Arcane Effigy

[Envy]

Can you cast conduct Aether twice on one model? I know the ability states it can only be cast once per turn. That being stated could you activate the target model in turn A, activate Arcane Effigy and cast Conduct Aether on target model end turn A, turn B starts activate Arcane Effigy and cast Conduct Aether on the target model again giving it 2 extra ap? Conduct Aether says that the extra ap stays on the model till it activates again and that it can only be cast once per turn (I think I don’t have the books in front of me).

[Ausplosions]

Effects of the same name do not stack.

[Envy]

Well crap lol Thank you

[Alex]

Effects of the same name do not stack.

UNLESS they are listed as model gains +X Foo. For example Armor +1 stacks with Armor +1 or Armor +2, and +1 Dg stacks with other Dg boosts regardless of name of ability. So question is does it say it gives "+1 AP", or "one additional AP" on Conduct Aether?

[Ausplosions]

"one additional AP"

[Hateful Darkblack]

UNLESS they are listed as model gains +X Foo. For example Armor +1 stacks with Armor +1 or Armor +2, and +1 Dg stacks with other Dg boosts regardless of name of ability. So question is does it say it gives "+1 AP", or "one additional AP" on Conduct Aether?

+1 Dg twice from the same ability (or +Cb or +Ca or even +Armor) does not stack.

[Alex]

Well then there ya go. Doesn't stack, clearly not intended to.

---------- Post added at 06:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:30 PM ----------

+1 Dg twice from the same ability (or +Cb or +Ca or even +Armor) does not stack.

Sure it does.

[Allandrel]

Page 20 of the RM is pretty clear. Effects of the same name do not stack unless

a) indicated otherwise in their description, or

the effect is listed as [name] +/-, such as Armor +1, even if they have the same name.

Conduct Aether could presumably stack if it was listed as "target gains AP +1," but it isn't. (And I don't think any abilities that grant AP are listed that way.)

[Hateful Darkblack]

Huh!

[Kadeton]

Page 20 of the RM is pretty clear. Effects of the same name do not stack unless

a) indicated otherwise in their description, or

the effect is listed as [name] +/-, such as Armor +1, even if they have the same name.

Conduct Aether could presumably stack if it was listed as "target gains AP +1," but it isn't. (And I don't think any abilities that grant AP are listed that way.)

I suspect there's some subtlety at play here. The +/- has to be attached to the name of the effect (per point , like "Armor +2". Having a +/- in the description of the effect is not sufficient for it to stack according to those criteria.

The effect would have to be named Conduct Aether +1 for it to stack.

[Omenbringer]

The actual wording for Armor from the new 1.5 edition Malifaux book page 226:

Reduce the Dg this model suffers by the indicated number (#) down to a minimum of 1 Dg. This is cumulative with any other type of Armor.

In other words, Armor doesn't stack with Armor unless it comes from another named source such as Evasive, Bulletproof, Magic Resistance, etc.

A model with Armor 1 that recieves Armor 2 becomes Armor 2 not Armor 3. The only way to add the armors together is to have armor from 2 different sources like say a model with Bulletproof 1 and behind Hard Cover (which gives Armor 1). In this instance the model would efectively have Armor 2.

Edited December 19, 2012 by Omenbringer

[Adran]

The FAQ does not agree with you

Does Armor stack?

Armor from different named sources does stack. Example, a model with Armor +1, behind hard cover (Armor +1), affected by a spell that grants Armor +2 would have an Armor of +4.

[xKoBiEx]

I can confirm from the card sitting in front of me that Conduct gives "+1 AP" so although it is a sneaky loophole against the intended use, it could work as OP suggests.

[Allandrel]

I can confirm from the card sitting in front of me that Conduct gives "+1 AP" so although it is a sneaky loophole against the intended use, it could work as OP suggests.

If we're talking sneaky loopholes based on exact wording, it still doesn't work. It would need to say "AP +1," not "+1 AP."

[Omenbringer]

The FAQ does not agree with you

Does Armor stack?

Armor from different named sources does stack. Example, a model with Armor +1, behind hard cover (Armor +1), affected by a spell that grants Armor +2 would have an Armor of +4.

The faq completely agrees with me actually as the Armor is coming from different named sources. The model began with Armor +1 then recieves Armor +1 from Hard Cover (different named source) and again recieves Armor +2 from a completely different named source (say for example the Spell Shieldwall on the Guild Guardian model).

The example I gave was for a model that already has the Armor ability and again recieves the Armor ability. For example Lazarus using Assimilate to gain the Armor ability from a construct (and dumping two control cards to gain it permanently) then doing it again. This Armor will not stack. It does stack with his Reinforced Patchwork Armor though as it is a different named ability.

Edited December 20, 2012 by Omenbringer

[Kadeton]

Bit of a tiny edge case there Omen... aside from Assimilating something else's Armor twice, are there any instances where Armor doesn't stack?

[Adran]

I am not sure that you are right. I need to check the rulings that they made with regard to Hoffman, but I was pretty sure that Armor +1 and Armour +2 gave you Armor +3.

A moleman can't dig in twice to get Armor +6 as the Effect, Dig in (Armor +3), would be repeated. Not the Armor being repeated.

Edit

Can't find anythign better than this thread at the moment

http://www.wyrd-games.net/showthread.php?25763-Assimilating-stacked-Armor/page3&highlight=Hoffman+Assimilate+Armor

Its not conclusive that I'm right, but it seems that the common consensus is that Armor +1 and Armor +2 are different effects, and it isn't corrected by the Stars in the thread.

Edited December 20, 2012 by Adran

[Kadeton]

Dug In would give the Moleman Armor +4, since he already has Armor +1. Tunneling would give him Armor +6.

[Adran]

Strictly it would give Him Armor +1 and Armor+3 (Dig in) which will count as Armor +4 at damage resolution.

I meant you can't get armor+1, Armor +3 (dig in) Armor +3 (dig in), but didn't bother referencing the molemans base Armor+1

[Ausplosions]

I believe Omen is saying that Armour +1 and Armour +1 do not make Armour 2.

You need two different Armour +#.

[Kadeton]

Yeah, no worries. It was actually a sneaky way of seeing if you would agree that they stack, since I've read a lot of tacticas and so on that suggest that a Tunneling Moleman is only Armor +5, for example.

---------- Post added at 05:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:26 PM ----------

I believe Omen is saying that Armour +1 and Armour +1 do not make Armour 2.

You need two different Armour +#.

What? I doubt it, that's crazy town. If you've got Armor +1 and you hide behind hard cover (Armor +1), you have Armor +2.

[Ausplosions]

Yeah, no worries. It was actually a sneaky way of seeing if you would agree that they stack, since I've read a lot of tacticas and so on that suggest that a Tunneling Moleman is only Armor +5, for example.

---------- Post added at 05:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:26 PM ----------

What? I doubt it, that's crazy town. If you've got Armor +1 and you hide behind hard cover (Armor +1), you have Armor +2.

Ooops.

That'll teach me to post while at work.

I meant to say Armour +X needs to come from different sources. Not a different # each time.

Bleh. Made sense in my head.

[Kadeton]

Ooops.

That'll teach me to post while at work.

I meant to say Armour +X needs to come from different sources. Not a different # each time.

Bleh. Made sense in my head.

We've all had those moments.

[Adran]

Yeah, no worries. It was actually a sneaky way of seeing if you would agree that they stack, since I've read a lot of tacticas and so on that suggest that a Tunneling Moleman is only Armor +5, for example.

My Molemen go up to Armor + 9 when they are in position!

Then a Ronin comes along...

So currently we have a total of 1 possible way to overlap Armor that we aren't sure if it works.

The rest all do. (Remembering effects with the same name don't stack). Don't double assimilate armour and we are fine.

[Omenbringer]

Bit of a tiny edge case there Omen... aside from Assimilating something else's Armor twice, are there any instances where Armor doesn't stack?

Definately corner case right now however...(it wasn't in the past or possibly in the future)

I believe Omen is saying that Armour +1 and Armour +1 do not make Armour 2.

You need two different Armour +#.

No what I am saying is Assimilating the Armor X ability from a model then again Assimilating a higher version Armor X+Y would result in Armor X+Y rather than Armor 2X+Y.

Example:

Lazarus Assimilates the Armor +1 ability from a model and dumps two control cards to keep it for the game. If he later Assimilates the Armor +2 ability from another model the result is Armor +2 not Armor +3 as it is coming from the same named ability (not different named abilities). The better armor value replaces the lower.

Think of how Poison works, a model that has 1 poison counter on them then gets hit with a Poison 3 attack doesn't get 4 Poison counters only 3.

Yeah, no worries. It was actually a sneaky way of seeing if you would agree that they stack, since I've read a lot of tacticas and so on that suggest that a Tunneling Moleman is only Armor +5, for example.

A lot of those tacticas were written well before Armor stacked (it didn't always). Models that recieved Armor from spells essentially gained the Armor ability/talent for the duration (either replacing the Armor value they had if it was better or granting Armor if they didn't).

FAQ aside (which up until it this wasn't really an issue) the language of the spells granting Armor is what is puzzling (and most annoying to resolve). For the most part the language of all of these spells simply has a model recieving Armor +X from it they really shouldn't stack as it is the same named ability that they are recieving (unlike Evasive, Bulletproof, Magic Resistance, Reinforced Patchwork Armor, Freikorps Armor, Hard Cover, all of which are different named types/ forms of armor and specifically not Armor).

As a quick example of how the language has muddled things a bit look at Hans benefitting from Armor Piercing via the Custom Ammunition Spell performing a Ranged strike against a Convict Gunslinger or Gracie. Does Hans also ignore Bulletproof (a different named ability that grants Armor against Ranged strikes)?

Granted this is way off the original topic so would best be moved to another thread vice continuing to derail this one.

Edited December 21, 2012 by Omenbringer

[Kadeton]

I'm happy to discuss it in a different thread if you like.

The thing with those spells is that they give the target Armor +#, but that's also what Evasive, Bulletproof etc are doing (just in specific circumstances). As far as I can tell, there's no difference between "Spell Name: target gains Armor +2" and "Evasive 2: target gains Armor +2 versus blasts". They both work exactly the same way, there's no distinction of it being a different "named type".

And yeah, an armor-piercing Hans ignores Bulletproof.