Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Spinsane last won the day on September 21 2017

Spinsane had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Spinsane

  • Rank
    Star Player

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Montreal, Canada
  • Interests
    Play Mason's and Mortician's, and occasionally Fisherman's and Butcher's and Union and...
  1. Confidence vs Diceless Plays

    Actually, CPs that target (or AoEs that cover) friendly models also have to hit, you just can auto-hit if you so chose:
  2. Eastons secret tech vs Thresher in US nationals

    Can't say I remember what it was, but I could almost swear he talked about it in a podcast shortly afterwards, most likely Strictly the Worst or Singled Out, considering what I was listening to back then, so maybe look at their older casts and find their 'post Worlds Easten interview' itterations and see if there's anything there?
  3. By the way, since no one seems to have really answered the original question, yes, Jawbone traps stack. Modifiers with the same name do not stack, but damage is not a modifier, it's just damage, so multiple Jawbone traps would stack.
  4. Fisherman Player Summaries

    As of last weekend, Salt is now also the best Fisherman Captain, and works very well with whichever mascot you prefer, whether it be Corsair or Shark...
  5. I'd have to assume that no, she wouldn't get the bonus. As per previous rulings, as soon as the pass is over the player reverts to his original "enemy" status before you get to resolve any Teamwork action. Similarly, as has already been explained, she couldn't benefit from a Seduced Harry's Inspiring Hat...
  6. In all cases, I don't see why the effects would not affect "temporary" friendly models, since we already have rulings confirming that friendly models count as friendly for all other purposes (see below, for example) If that model still has influence on it, then I have to assume yes. But then, keep in mind you'd also be giving them extra VPs and MP:
  7. Wrapped Snacks and VP

    But isn't this irrelevant to the current example? These are not Attack/result modifiers... In the case of Gravedigger, the play affects the enemy model, and says you get [+1]VP if it is taken out this turn. Since the Taken Out step occurs after the attack has been fully resolved, Gravedigger would be in effect at that point. Snack Break is similar; it is not an attack or result modifier, it simply states that when Windle next inflicts the taken-out condition you gain an extra [1]VP.
  8. Snared while Moving

    It does:
  9. Just note that you need Line of Sight to your target to be able to declare a charge, so if intervening models were to block LoS in addition to your charge lane, you can't actually declare the counter-charge at all...
  10. Checking for Taken Out

    Fair enough, I see the point now, and can agree I see no way to resolve this simply that doesn't seem to break one rule or ruling...
  11. Checking for Taken Out

    Which part of the previous ruling seems to indicate this is not already handled by the standard "Any effects and abilities that trigger at the same timing step may be resolved in any order the Controlling Player chooses." rule that is found on page 15 of the rulebook?
  12. Lone striker

    @MilitaryCoo Just a friendly reminder that the card only affects the first friendly model you activate (if you win ini), not every friendly fighter... Incidentally, this means it won't affect any model that temporarily becomes friendly because they wouldn't be activated, just become active...
  13. Checking for Taken Out

    Fair enough. I was under the impression the issue in the other thread was one of "when is the check for Taking-Out made" - once all triggered effects have been resolved, or after each effect has been resolved individually...
  14. Checking for Taken Out

    Was it necessary to open another thead for this, considering there's already one open?
  15. There is a difference between these two. However, the timing sequence being referred to in the first example is off, which clearly makes the distinction harder to see. Let's start with example two first, however. As explained in the quoted post, each Character Play is resolved in full, including checking for TakeOut, whenever a CP is played/resolved. This means that multiple plays being initiated/triggered in sequence (wrapping and selecting multiple or results) would be resolved one after the other and the possibility of a single character being taken out multiple times. Now if we look at the first example, @LeadDiceandBeers shouldn't ever even refer to the "Sequence of a Character Play". We're not resolving character plays here - the plays were resolved when PinVice used Ctrl-Alt-Del previously, when Declaring the play / rolling dice / etc would have occured (if the play had targetted an opponent). In that case, we should be looking at the "Sequence of an Activation" for the timing step when the effects are resolved (which would be Step 3, End of Activation). Once all simultaneous effects are resolved you then initiate the Taken Out Sequence (at least that's how I'd interpret the wording of the Reanimate and Escaping Fate resolutions in the Collected Clarifications Thread).