|
Post by Swampmist on Jul 7, 2017 19:56:31 GMT
...wut? I'm not sure how your drawing that conclusion. Ability C is a support or interaction ability that makes A more relevent, assuming it's counter doesn't show up. a Good example of this is something like Mark Target; it is a ranged accuracy buff that makes shooting better, assuming a shooting counter (ala stealth) isn't in play. I don't know why something like that would be "superfluous"
|
|
|
Post by streetpizza on Jul 7, 2017 20:00:43 GMT
Because C buffs A regardless of external factors. B will always nullify A regardless of external factors. You don't need to state that C is only workable if B isn't present.
My inner engineer is coming out and he doesn't have to here. Both are valid and you're not wrong I'm just being pedantic.
|
|
|
Post by Swampmist on Jul 7, 2017 20:06:18 GMT
Ah, fair enough then. it was a bit wordy, but I was trying to give off the intent that, without C (fire bufss,) A (fire damage) is usually a net negative because of the existence of B (fire immunity.) While we can certainly play around it, that does not mean we aren't (even if slightly) weaker for it.
|
|
|
Post by paradox on Jul 7, 2017 20:08:01 GMT
"Super Stealth" existed in MKI. It was called Invisibility. It went away in MKII. Probably for very good reasons but was it an actual upgrade to stealth models or was it its own separate ability? It's own ability, but only Stealth models had it. Like Eiryss1 and Di Bray, IIRC.
|
|
thelat
Junior Strategist
Posts: 480
|
Post by thelat on Jul 7, 2017 20:13:36 GMT
and then it ends with an old woman swallowing a horse I guess. That sounds like a Grymkin model.
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Jul 7, 2017 21:34:12 GMT
Honestly i would prefer of fire stacked somehow over being able to turn of a models immunity. It would make it so that the fact we had so many models that give continuous fire more relevant and would give us a fire niche.
|
|
|
Post by paradox on Jul 7, 2017 22:20:21 GMT
and then it ends with an old woman swallowing a horse I guess. That sounds like a Grymkin model. I think the frightmare was the other way round.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on Jul 8, 2017 2:15:46 GMT
Honestly i would prefer of fire stacked somehow over being able to turn of a models immunity. It would make it so that the fact we had so many models that give continuous fire more relevant and would give us a fire niche. A model being able to suffer multiple Fire Continuous Effect markers would be another way to go. With each being rolled for, going out and damage, separately. A jack taking 1 pow 12 isn't really all that scared. A jack suffering 4-5 pow 12s might get a little nervous. Or maybe not multiple pow 12s, but a pow 12 damage roll with +1 damage per each additional fire token. So 3 fire tokens would mean a pow14 damage roll. 5 would be pow16. If a model with multiple tokens rolls for the effect to go out, if it has multiple tokens only 1 token goes out per turn at most. So you'd have incentive to keep hitting a heavy with multiple fire tokens.
|
|
doopsie
Junior Strategist
Posts: 341
|
Post by doopsie on Jul 9, 2017 1:28:07 GMT
Honestly i would prefer of fire stacked somehow over being able to turn of a models immunity. It would make it so that the fact we had so many models that give continuous fire more relevant and would give us a fire niche. A model being able to suffer multiple Fire Continuous Effect markers would be another way to go. With each being rolled for, going out and damage, separately. A jack taking 1 pow 12 isn't really all that scared. A jack suffering 4-5 pow 12s might get a little nervous. Or maybe not multiple pow 12s, but a pow 12 damage roll with +1 damage per each additional fire token. So 3 fire tokens would mean a pow14 damage roll. 5 would be pow16. If a model with multiple tokens rolls for the effect to go out, if it has multiple tokens only 1 token goes out per turn at most. So you'd have incentive to keep hitting a heavy with multiple fire tokens. I can both of these being reasonable, but I'd then expect corrosion to get a similar bump (lose 1 box per corrosion token), and electricity to get a bump to help against heavies.
|
|
Fire Step
Junior Strategist
Everyday I'm Wrastlin'
Posts: 334
|
Post by Fire Step on Jul 9, 2017 10:25:49 GMT
I feel that the idea of turning fire immunity off is a trap. The following 27 models have fire immunity: - Assault Kommander Strakhov and Kommandos
- Assault Kommando Flame Thrower
- Assault Kommandos
- Azrael
- Castigator
- Celestial Fulcrum
- Durgen Madhammer
- Exemplar Cinerators
- Eye of Truth
- Feora, Priestess of the Flame
- Feora, Protector of the Flame
- Feora, The Conquering Flame
- Flameguard Cleansers
- Flameguard Cleansers : Officer (CA)
- Gorman Di Wulfe, Rogue Alchemist
- Hand of Judgment
- Horgle Ironstrike
- Horgle, the Anvil
- Kommander Oleg Strakhov
- Malekus, The Burning Truth
- Purifier
- Pyre Troll
- Reckoner
- Sanctifier
- Tactical Arcanist Corps
- Torch
- Vessel of Judgment
Out of those 27, only 13 are not Protectorate models. Unless you lived in a meta that featured crazy amounts of those specific models, I don't see the value of turning off fire immunity. It would be such a niche ability that some people would never see it on the tabletop.
|
|
Provengreil
Junior Strategist
Choir Kills: 12
Posts: 850
|
Post by Provengreil on Jul 9, 2017 13:58:24 GMT
I feel that the idea of turning fire immunity off is a trap. The following 27 models have fire immunity: - Assault Kommander Strakhov and Kommandos
- Assault Kommando Flame Thrower
- Assault Kommandos
- Azrael
- Castigator
- Celestial Fulcrum
- Durgen Madhammer
- Exemplar Cinerators
- Eye of Truth
- Feora, Priestess of the Flame
- Feora, Protector of the Flame
- Feora, The Conquering Flame
- Flameguard Cleansers
- Flameguard Cleansers : Officer (CA)
- Gorman Di Wulfe, Rogue Alchemist
- Hand of Judgment
- Horgle Ironstrike
- Horgle, the Anvil
- Kommander Oleg Strakhov
- Malekus, The Burning Truth
- Purifier
- Pyre Troll
- Reckoner
- Sanctifier
- Tactical Arcanist Corps
- Torch
- Vessel of Judgment
Out of those 27, only 13 are not Protectorate models. Unless you lived in a meta that featured crazy amounts of those specific models, I don't see the value of turning off fire immunity. It would be such a niche ability that some people would never see it on the tabletop.
I'm being specifically targeted with Horgle (which means his whole BG, which means a MK) and my local Menite opposite is experimenting Vindictus with double Cinerators, and I know our legion player has put in an order for Kallus. Thing is, these guys do great things even without needing their immunities. Horgle and Kallus win plenty into other forces. It's an uneven trade, they barely give up anything for something that shuts down a good quarter of my faction.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jul 9, 2017 14:54:45 GMT
But doesnt he loose out against your faction as well?
Man when the Assault Kommando books come out, its gonna be a sorr day.
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Jul 9, 2017 16:48:19 GMT
I had forgotten how much assault commandos infuriate me. But since mrk2 i feel we have more options to deal with fire immune stuff. It used to be that all our good guns were fire typed. Now we have idrians and redeemers so we have a little bit of leway
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Jul 9, 2017 18:02:57 GMT
Yup, and it isn't exactly difficult to find things for a second list that deals well with Legion and Trolls.
|
|
|
Post by paradox on Jul 9, 2017 18:44:41 GMT
Are Troll and Legion players bringing Horgle/Kallus2 to shut down Menoth? Is this creating list pair issues? Especially if they end up in a mirror match or into Trolls/Legion?
|
|