can you attack yourself in m2e?

[irishdave]

Can you do this? If so who flips for the defender?

---------- Post added at 06:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:36 PM ----------

For example can joss butcher an electrical creation turn 1 to create 2 scrap for ramos' to summon loads of arachnids?

[Joel]

Yes, you can attack other friendly models, you flip for both the attack and defence, and can cheat either or both if you wish.

A model cannot attack itself however.

[Dracomax]

For example can joss butcher an electrical creation turn 1 to create 2 scrap for ramos' to summon loads of arachnids?

Yes. Joss will take 1 damage from the EC's Explosive demise, after Armor, and there will be two scrap. Ramos will only be able to summon off of one of them in the turn, but it will be there for next turn.

[Hockridge]

Can a model target itself with tactical actions? Or Ca actions? Such as say Myranda healing herself or The Captian Airbursting himself.

[Omenbringer]

Yes, you can attack other friendly models, you flip for both the attack and defence, and can cheat either or both if you wish.

You also have the option of having the friendly target Relent the duel prior to any cards being flipped. In this case the attacker flips, the defender does not. It is assumed the defender ties the attackers result without any suits incurring a http://themostexcellentandawesomeforumever-wyrd.com/community/uploads/emoticons/default_Minus.png' alt=':-fate'> :-fate on the damage flip. The defender may not declare triggers when it relents though the attacker may. Page 33 in the "Attacking Friendly Models" call out

---------- Post added at 02:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:09 PM ----------

Can a model target itself with tactical actions? Or Ca actions? Such as say Myranda healing herself or The Captian Airbursting himself.

Generally speaking, Models are always considered to have LoS to themselves (page 40 under "Drawing Line of Sight") and the model should always be within range of itself. So unless otherwise stated in the specific abilities/ Actions rule a model should be able to target itself with an action.

[Mako]

Models cannot use an Attack Action on themselves, unless specifically allowed by the attack - page 38 of the rules. Basically, if it has a resist (i.e. requires an opposed duel), and doesn't say that the model can target itself, you can't do it.

Tactical actions (simple duels) seem to be ok though.

[Dracomax]

Models cannot use an Attack Action on themselves, unless specifically allowed by the attack - page 38 of the rules. Basically, if it has a resist (i.e. requires an opposed duel), and doesn't say that the model can target itself, you can't do it.

Tactical actions (simple duels) seem to be ok though.

In M2E, that isn't quite right, as there are tactical actions that require a resist, and Attack actions that produce TNs. However, attack actions are clearly labeled on the card, so...

[Mako]

I was going off the definitions on page 38 of the book:

Those actions that do not require an Opposed Duel are called Tactical Actions

Any action a model performs which requires an Opposed Duel is considered an Attack Action

But yeah, they're split on the cards so it's pretty obvious regardless.

Out of interest, which Tacticals have a resist?

[Dracomax]

I was going off the definitions on page 38 of the book:

But yeah, they're split on the cards so it's pretty obvious regardless.

Out of interest, which Tacticals have a resist?

You know, the ones I was thinking about that I could have sworn were tactical actions, on looking at the actual entry in the book are attack actions. 's what I get for not double checking myself first.

[hypoking]

Out of interest, which Tacticals have a resist?

Tacticals I'm not sure of, but off the top of my head I can think of at least two attack actions that have no resist and require no opposed duel. I swear, you just got to love Ophelia.

[Justin]

Tacticals I'm not sure of, but off the top of my head I can think of at least two attack actions that have no resist and require no opposed duel. I swear, you just got to love Ophelia.

Oh?

[hypoking]

Ooh a girl and with my eyes closed are both listed as attack actions. God knows why, but they are.

[irishdave]

Cheers, was looking under the attack/ actions section if rules... didn't bother checking opposed duels. Cest la vie.

[Omenbringer]

To bad the Index doesn't help much with locating things like this.

[Necrofaux]

To bad the Index doesn't help much with locating things like this.

That is the main thing I hate about this book. Finding things is such a chore with that terrible excuse for an index.

[Ausplosions]

To bad the Index doesn't help much with locating things like this.

Yeah.

Wyrd seems to have difficulty Indexing their books. At least it's not quite as bad as 1st edition.

[Omenbringer]

Yeah.

Wyrd seems to have difficulty Indexing their books. At least it's not quite as bad as 1st edition.

Really? You honestly think this Index is better? Most terms could be easily referenced in the earlier books (Each of the earlier books had 6 pages of fairly small font dedicated to the Glossary/ Index, this book has 2 Large Font pages). The only thing the earlier books were missing where some less common abilities.

Off topic of course but curious.

[Ausplosions]

At least now you don't have to find the entry in the book and download an errata, and search for Rules Marshall rulings and rub your belly and pat your head while singing Row Row Row your boat, just to find a rule.

[Omenbringer]

At least now you don't have to find the entry in the book and download an errata, and search for Rules Marshall rulings and rub your belly and pat your head while singing Row Row Row your boat, just to find a rule.

I would preface that with a big yet. Faq/ Errata/ Clarification is necessary in any game and as more books get released Rules Bloat and updates will increase as well, it seems to be a bit of an inevitable cycle.

We'll see how large the first Faq/ Errata Doc is come November 1st.

Edited October 26, 2013 by Omenbringer