changes to knocked down jacks

[Jestor]

It's amazing how many people have commented on this thread and still have no idea of how everything works.

[TheLoki]

It's amazing how many people have commented on this thread and still have no idea of how everything works.

I agree. I highly suggest several of you re-read several sections of the core rulebook. Not trying to be mean about it but quite a few just need to go back to the book and try again.

[Vex]

How are you getting a puddle there without activating Barnabas first?

I agree. I highly suggest several of you re-read several sections of the core rulebook. Not trying to be mean about it but quite a few just need to go back to the book and try again.

Good point and my bad. To be fair though, this is Minions we are talking about. I'm pretty sure that they aren't most peoples' primary faction.

[PG_LEJKaya]

it actually makes jacks BETTER during his feat turn.

Its this that is pretty silly. Yes, some people have totally failed to understand the issue but I still say the impact is minimal and actual play is supporting that.
Knocking down your own jacks or saying they are better off KD after feat isn't good play 99% of the time or you're looking at it wrong.

Feat still KDs a jack in (Existing) water, barnabus can still create swamps and beasts can slam/ throw jacks into it, you can still KD jacks and beat on them with auto hitting attacks, you can KD jacks and disrupt them with reach so they do nothing next turn.

Its all good.

[PG_talonhawk01]

It's a pity the Wrastler's animus can't be used on enemy models. That would be too funny. Knock them down with a feat, stand them up with an animus, throw them into the water. xD

[correlation2]

I won't pretend to be able to empathize with Barnabus players on this whole thing, but I thought one thing was worth mentioning.

The clarification on the wording is now more airtight and precise, which is how PP's rules tend to be. There's a difference between "when a model falls down" and a model that "has fallen down". The difference just isn't very good for the warlock in this particular instance.

How that relates to the fluff I'm not 100% sure. I'm not even sure it matters.

( To be fair, up until now I'd have assumed a KD model would suffer the effects of an extinguished cortex if moved into the terrain. It just seems logical. BUT, looking at the particular wording... that's just not the case. ^^; )

[Yertle4]

But throws also knock you down. Therefore the effect of 'being knocked down' would be suffered while in water - except, for equally arbitrary reasons, it has been ruled not work that way since you already were in the state of being knocked down.

An unintuitive ruling is a bad ruling. The rules are slightly ambiguous on the wording, but this was the wrong way to go.

[correlation2]

Effects like Stationary and Knockdown have never doubled though. You don't change being in and out of the KD state when you're thrown, the same way you don't change facing when you're thrown. Being "thrown" has a fluff explanation and such and a strongly ingrained image in our minds but on the actual table none of that happens. It's strictly just a warjack power attack that moves a model from one point on the board to another. The model is never "picked up" and "thrown". It's just moved from point A to B ignoring models with smaller sized bases.


The only thing that is different now is that its been made clear that "is knocked down" and "in the knockdown state" aren't the same thing. It was always a natural assumption that "is knocked down" referred to the STATE of knockdown, but, this is apparently not the case. It's the actual practice of knocking the model down that triggers X.


Like if you had a field of spikes or something. Pushing a knocked down guy onto the field of spikes it going to hurt him, but it's not going to carry the same deadliness as if you knock him off his feet and onto the spikes where he gets impaled by his body weight. ( Which of course in a fluff way has nothing to do with throws or whatever, but there's always casualties between practical game considerations and fluff. )

[Top]

Water and I have been old friends ever since Hordes came out. My first Hordes force was Legion and I soon learned to place a deep water terrain feature any time I could if I were facing a Warmachine player. I had three Warbeatsts (more now) who could just fly over them if needed, and slamming/throwing any non-amphibious 'Jack into Deep Water is an auto-kill. (I also used Deep Water in Warmachine Mark I with pHaley and did my best to cast at least one Scramble every turn. Ah, memories!).

Even though Baranabas places shallow water terrain (rather than deep water) nevertheless I definately appreciate it. They are a very handy way to canalize where your opponent moves. And as several posters have already pointed out there are ways to get a 'Jack into one of Barnabas' swamp pits and then knock it down with something other than his Feat. If you are fortunate enough to have some shallow water already on the board as terrain then his Feat can be used for the KD to make the 'Jack DRT if you manage to get it onto the water terrain and then knock it down.

On the surface having a previously knocked down 'Jack not being extinguished when dragged/thrown/placed into shallow water seems odd. *shrug* I will assume the rule has something to do with how they calculate the relative power of their models and their abilities.

As for realism: if you actually made most of the swords and axes wielded by our models to real life scale then there's no way you could fight with them, they'd be far too heavy. You'd be ahead of the game if you could even lift them. Yet our heros swing them like they were fencing foils! So the whole "previously knocked down 'Jack surviving going into shallow water" issue is not a big thing in the PP universe.

[correlation2]

It's worth mentioning that the concern over the use of water terrain is justified.

Outside of a tournament table that features water as a side thing looking pretty or playing a friendly game against an opponent, I -never- see water used. Privateer and some Cryx players don't mind putting out some shallow water, and if its fluffy and limited ( maybe a stream along the center line or something with a couple of bridges to fight over ) some normal players won't mind either. Since the release of MK2 I have never seen Deep Water used.

Part of this has to do with the fact that Deep Water and Shallow Water present unbalanced pros/cons between Warmachine and Hordes, and part of it is due to the new terrain generation rules. In MK1 players used to take turns placing terrain and water could at times be unavoidable unless you just decided not to play, which happened occasionally when people were just being complete jerks about it. ( I place a lake here and put down 10 Long Gunners with Snipe. Enjoy~ ) You'd see the same thing happen with forests and Legion.

Nowadays terrain is supposed to not be particularly beneficial to either side and generated/placed rather randomly for a scenic battlefield conductive of good gaming. Having a table full of shallow water terrain features because you're playing gators doesn't meet that criteria. Similarly, people playing in an urban city table aren't going to let you drop a lake in the middle of the street. That's just not how the game plays anymore.

To suggest that Shallow Water, let alone Deep Water, is going to be a common gameplay element is being naive at best. ^^;

[Top]

When they have terrain making events at the local game stores I would show up and make deep water templates. I have even written "Deep Water" on some of them. Most of the time I can grab one off the shelf and toss it on the table. I may be fortunate in that the local metas haven't squawked, at least I haven't heard any yet.

But I certainly can see your point Correlation2. I ran into this myself once. I simply took the viewpoint that it was a permissable terrain type, was within the prescribed size limit, and it was my choice of terrain. He couldn't argue. It wound up not making any impact in the game anyway IIRC.

[Yertle4]

I don't think anything will change on this matter until an edition rejig. My assumption is the change was made because of dodgy KD interactions with Cassius' feat rather than anything to do with Barnabas, and it's a safe bet to say there's more Cassius players than there are Gator players. I've always thought that Barnabas' feat should be something like 'models become DEF 5 and must sac movement or action next turn' rather than KD - it's similar and stronger/weaker in certain ways, and avoids crap like this. Fluffier too

Despite what it looks like from the Warmachine player's side of the table, Barnabas players would much rather just destroy your KD jack than set up an elaborate push/throw/slam routine which can often fail due to dice. Problem is, we have lots of problems with that ARM 19+ which is usually found on warjacks.

[Mod_GoLu]

Reminder for everyone in this thread: Keep it civil. Always.

[Mod_Faultie]

To stress the point: one's civility in posting is not contingent upon the civility of other posters. The terms of service are not invalid for all because of a single violation.

[Space Donkey]

To stress the point: one's civility in posting is not contingent upon the civility of other posters. The terms of service are not invalid for all because of a single violation.

Awww but I wanted the thread to devolve into total anarchy.

[Gdead909]

They should make a ruling than if the jack was thrown into the water one of beasts can stand on top of it so the pilot light goes out lol. And I have flat out seen WM players get up and move if you place water down on the tables.

[TheLoki]

well with the current line of water rulings they would rule that the Beast would have to be standing on the jack before it was placed on the table. I kid =P

[Jestor]

well with the current line of water rulings they would rule that the Beast would have to be standing on the jack before it was placed on the table. I kid =P

I laughed

[TheLoki]

I laughed

Shattered my ankle yesterday so the Docs have me on a bunch of opiates. I'm in rare form.

[mortal]

The usual for our group is that we grab 3 pieces of terrain each off the shelf and alternate placing them. I always grab one piece of shallow water and no one complains. I've never been a ****** about it by grabbing two or three though.

We have a Circle player who always grabs 3 forests though.....

[Cannotcope]

Locally we have a River Set and a Swamp set as part of our terrain options (boxed into neat little thematic boxes for storage, other sets include a Bunkers set, Desert set, Winterland set, etc...). I haven't seen to many warmachine players balk at using the River or Swamp sets and even remember a recent game where a pair of warmachine players were duking it out with a pile of 'two open fist' jacks on a board set up that could only be described as "A River Runs Through It"

[Jestor]

Shattered my ankle yesterday so the Docs have me on a bunch of opiates. I'm in rare form.

Not sure why but I just had a vision of buying dozens on Wrastlers and modeling them on top of things like the Behemoth. This way I could break them out when my Wrastler gets the Behemoth in the water.

Shattering bones sucks man. At least it was not the hands so you cna do some serious paint-a-thons!