Order on how to place Attachments (Jaime, Maimed Hostage; Jaqen, Mysterious Prisoner)
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: Order on how to place Attachments (Jaime, Maimed Hostage; Jaqen, Mysterious Prisoner)

  1. #1

    Question Order on how to place Attachments (Jaime, Maimed Hostage; Jaqen, Mysterious Prisoner)

    Hi,

    Jaime (Maimed Hostage) has the ability Valuable Captive, which says in its first part:

    This model is always the last model destroyed from this unit.

    Now my question is, if the enemy unit has an Attachment besides Jaime, did the Attachment get removed before Jaime if it has no similar ability?

    I know some of the people out there are arumenting with a forum post, which is about KG Jaime and Ygritte who can kill an Attachment. In this case Michale Shinall has cleared that this rule is just a reminder of the basic rules, which I understand.
    But the post does not say anything about how the order is to place Attachments in a unit or in which order you are suppose to remove them, if one of the Attachments have such Abbility.
    So the forum post some people are refering to is just another case which has nothing to do with this problem in my opinion, so I hope I can get an answer here.

    Thanks you guys in advance

    TK2

  2. #2

    Default

    It's up to the owner of the Unit as to the order in which the Attachments are placed:

    Name:  Attach.jpg
Views: 243
Size:  16.7 KB
    Chaos is a ladder.

  3. #3

    Default

    Yea this one is interesting, perhaps the models that grant extra VP when the UNIT is destroyed should always be last? Otherwise they could be destroyed from a regular attack before the unit is destroyed thus missing out on that bonus VP? Not sure. Currently seems that the unit owner decides the order, as posted above, which means you better kill the unit when you remove the hostage model lol.

  4. #4

    Default

    There isn't any room for interpretation here, the rulebook is very clear that the owner of the Combat Unit decides on order of Attachments.

    If you can somehow calculate and plan it so the extra VP/effect/whatever guy dies and the unit is left with only 1 other model... Good on you I suppose? This isn't anything you can plan for.

  5. #5

    Default

    I would say that the rule book is a general rule and Jamie’s card is very specific.

    As a Night’s Watch player when I use ‘Take the black’ on a destroyed unit I would typically place the enemy attachment to the right of say Jon Snow. In this case Jamie’s rule would make him the last model.

    Just my interpretation.

    Joken

  6. #6

    Default

    The core rulebook is a very specific set of rules, where as Jaime's card is just a reminder of those rules. As Alliser says, the rules aren't there to be interpreted.

    For further clarification have a read of this thread:

    http://www.coolminiornot.com/forums/...Joffrey-Rickon

    The text of those cards is effectively reminder text (as the Core Rules already dictate that Attachments are the last models removed).
    Chaos is a ladder.

  7. #7

    Default

    As I said before in my post, the thread you mention is a very different situation than the problem which we have here.
    When its only a reminder, why its only on a few Attachments and not on every Attachment?
    Michael is only says that the rule is only a reminder if the Attachment is targeted by KG Jaime or Ygritte, which is a very specific situation.
    This explanation can not be used in general, because its a specific implication under a certain premise.

  8. #8

    Default

    So your question is in two parts:

    Q) In which order do you place attachments?
    A) It's up to the owner of that unit.

    Q) In which order do you remove attachments?
    A) From right to left (as per the core rulebook).
    Chaos is a ladder.

  9. #9

    Default

    Dean,

    Thanks for the correction.

    Joken
    No easy dice role too difficult......

  10. #10

    Default

    Models with the "Last model killed" Must be placed after attachments that do not have the "Last model killed"

    Compare Rickon (Last model killed) with Osha (regular attachment)

    If Rickon is able to be placed and killed before Osha, then he does not give up a victory point (He is dead and his card has no effect before the unit is destroyed)
    Obviously this is not how the rules are either worded or how they would work as Rickon would never have a drawback.

    The same applies to any units with (Last Model Killed) relative to non-Last model killed attachments.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daboarder View Post
    Models with the "Last model killed" Must be placed after attachments that do not have the "Last model killed"

    Compare Rickon (Last model killed) with Osha (regular attachment)

    If Rickon is able to be placed and killed before Osha, then he does not give up a victory point (He is dead and his card has no effect before the unit is destroyed)
    Obviously this is not how the rules are either worded or how they would work as Rickon would never have a drawback.

    The same applies to any units with (Last Model Killed) relative to non-Last model killed attachments.

    There is nothing in the rules that supports this. The rules state in the case of multiple attachments the unit's owner decides the order.

    It has also been ruled that, while models are removed one-by-one, they don't lose effects in that order- they are grouped by attack. Otherwise, by your own logic presented, it wouldn't matter at all when any of those models die, as they would technically die before the unit is destroyed (as units are not destroyed until AFTER the last model is removed).

    The only time their effects would not activate would be the exceedingly rare case where just enough wounds were dealt to kill them, while another attachment were in the unit, and leave the unit alive with 1 Wound. This is absolutely nothing that a player can actually plan for.

  12. #12

    Default

    so you argue that rickon can always be killed before Osha, and therefore because wounds are removed one at a time, that rickon never forgoes a victory point

  13. #13

    Default

    no, that is not what he argued.

  14. #14

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daboarder View Post
    so you argue that rickon can always be killed before Osha, and therefore because wounds are removed one at a time, that rickon never forgoes a victory point

    If I understand the point, as a Stark Player using Rickon, it is ALWAYS in the Stark Players best interest to orient a Rickon unit from left to right (facing forward) as Osha -> Rickon -> rest of unit. Doing so means on the off chance the unit is killed down to a single model with an attack, and then killed later, Rickon does not give up an extra VP since at the time of the units death the rules on Rickons card are no longer in effect. Same reasoning with Jaime Maimed Hostage, if he is placed into a unit with an attachment, the owner would want to orient the unit so that Jaime is the second to last model killed on the off chance the model is killed down to a single model.

    If say a unit has 4 models left and is killed in one attack, regardless of which positioning Rickon is, the valuable captive would trigger for the same reasoning Osha's go down fighting ( even if shes in the second to last slot) would trigger.


    As an aside, it does seem very odd that these cards say "this model is always the last to be killed" and yet Shinnal has said that this is not a superceceding rule, but simply a reminder of the rulebook. But if thats the case, why is it only on these models? And if he didn't say that, and the card text superceded the rule book as it normally would, then it it would clear up all this jank and silliness. But alas.....

  16. #16

    Default

    Shinall is also the first one to say (directly during the same statement) that his comments are not to be taken as an FAQ. which they are being treated as here.
    The card is clear that such models must be the last killed, there is confusion over the instance where 2 such models are present. But there is no supported rules confusion regarding where there is not.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daboarder View Post
    Shinall is also the first one to say (directly during the same statement) that his comments are not to be taken as an FAQ. which they are being treated as here.
    The card is clear that such models must be the last killed, there is confusion over the instance where 2 such models are present. But there is no supported rules confusion regarding where there is not.
    I agree, but that's the reasoning occurring in this thread

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daboarder View Post
    Shinall is also the first one to say (directly during the same statement) that his comments are not to be taken as an FAQ. which they are being treated as here.
    The card is clear that such models must be the last killed, there is confusion over the instance where 2 such models are present. But there is no supported rules confusion regarding where there is not.
    Just saying. Shinall has said that only the FAQ and this forum are to be taken as official rulings. He did include this forum as official.

    It's his podcast and other social media posts that should be taken with loads of salt.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yelraek View Post
    Just saying. Shinall has said that only the FAQ and this forum are to be taken as official rulings. He did include this forum as official.

    It's his podcast and other social media posts that should be taken with loads of salt.
    That's a good point. Guess it matter WHERE he said the text in question is just a reminder was said. I don't recall myself

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Codfather View Post
    That's a good point. Guess it matter WHERE he said the text in question is just a reminder was said. I don't recall myself
    Dean linked it in the 6th post.

    http://www.coolminiornot.com/forums/...Joffrey-Rickon

    He said it in these forums.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Privacy Policy  |   Terms and Conditions  |   Contact Us  |   The Legion


Copyright © 2001-2018 CMON Inc.

-->