Possible Legendairy Nemo feat spoiler

[Dan from Chicago]

Would that make the Stormwalls fists POW 20 + 4D6 if boosted on feat turn?
Plus any other buff you'd apply? We'll that's finaly a 'nutcracker' at hand...

No ... the Stormwalls melee attacks aren't type electricity. However, with Lightning Shroud it would be P+S 22. The electroleaps are pow 10 + 3d6

[Dyoria]

Watch the 3mo's theme list tier 2 restriction be: must field 2 unitis of trenchers!

Honestly, if these feats are true, Cygnar got the best feat followed closely by Khador. All I am saying is watch out for Beast09 and Dragos pulling Molik Karn shenanigans.

[Varius]

true, but you still have to hit with that charge attack. But assault on the Storm blades got real nasty all of the sudden.

Storm blade's problem has never been their damage...its the Rat 5 and poor defensive stats

[paspinall]

Watch the 3mo's theme list tier 2 restriction be: must field 2 unitis of trenchers!

Honestly, if these feats are true, Cygnar got the best feat followed closely by Khador. All I am saying is watch out for Beast09 and Dragos pulling Molik Karn shenanigans.

but its not that good, as it doesnt work on the Electroleap as worded.

[Bishop84]

No ... the Stormwalls melee attacks aren't type electricity. However, with Lightning Shroud it would be P+S 22. The electroleaps are pow 10 + 3d6

Stop me if I'm wrong, and I might be, but isn't an unboostable damage roll unboostable? Or does being unboostable only mean you can't spend focus/fury to boost it?

[Dyoria]

but its not that good, as it doesnt work on the Electroleap as worded.

How does it not work with electroleap exactly?

And doesnt the feat add an additional damage die, not boost? Similar to Xerxis feat...

[paspinall]

Stop me if I'm wrong, and I might be, but isn't an unboostable damage roll unboostable? Or does being unboostable only mean you can't spend focus/fury to boost it?

With the assumption the feat worked on the electroleap they would get an extra dice (it doesnt say boosted) However at the momet its a moot point as it doesnt work on electroleap.

[paspinall]

How does it not work with electroleap exactly?

Because the electroleap originates from your target, not you, and its from friendly models damage rolls as worded in the feat.

[Sanguinary Dan]

Stop me if I'm wrong, and I might be, but isn't an unboostable damage roll unboostable? Or does being unboostable only mean you can't spend focus/fury to boost it?

I would imagine that is the correct interpretation. You can't spend Focus to boost, but the Feat can add an additional die.

[Dyoria]

Because the electroleap originates from your target, not you, and its from friendly models damage rolls as worded in the feat.

Uh i would want a ruling on that. Its ridiculous to assume that the eleaps source is anything other than the attacking model. The point of origin is from the model struck, but the eleap is generated from an attack that originated from a friendly unit.

Its like saying if i whip a racketball at your head and it bounces off your head to hit your friend in the eye, that you are responsible for blinding your friend.

[Bishop84]

I would imagine that is the correct interpretation. You can't spend Focus to boost, but the Feat can add an additional die.

That's where I went wrong. I read it as "boosted" even though it says "additional die". Haven't watched the video yet, and reading stuff on the forum doesn't quite sink in as well as reading it in rulebook/card format.

[paspinall]

Uh i would want a ruling on that. Its ridiculous to assume that the eleaps source is anything other than the attacking model. The point of origin is from the model struck, but the eleap is generated from an attack that originated from a friendly unit.

Its like saying if i whip a racketball at your head and it bounces off your head to hit your friend in the eye, that you are responsible for blinding your friend.

Already been ruled on with Prey and Lightning tendrils before.

and you can see with things like

"Finally, some non-AOE attacks, such as Chain Lighting, have special rules that allow them to damage models besides the attack's target. The origin of damage in those cases is the model or point from which you measure the range to other affected models. For example, when the lightning generated by Chain Lightning arcs to another model, the immediately previous model struck by the lightning is the origin of the damage." Primal Pg 64

[Bishop84]

I would imagine that is the correct interpretation. You can't spend Focus to boost, but the Feat can add an additional die.

That's where I went wrong. I read it as "boosted" even though it says "additional die". Haven't watched the video yet, and reading stuff on the forum doesn't quite sink in as well as reading it in rulebook/card format.

[Bishop84]

"Finally, some non-AOE attacks, such as Chain Lighting, have special rules that allow them to damage models besides the attack's target. The origin of damage in those cases is the model or point from which you measure the range to other affected models. For example, when the lightning generated by Chain Lightning arcs to another model, the immediately previous model struck by the lightning is the origin of the damage." Primal Pg 64

Wait, does this mean I can't boost Chain Lightning and Ashes to Ashes and Admonisher arcs? Because I've been doing it all wrong then, and suddenly those spells don't seem as nice.

[Dyoria]

That rulling is for the direction of the attack, in that lightning leaps can hit models from a different direction then the caster of the attack. For instance, i can chain lightnjng a model in the second rank of a shield wall unit and jump the second leap to the front rank.

This feat states that any friendly lightning based attack gains an additional damage dice. While eleaps originate from the struck model, the struck.model is NOT making the attack. The attack was made by the friendly model with eleap, ie the stormguard.

[Crate123]

Regarding where the elextro leap originated from, the Devs are still working on what exactly constitutes an attack and that will have an effect on whether electro leaps get this benefit or not since part of that discussion is where electro leaps actually comes from.
Its not a bad feat at all but I cant feel that its weak compared to butchers and xerxis' but then again Im not impressed by the other 3pic feats so far either.

[paspinall]

That rulling is for the direction of the attack, in that lightning leaps can hit models from a different direction then the caster of the attack. For instance, i can chain lightnjng a model in the second rank of a shield wall unit and jump the second leap to the front rank.

This feat states that any friendly lightning based attack gains an additional damage dice. While eleaps originate from the struck model, the struck.model is NOT making the attack. The attack was made by the friendly model with eleap, ie the stormguard.

except Prey doesnt work with lightning tendrils because it was ruled that the unit with prey is not the unit the attack originates from if they use tendrils to hit something else and bounce hits the prey, so its the same situation.

[PG_Enazel]

Prey and Lightning Tendrils - http://privateerpressforums.com/show...tning+tendrils

You don't get prey bonus with electro leap, because of that wording I assume its the same for the feat.

[BigHoot]

I think it's pretty obvious that the whole point of 3-Mo's feat is to work on electric leaps. If not, then its' really one of the lamest feats there is. I don't think there's going to be a lot of mileage in assuming it doesn't work on leaps.

[PG_Enazel]

BigHoot it won't be the first lame feat around. It may get altered, but right now the rules say it doesn't.

[Dan from Chicago]

If prey specifies attack, then the feat might work around that ruling ...

[Bladestorm]

Except the linked thread on electro-leap and prey doesn't have a ruling - it has a further link to a thread about Blood Spiller and electro-leap. Blood Spiller is a weapon ability that gives an additional die on attacks made "with this weapon" - which is why Mootaz said it didn't work on electro-leap in that case.

To the best of my knowledge whether electroleap is considered to be caused by the model has never been definitively answered by PP, despite a fair number of threads on the issue over a few years.

[PG_Dawnlord Ed]

If prey specifies attack, then the feat might work around that ruling ...

The problem is that prey and Eye of the Storm (if the gentleman read it correctly) both say attacks made by a model. E-leap is shrouded in confusion and there is still no official ruling from the Infernals on what, exactly, it is. However, the precedent is that the damage roll is generated by E-Leap itself and not the model and is not currently an attack.

My prediction is that this will finally settle the e-leap question. If the Infernals have not already been instructed by the design team on it already, I suspect the email is already written. There will be a speedy on ruling on this one.

[PG_Bobby Hostile]

I don't think that ruling stands. It's from 09, which if I'm not mistaken is MK I. The other thread is from '10, which is right around when MK II came out and references the MK I "ruling".

The attack orignates from a friendly model and, for lack of a better term, continues to auto-hit and damage other models as per it's rules. If the feat is spoiled correctly, I'd rule that e-leaps gain the benefit.

[aaziz]

A good logic check for this (and I haven't found a ruling yet) is whether electro leap triggers "damaged by an enemy" (not hit) rules.

[paspinall]

I don't think that ruling stands. It's from 09, which if I'm not mistaken is MK I. The other thread is from '10, which is right around when MK II came out and references the MK I "ruling".

The attack orignates from a friendly model and, for lack of a better term, continues to auto-hit and damage other models as per it's rules. If the feat is spoiled correctly, I'd rule that e-leaps gain the benefit.

the rules quoted are all correct for the MkII book however

[Crate123]

The Infernals cant rule on it before the devs get back to them, the last time I asked they still hadnt and couldnt give a ruling on who is rolling damage: The model that made the attack that triggered e-leap or the model that the e-leap bounced from. Its all part of the "whats an attack" and until the devs can lock that down we wont know for sure.
It does make quite a difference whether this feat (if correct) is good or fairly lackluster.

[aaziz]

Someone in another thread mentioned that the Storm Strider can boost it's e-leaps, meaning it really is the one making the attack...

[Bishop84]

Storm Strider doesn't have Electro-leap. It has Lightning Generator which is worded more like Chain Lightning.

[eKraye]

Please stop linking or mentioning posts that don't have infernal rulings and saying "it was ruled". Watching this thread, it better boost e-leaps.

Though I'm more excited about Finch honestly.

[Lalnuir]

Though I'm more excited about Finch honestly.

Oh if only finch was a 3pt solo. xD

[paspinall]

she certainly 'costs' as much as one wonder if the other casters are 'paying' for their horses

[PG_Enazel]

The last discussion was Mark 2, Warmachine MK2 was out in early 2009. As i said before I hope the feat does work with electro-leap but there is a fair chance it may not.

[Crate123]

Well this thread was locked (which they usually do when the info is correct) http://privateerpressforums.com/show...highlight=prey. In that thread I linked to the other thread that we have had links to here as well and apparently the Infernals agreed enough to lock the thread.
Currently e-leaps would not get the bonus, subject to change though.

[paspinall]

Well this thread was locked (which they usually do when the info is correct) http://privateerpressforums.com/show...highlight=prey. In that thread I linked to the other thread that we have had links to here as well and apparently the Infernals agreed enough to lock the thread.
Currently e-leaps would not get the bonus, subject to change though.

it was probably locked because he was just directed to a different thread.

[Anurien]

Friends, Cygnarans, Electro-philes. Lend me your shell-likes.There are many factors to all sides of this argument (...maybe...). How about we wait to actually get ALL the info before ruling?

Wait for the full rules and/or tactical tips. They might have some clarifications.
His Electrical field also seems to imply lightning arcs come from friendly models even though they arc from an enemy model hit by a friendly model.

[paspinall]

but we've seen the rules, they have all been spoiled by now, and the field doesnt imply that particularly at all, lightning in his control doesnt arc to friendly models, no real implication that the arc comes from a friendly at all, as they are friendly to Nemo that we are talkinng about.

[Ender101]

I'd like to ask for a clarification if I may?

Is it only electro-leap which is called to question right now, or also Chain Lightning and Lightning Generator?

[PG_Dino-Czar]

Just e-leap. Chain and Generator are both part of the attack.

[Anurien]

Can I ask where you have seen the rule? The actual rule wording? Does this Tactical tip say: "This does not count electro leaps" or "this includes all electro-leaps from friendly models attacks such as Storm Guard"
I have only heard someone reading it and saying stuff. Not the actual card or page (even on HD I can not make out all of the page on RHQ).

Regardless it sounds good and hopefully it can be clarified for us all.

PS I think saying "it is y" and "it isnt x" at this stage is a bit premature. Also. Howcome this has ended up "Nemo3 is not good because his feat sucks as it is not boosting e-leaps"