RegisterDonateLogin

Not yet DCI legal.

Welcome Guest Active Topics | Members

Con Artist Options
UrbanShmi
Posted: Friday, November 15, 2013 8:34:56 PM
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member , Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2009
Posts: 859
See, to me, Deri's explanation seems the most logical. If the CE comes from an enemy, it makes sense that Disruptive (Enemy CEs are suppressed) on your team would block it, regardless of who is receiving it.

I honestly don't know what the ruling is. Conflicting things have been said, and this is definitely an area that needs some clarity.
FlyingArrow
Posted: Friday, November 15, 2013 9:03:53 PM
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member , Moderator

Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,189
fingersandteeth wrote:
IF you have disruptive on your squad and you steal a CE with Con Artist and are sitting in your disruptive, you are disrupted.

You are subject to enemy commander effect via con artist but disruptive suppresses them.

Its the most concise way of doing it.



While I agree with what you and UrbanShmi are saying, I do not believe that is the current ruling. Like UrbanShmi, however, I am not 100% sure on this ruling. And apparently an errata is on the way. In the mean time...

Sithborg wrote:
There are 2 modes of Disruptive.

When it affects the commander. And when it affects the beneficiary. Advanced Battle Meditation affects the whole board, commanders and beneficiaries a like. So, the Con Artist characters would be affected as well. And I am not going to add more to the cluster that is Con Artist by ruling on the difference between enemy and allies CEs. So, a Con Artist being affected by Advanced Battle Meditation or Disruptive will be unable to benefit from any CE's, unless they have Disciplined Leader.

Unless you want to reopen Bombad Gungan with it's interactions and abilities that say they specify attacking an enemy.


This says (to me) that Disruptive, and by extension ABM, affects characters, not commander effects. I gave more detail about how that would work with Con Artist, and I asked for a correction if it was incorrect. I did not receive a correction.
swinefeld
Posted: Friday, November 15, 2013 10:14:22 PM
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member , Moderator

Joined: 1/30/2009
Posts: 6,424
Location: Southern Illinois
I agree, this is an area that needs thorough treatment in the FAQ for clarity.

Quote:
Enemy commander effects have no effect (on enemies and allies alike) within 6 squares of this character.

Characters within 6 squares cannot receive the benefits (or the penalties) of enemy commander effects until they move out of range. An enemy commander within 6 squares has its commander effect suppressed until it moves out of range. (It still counts as a commander.)


I read the glossary as saying this:

1.) Enemy commanders in disruptive range have their CE blocked completely.

2.) Non-commander enemies in range are blocked from receiving CEs (from their side or yours)

3.) Any allied character in range is blocked from being affected by an enemy's CE (Con Artist goes here)

4.) the character with Disruptive is...? Guessing it works like Ysalimiri and so it's considered in range for #3
FlyingArrow
Posted: Monday, December 2, 2013 6:12:34 PM
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member , Moderator

Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,189
swinefeld wrote:
I agree, this is an area that needs thorough treatment in the FAQ for clarity.

Quote:
Enemy commander effects have no effect (on enemies and allies alike) within 6 squares of this character.

Characters within 6 squares cannot receive the benefits (or the penalties) of enemy commander effects until they move out of range. An enemy commander within 6 squares has its commander effect suppressed until it moves out of range. (It still counts as a commander.)


I read the glossary as saying this:

1.) Enemy commanders in disruptive range have their CE blocked completely.

2.) Non-commander enemies in range are blocked from receiving CEs (from their side or yours)

3.) Any allied character in range is blocked from being affected by an enemy's CE (Con Artist goes here)

4.) the character with Disruptive is...? Guessing it works like Ysalimiri and so it's considered in range for #3


I also read it that way, but is not how I read what Sithborg said. Regardless, it appears that my understanding was incorrect. I do not know what the current ruling is, nor do I know what the forthcoming errata is.
SignerJ
Posted: Monday, December 2, 2013 6:40:33 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 1/2/2012
Posts: 746
FlyingArrow wrote:
I also read it that way, but is not how I read what Sithborg said. Regardless, it appears that my understanding was incorrect. I do not know what the current ruling is, nor do I know what the forthcoming errata is.


We really need to get a ruling for this. It's all very confusing.
FlyingArrow
Posted: Monday, January 27, 2014 9:42:34 AM
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member , Moderator

Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,189
SignerJ wrote:
FlyingArrow wrote:
I also read it that way, but is not how I read what Sithborg said. Regardless, it appears that my understanding was incorrect. I do not know what the current ruling is, nor do I know what the forthcoming errata is.


We really need to get a ruling for this. It's all very confusing.


Agreed.
Sithborg
Posted: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 9:26:18 AM
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member , Moderator, Rules Guy

Joined: 8/24/2008
Posts: 5,201
Honestly, it is a timing thing that I need to figure out between Con Artist and Camaraderie.
FlyingArrow
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 5:57:29 AM
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member , Moderator

Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,189
This quote is from another thread, but I thought it made more sense to reply here...
"Echo24" wrote:
I'm not even sure what the confusion in that other thread is; I understand Sithborg's original explanation. But then he makes some cryptic comments which make it a little confusing, but I don't see any real counterarguments to his explanation other than "That's not how I read it".


Options A, B, and C represent 3 possible interpretations of the interaction between Con Artist and Disruptive.

1. A character with Con Artist is subject to an enemy's commander effect. The Con Artist is within range of an ally's Disruptive. Does the Con Artist still benefit from the commander effect?

A) Yes. Disruptive affects enemies, not allies.
B) No. Disruptive affects enemy commander effects, so the enemy commander effect is suppressed.
C) No. Disruptive affects both enemies and enemy commander effects.


2. A character with Con Artist is subject to an enemy's commander effect. The Con Artist is within range of an enemy's Disruptive. Does the Con Artist still benefit from the commander effect?

A) No. Disruptive affects enemies, so the Con Artist is not subject to any commander effects.
B) Yes. Disruptive only affects enemy commander effects, so the Con Artist can still benefit from the stolen commander effect.
C) No. Disruptive affects both enemies and enemy commander effects.


Which of (A), (B), or (C) is the current ruling? I'm not making any counterargument to Sithborg's ruling. I'm just not sure what the ruling is. I thought that Sithborg ruled (A) in his first 2 posts in this thread. I posted as much and asked for a correction if I was wrong. I received no correction. But then fingersandteeth and Darth Jim (on SHNN) said the answer to question (1) is no. (I'm not sure if they meant option B or C, though.) UrbanShmi and swinefeld agreed with the reasoning of fingersandteeth and Darth Jim, but (like me) they seemed to be waiting for Sithborg to clarify.

Echo24
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 6:29:27 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 9/30/2008
Posts: 1,288
Ok, I think I see the confusion. It doesn't appear that any answer to question 1 has been given. The answer to question 2 seems unambiguously to be "A".

The Glossary would support B or C for question 1 in my opinion, but I'm not an official rules source. Sithborg is the only one that can make that call.

This is a pretty good example I think of why our current rules structure is severely lacking, specifically that we have just a single person (Sithborg) as the end of the line on rulings (especially since he is often unclear and/or cryptic) and that the rules rely exceptionally heavily on precedent instead of just giving clear rulings to individual situations. That conversation isn't really here nor there, though.

I also stand by not understanding the confusion in the other thread, because this doesn't seem to be related except for very tangentially in that both threads mention Con Artist.
urbanjedi
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 6:31:26 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/30/2008
Posts: 1,882
It was my understanding that a if a character with con artist was within range of disruptive (on either side) it would get disrupted.

Because disruptive effects enemy commander effects (when in range of an ally with disruptive) and because disruptive effects enemies (when in range of an enemy disruptive piece).

So I personally believe that the answer to your question above are
C (disruptive effects enemies and enemy commander effects)
Echo24
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 6:38:42 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 9/30/2008
Posts: 1,288
Sithborg made it clear that if an allied character is being affected by an enemy's Disruptive (and effects like it), they benefit from NO CEs, enemy and ally alike.

I do not believe he made a clear ruling on what happens when an allied character is being affected by an ally's Disruptive, though.
TimmerB123
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 7:16:50 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,195
Location: Chicago
Echo24 wrote:
I do not believe he made a clear ruling on what happens when an allied character is being affected by an ally's Disruptive, though.


Great, now that it's clear what is unclear, how do we clear it up?
Echo24
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 7:35:33 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 9/30/2008
Posts: 1,288
Local judges make rulings to their best ability (B or C in the above list seem to be most supported by the glossary) until an official ruling is made. Because of the way the rules of this game have been dealt with since day 1, that means waiting for Sithborg.

I still don't see what any of this has to do with the other thread, though, except for the tangential link.
juice man
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 8:04:41 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 1/5/2009
Posts: 2,241
Location: Akron Ohio, just south of dantooine.
Echo24 wrote:
I still don't see what any of this has to do with the other thread, though, except for the tangential link.
The only link is Tim's jumbled brain. I think he was attempting humor.
TimmerB123
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 8:27:48 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,195
Location: Chicago
juice man wrote:
Echo24 wrote:
I still don't see what any of this has to do with the other thread, though, except for the tangential link.
The only link is Tim's jumbled brain. I think he was attempting humor.


Some don't seem to understand the concept. LOL
juice man
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 8:31:02 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 1/5/2009
Posts: 2,241
Location: Akron Ohio, just south of dantooine.
Boy, do I get that alot. People just stare at me.Confused
TimmerB123
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 8:41:09 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,195
Location: Chicago
juice man wrote:
Boy, do I get that alot. People just stare at me.Confused


I for one quite like your dry delivery. Still the best combo in Cards Against Humanity history was constructed by you:

If God didn't want us to enjoy (blank), he wouldn't have given us (blank).

We'll let everyone fill in there own blanks, and those that were there can remember Joe's awesome combo.
fingersandteeth
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 12:23:59 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/2/2008
Posts: 521
Location: Chicago
Con Artist Clarifications from a designer. (ignore my other post on this thread, i have now gone through the design thread and glossary entries of the relevant SAs and read the relevant CE's)

Card text - During setup, after seeing your opponent's squad, you may choose one enemy commander effect. This character is now subject to that commander effect regardless of restrictions. This effect lasts until the chosen commander is defeated.

Glossary (from design thread) - Con artist - During setup, after seeing your opponent's squad, you may choose one commander effect. This character is now subject to that commander effect regardless of restrictions on faction, range, special ability's, identifier or unique rules. This effect lasts until the chosen commander is defeated.


So the timing of the ability is exactly like reinforcements and chosen at the same time, ergo, you can't choose a CE from an opponents reinforcements because its a simultaneous reveal (write it on a piece of paper or something). I don't know what the implications in regards to camaraderie is because there is very little explanation about Camaraderie anywhere. As far as Pelleaon goes, its after Con artist so Pelleaon can whip that commander away from the board and your Con Artistry is void.

When you chose a CE you get that bonus so long as there are no other caveats (e.g. you need to be within 6 of an ally). Ignore ranges and other qualifiers, if it's GOWKs CE, you get +3 +3 until GOWK is defeated so long as you are within 6 of an ally. Note that you are just applicable to the commanders CE, if you choose a CE that a commander has the option of granting (i.e. swap), you are under the commanders control, they decide when its applied so its virtually useless to pick something like that (likewise Pelleaons CE, dodonna etc).
So you would be picking your figure to have a bonus, or gain force renewal, or GMA, or mobile and evade etc.

Disruptive interactions

Quote:
Disruptive Enemy commander effects have no effect (on enemies and allies alike) within 6 squares of this character.

Characters within 6 squares cannot receive the benefits (or the penalties) of enemy commander effects until they move out of range. An enemy commander within 6 squares has its commander effect suppressed until it moves out of range. (It still counts as a commander.)

A character who starts its turn outside this range and whose speed is modified by a commander effect continues to move at that speed for the rest of its turn, even if it comes within 6 squares of this character. Conversely, a character that begins its turn within range cannot have its speed modified by an enemy commander effect for the rest of its turn, even if it moves farther than 6 squares from this character.


This is the glossary text for disruptive.

As you can see, the very first line states that if your Con artist is in your own disruptive, Con Artists lose the bonus. You are effected by an enemy commander effect and the disruptive effect is spelled out in the 1st line of disruptive.
If the enemy Commander is in your disruptive, distracted or ABM then you will lose the benefit of the CE.

The weirdness is that when your character with Con Artist is within your opponents disruptive, con artist is unaffected because you are not affected by an enemy CE of the disruptive character. Thus, it is not suppressed by that disruptive. Disruptive affects enemy CEs, not enemy characters.

So to recap

1. choose Con artist CE simultaneous with reinforcements, can't choose reinforcement CE's as a result
2. pick a bonus and you always apply to it except for conditions or disruptive issues, CE is chosen like Yammosk (one line of a CE).
3. Your disruptive/abm/distraction suppresses your own Con Artist. Con Artists are unaffected by the opponents CE suppression. Think of it as the enemy is unable to scramble the signal so that the con artist is not aware of orders.


Objections?
swinefeld
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 12:35:13 PM
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member , Moderator

Joined: 1/30/2009
Posts: 6,424
Location: Southern Illinois
Looks good to me, Deri.
Echo24
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2014 1:04:14 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 9/30/2008
Posts: 1,288
I agree that that is the best way to rule it and fits with the Glossary. That's also how Ricky and I played it at GenCon. It's certainly the most intuitive way to rule it.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Bloo Milk Theme Created by shinja
Powered by Yet Another Forum.net.
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.