them memorized we can easily see the new stuff?

Also in the wording of the Stitched Together's Does Not Die would it be possible to say that while DND can happen as many times per turn as he takes damage, that reactivate happens only once? I've never played a model with reactivate before using the STs and wasn't familiar with the reactivate rules, nor was my opponent and I had once reactivate twice in a single turn.