View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently September 20th, 2017, 3:37 pm



Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
 Battle Report: S.N. Corsairs v Shattered Sword Paladins 
Author Message
Bottle Cap
User avatar

Joined: June 4th, 2017, 3:35 pm
Posts: 4
What follows is my observations of a game between forum members Mirgroht and Pitstarter. This game was played last night (01/07/17), at our local gaming group. The game was 35pts and the Cadres as follows:

Star Nebula Corsairs:

Questing Knight - Wildspace Gabe w/ Fleshreaper (14)
Hero - Jenner the Seeker (8)
Minion - Broadside (4)
Minion Squad - Blowhards [x2] (4)
Minion Squad - Corsairs [x4] (5)


Shattered Sword Paladins:

Questing Knight - Sebastian Cross (QK) w/ Rook (15)
Hero - Navarre Hauer (10)
Minion Squad - Paragons [x2] (5)
Minion Squad - Swordsworn [x4] (4)
Boosts - Combat Stimulants (1)


Star Nebula Corsairs gain first activation.

Turn One

- Hero Activation: Jenner the Seeker. Moved to engage the Swordsworn. A successful activation of Bastard Cross resulted in 5dmg. The Swordsworn managed to Block 2dmg. Jenner received a luck token from the flip for more damage, and immediately discards to repeat the action. The Swordsworn repeat their defensive action to reduce the damage to 3. One Swordsworn removed as a casualty.
- Minion Activation: Blowhards, who do not manage to take any action.

- Hero Activation: Sebastian Cross. Engaged Jenner for 'Benediction', with Jenner defending against 3 of the damage to take 2dmg.
- Minion Activation: The Swordsworn join Sebastian in melee with Jenner, but do not have the Esper for any actions.

- Hero Activation: Wildspace Gabe. Who steps up to cast 'Darkmagic' on Sebastian, and increases the damage with a press. Sebastian manages to prevent the majority of the damage, but the effect of not being able to play cards to pay for actions during his next turn is applied.
- Minion Activation: The Broadside moved into position, but didn't have enough Esper for an action.

- Hero Activation: Navarre. Who moved into position, ready to engage the hiding Corsairs.
- Minion Activation: Paragons. Who followed Navarre, but also took no action in preparation for engaging the Corsairs next turn.

Turn Two

- Hero Activation: Jenner. Who engaged the Cypher Rook, and proceeded to attempt two Cleave actions on the little Cypher, succeeding both times, but the Shielding effect reducing the damage of each attack.
- Minion Activation: Broadside. The large gun took sight at the Paragons... only to not have enough Esper to engage.

- Hero Activation: Navarre. Who engages the Corsairs with Dragon Slayer, and felling two of them.
- Minion Activation. Paragons. Emboldened by Navarre's example, they too engage the Corsairs, this time with Blazing Sword, and fell the last two.

+1 VP to Shattered Sword

- Hero Activation: Gabe. Seeking to avenge the Corsairs, Gabe engages the Paragons and cuts into them with Flashing Ginsu, even their armour couldn't save them as the piercing effect negates armour and deals 4dmg.
- Minion Activation: Blowhards. Seeing the cluster of Swordsworn and Sebastian, they throw in some explosives for Crowd Control, blasting away 2 Swordsworn, but also blasting Jenner into a vending machine, inflicting damage on the Hero.

- Hero Activation: Sebastian. Taking advantage of a stunned Jenner, Sebastian engages again and inflicts 2 damage after Jenner's block reduces the damage.
- Minion Activation: Swordsworn. The remaining Swordsworn assists Sebastian and a Sword Strike deals 3dmg after Jenners armour takes some of the damage.

Turn Three

- Hero Activation: Jenner. Sensing the end, Jenner doubles his efforts and engages Rook to try to cripple the Shattered Sword a little. Another couple of attacks, with a Luck Token discarded to attack again results in another few points of damage, but the Cypher remains in this mortal realm for now.
- Minion Activation: Blowhards. Once again They fire in some Crowd Control towards the remaining Swordsworn, but with boosted armour and 'Block', the sole survivor remains unharmed.

- Hero Activation: Navarre. Taking advantage of the shooting rules, Navarre ignores Gabe and fores off a Blinding Beam at Jenner. Even with Armour 5 and Block, this was still enough to end Jenners presence in the battle.
- Minion Activation: Paragons. Emboldened by Navarre's example, the Paragons Blazing Sword Gabe for an impressive 6dmg, none of which is blocked or reduced.

+1 VP for Shattered Sword

- Hero Activation: Gabe. Getting some more hits in, Gabe continues Flashing Ginsu at the Paragons, dealing a small amount of damage, before dancing round and doing the same to Navarre, but getting a Righteous Shield in the face for some Backlash 2.
- Minion Activation: Broadside. Finally able to take an action, the Broadside fires off a Fusilade at the Paragons, downing them.

+1 VP for Star Nebular Corsairs

- Hero Activation: Sebastian. Now free of Jenner attempts to hunt down the Blowhards, but with no Esper can only move to engage them.
- Minion Activation: Swordsworn. Following her leader, the remaining Swordsworn engage the Blowhards with a Sword Strike, cutting one down.

Turn Four

- Hero Activation: Gabe. Keeps up the pressure on Navarre, but the first attack fails with no Esper. A luck token is discarded and the second attack is successful, with less damage after Block.
- Minion Activation: Broadside. Trying to help out their mate, the Broadside blows a hole through the remaining Swordsworn.

+1 VP for Star Nebula Corsairs

- Hero Activation: Sebastian. Seeking vengeance, Sebastian puts the remaining Blowhard to the sword for 5dmg.
- Minion Activation: Rook. Repositions.

+1 VP for Shattered Sword

- Hero Activation: Fleshreaper. Seeing that his master needs some help, Fleshreaper drops a Premium Upgrade token nearby to boost all active skills.
- Minions: Broadside. Also seeing the need to help out, the Broadside fires a Fusilade at Navarre, who shrugs off the damage with his armour alone.

- Hero Activation: Navarre. Keeping up the pressure on Gabe, Navarre uses Dragon Slayer, with Gabe only managing to Guard, reducing the damage to 4.
- Minion Activation: Rook. Repositions.

Turn Five

- Hero Activation: Gabe. Calling on his reserves Gabe Flashing Ginsus' Navarre again, little pinpricks of damage slowly whittling down the Shattered Sword Hero.
- Minion Activation: Fleshreaper. Keeping up the bonus, Fleshreaper re-engages Premium Upgrade for Gabe.

- Hero Activation: Navarre. Needing to do something to keep himself in the game Navarre acts, and can do nothing as the Esper fails him.
- Minion Activation: Rook. Repositions.

- Hero Activation: Fleshreaper. Acting as a hero now, Fleshreaper attacks Navarre with the self named Flesh Reaper, and the Damage 2, Piercing 3 is not enough to beak him down this turn, but a convenient flip allows a Luck token to be discarded to act again and this time breaks through the stubborn armour, felling Navarre.
- Minion Activation: Broadside. Repositions.

+1 VP for Star Nebula Corsairs

- Hero Activation: Sebastian. Moves to objective.
-Minion Activation: Rook. No action.

+1 VP for Shattered Sword, awarded before games' end, due to working out that no more points can be scored by SNC before Sebastian acts again and scores.

Final Score: SNC 3 - 4 SSP

I'll try to add pictures at some point, but currently the forum doesn't like the size of my phots

Issues/Questions raised during the game

  • Rook has the Stoic Trait, and thus has the ability to gain 'Righteous' tokens. However, since Rook does not currently have a defensive ability, and therefore cannot meet the criteria to gain a Righteous token.
  • Wildspace Gabe, and his action 'Flashing Ginsu' states: 'Take this action again against a different target'. Should this be clarified to be a different target unit? Since multi-model units may still be a new target.
  • Flashing Ginsu (cont.), does this action allow to be pressed further times, therefore being an almost 'endless loop'?
  • Navarre Hauer, should backlash be that cheap?
  • Jenner the Seeker, no mention of 'Ossyrian' in the Keywords list
  • Are defensive cards only flipped if the attack is successful?


August 2nd, 2017, 8:41 pm
Profile
Employee
User avatar

Joined: August 22nd, 2016, 6:01 pm
Posts: 624
Thank you for the report!

I generally reply to these via email but I think you just posted it here (which is fine).

_________________
The Demogorgon tires of your silly human bickering!

Email: justin.gibbs@ninjadivision.com


August 2nd, 2017, 9:02 pm
Profile
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: August 27th, 2012, 5:11 am
Posts: 477
Fawlkes wrote:
Rook has the Stoic Trait, and thus has the ability to gain 'Righteous' tokens. However, since Rook does not currently have a defensive ability, and therefore cannot meet the criteria to gain a Righteous token.
There exist AoEs which allow a unit to gain a defense action. I'm guessing the setup required will make it rare that Rook would benefit from this, but that does mean Stoic is not entirely useless for him.

Fawlkes wrote:
Wildspace Gabe, and his action 'Flashing Ginsu' states: 'Take this action again against a different target'. Should this be clarified to be a different target unit? Since multi-model units may still be a new target.
When targeting a squad, you are still targeting the unit as a whole, but you are required to designate a model for the purposes of additional effects, such as Blast. (p31)

Fawlkes wrote:
Flashing Ginsu (cont.), does this action allow to be pressed further times, therefore being an almost 'endless loop'?
Yes, p24 states abilities that allow an action to be taken again must be paid for as normal, including presses. Keep in mind that the press to retake the action is a discard, which inherently limits how many times you can take the action. It is worth clarifying if "different target" only check the current action, or if it checks all actions taken on a given activation. In Gabe's case, the latter would also limit the number of attacks to the number of units he is engaged with, but the former would allow a player to alternate between two units until one was killed. Ranged/psychic attacks with similar presses are potentially more problematic when they are able to retarget the same unit, though all effects so far have had a cost that involved a discard or the expenditure of a faction token.
@Justin - The rulebook on p24 uses the word "twice", but nowhere else is there a rule that caps repeat actions to one additional time. Suggest clarifying wording.

Fawlkes wrote:
Navarre Hauer, should backlash be that cheap?
You still have to be able to pay the base defense cost, and the threat of backlash could be an effective deterrent to an attack. Most defenses had their costs reduced over the last couple of updates. Consider also the cost of a +2 damage press on an attack and the 1Y cost for Backlash 2 isn't problematic, imo.

Fawlkes wrote:
Jenner the Seeker, no mention of 'Ossyrian' in the Keywords list
Ossyrian is also missing from the listed traits in the core rules. SPM did mention that some of the history was getting cleaned up, so it's possible that a retcon is taking place. (Though I hope it's an oversight, as I liked the idea that one of the Six Orders is basically rogue. Of course, that means there's a parallel with the Noh Empire and the Gomandi, so they may have other plans for Jenner's backstory.)

Fawlkes wrote:
Are defensive cards only flipped if the attack is successful?
Defensive skills are only flipped if the attack is successful and the defending player chooses to attempt a defense. A player may let an attack succeed without contest and flip nothing if desired.


August 3rd, 2017, 3:47 am
Profile
Bottle Cap
User avatar

Joined: June 4th, 2017, 3:35 pm
Posts: 4
Quote:
There exist AoEs which allow a unit to gain a defense action. I'm guessing the setup required will make it rare that Rook would benefit from this, but that does mean Stoic is not entirely useless for him.


From a brief scan of the Shattered Sword Cards and Main Rules, it appears that only the Medikit Boost would allow Rook to utilise this Trait. Unless I'm mistaken.

Quote:
Defensive skills are only flipped if the attack is successful and the defending player chooses to attempt a defense. A player may let an attack succeed without contest and flip nothing if desired.


The rules as written, rather than rules as intended don't mention that the attack has to succeed to make a defensive action. Perhaps this should be added to avoid confusion and unfair play.


August 3rd, 2017, 9:46 am
Profile
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: September 9th, 2012, 1:25 am
Posts: 316
Location: Australia
First line of Defence Actions:
The target may take a Defense action.

So if the attack fails you can happily choose to not take a Defence action.

That said it probably should be clarified because currently you can take a Defence action even if the attack fails which is quite useful for SSP...

_________________
Australian Soda Pop Community On Facebook
South East QLD Relic Knights on Facebook


August 4th, 2017, 8:39 am
Profile WWW
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: August 27th, 2012, 5:11 am
Posts: 477
Adding "If at least the base cost of the attack is not paid, the action ends," to step 3 - Pay Costs should clean up that issue nicely. I had been playing under the assumption that the above was the case, but Obsidian-Crane is correct that in the absence of specific language, the full order of operations would progress, allowing a defense against nothing.

Likewise, it is ambiguous if a player can declare an attack and then intentionally choose to let it fail (for example, if the flip was poor and they do not wish to pay for the attack from their hand). I also assume this is the case, but if "an action, once initiated, must be paid for if able," then that line should be added earlier in the section. Now, it is made clear that a player may skip the action on a unit's activation, but that doesn't necessarily imply that they must follow through if an action is attempted.


August 4th, 2017, 11:55 am
Profile
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: September 9th, 2012, 1:25 am
Posts: 316
Location: Australia
Hmm as worded you must pay all costs if able...
But the text doesn't cover what happens if you cannot pay the costs.
We all know what is supposed to happen, but the rules don't actually cover that...

_________________
Australian Soda Pop Community On Facebook
South East QLD Relic Knights on Facebook


August 5th, 2017, 10:33 pm
Profile WWW
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: August 27th, 2012, 5:11 am
Posts: 477
My problem with "you have to pay if able" rules is that it creates a situation where one player can accuse the other of cheating. In trick-taking card games, it is fairly easy to catch someone who is illegally holding back, but in RK with constant card drawing, it is harder to prove you weren't withholding a card.

And while there should never be a situation where an action is declined if a flip could pay the base cost, I think the rules should be written to allow a player to decline to pay for an action if they feel that paying from hand after a bad flip would leave them vulnerable. If forced payment stays the rule, I worry that the 1.0 issue of "I'm not going to attack because I need to have resources to defend" will return.


August 7th, 2017, 5:05 pm
Profile
Bottle Cap
User avatar

Joined: June 4th, 2017, 3:35 pm
Posts: 4
I have to disagree with the idea of forcing a player to take an action if able. I come from a gaming background where holding off attacks and actions for a more favourable position is key to winning, and I agree with Glitch's comment about being unable to defend if you have to burn your only (Insert Esper colour here) in your hand due to a bad flip. I'd rather the game let me play when I want to.


August 7th, 2017, 5:28 pm
Profile
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: September 9th, 2012, 1:25 am
Posts: 316
Location: Australia
I'm certainly not advocating that you should be forced, it should always be an option and it is how I have been testing, but the RAW say something different. (Its another case where I think the rules should match what the players do.)

_________________
Australian Soda Pop Community On Facebook
South East QLD Relic Knights on Facebook


August 8th, 2017, 11:28 pm
Profile WWW
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: September 9th, 2012, 1:25 am
Posts: 316
Location: Australia
I know I said I was done but...

After playing through the first 3 games of the 2P rules I talked with the father and daughter that tested them for me a bit about the rules and explained the line of sight rules fully (as the 2P set doesn't have them and we used some terrain).

The father had this to say as part of a general response to my feedback on the 2P rules:

Miss 13 thinks the rule about being on top of building and basically ignoring interior of building as an LoS obstacle is nuts.

Which again brings me back to the idea that people are going to essentially play the rules how they expect them to work not how they do work, so something should be done to address that so they are more likely to follow the rules by default.

_________________
Australian Soda Pop Community On Facebook
South East QLD Relic Knights on Facebook


August 16th, 2017, 10:56 am
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 11 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by STSoftware.