Jump to content

Time Trap discussion!


Wallack

Recommended Posts

This is the card:

qZeCOjX.jpg

So there are a lot of interpretations here.

The rulebook states that a card might allow you to do something that is, otherwise, not allowed. With that in mind:

- Could you charge with a fighter that already charged? It says take an action no activate a fighter. But rules says that a fighter can charge only once. But rules also say that a card can allow you to do something otherwise not allowed.

- Could you attack with a fighter that already charged? same reason as before. A fighter that charged cannot be activated again. But this isn't an activation is just taking an action. Is like using sidestep in a fighter that charged.

- Skips your next activation, but, do you flip the token? I assume so, would be too OP otherwise I'd say. Is good enough because, for example, it lets you charge with 2 characters (without considering the previous two questions) to kill an enemy. Your opponent will have two activations in a row too but the initiative is better in your case. You could use to finish a strong fighter, the warden of the sepulchral guard for example or a very upgraded one.

 

I would have worded it completely different, like, switch the order of the next two activations. And make it that simple. Is even better because you could use it to make your opponent have two activations and then you have two. I know is better to have two activations before than your opponent but can be a bluff or just to make them kill some of your fighters to get an objective (khorne's champion?)...

Anyways, I would play this card as rules-safe as possible, meaning that with this card I'm "activating" a fighter rather than taking an action with it to avoid charging twice or activating a fighter that charged, plus also flipping my next activation token when I skip it.

How would you treat this card?

I think this kind of discussions are healthy for the game!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great set of questions and indeed I think different wording would have cleared up this card.

- I believe that in order to preform an Action at all the model also must be legal for Activation, as a result I think the intention is to not have this allow you for a double charge. Nor would you "logically" be able to use this on a model who Charged.
- I believe that the inention of the second part is indeed to enforce a Pass in the next Activation, but yes that's not what it says.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Killax said:

Great set of questions and indeed I think different wording would have cleared up this card.

- I believe that in order to preform an Action at all the model also must be legal for Activation, as a result I think the intention is to not have this allow you for a double charge.
- I believe that the inention of the second part is indeed to enforce a Pass in the next Activation, but yes that's not what it says.
 

Yeah, I will play it very simple, activate a fighter and your next activation you do nothing and flip the token. So you cannot activate a charged or move a moved fighter. But sometimes I feel that wording could have been made so better ...

For example, switching the order of the next 2 activations, I think is great because that would also allow you to draw a card for example, but don't know, I think even with the strict rules I plan to use it with is still a powerful card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah this wording doesn't line up with anything found in the Core Set at all, which makes it such an oddity. Ideally it should say:

 

Quote

Choose a fighter who did not charge. They can thake an action.
You must pass your next activation. (you cannot play this card after your fourth activation)

*Under Move Actions it's specifically stated that a model who made a Move action cannot make another Move or Charge action.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Page 23, Ploy card section, 2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence states, "Some ploy cards allow you to make Move or Attack actions with your fighters - you can do this even if normally they would not be able to (e.g. because they have made a Charge action)" These clearly indicates that ploy cards can allow players to perform actions that they otherwise would not normally be allowed to do as stated by the OP.

The card says choose a fighter. There is no restriction mentioned or implied. The card then says they can take an action. Again, no restriction is mentioned or implied.  So given the RAR on page 23, I see no reason why the player using this card cannot choose a fighter that has either moved or charged to now perform another action, including a move or charge action "....even if normally they would not be able to...." at the possibly considerable cost of skipping your next activation.  In other words, for the near-term advantage of allowing you to immediately take another action possibly with a fighter that has already performed an action, be it move, charge, etc. you have to skip, i.e. lose your next activation which in effect will allow your opponent to perform two actions back to back.

It is potentially a very powerful ploy card, but there is a risk because the other player will get two activations in a row. Now just imagine if both players have this ploy card. Player one plays it, completes the second immediate action as allowed by the card, then the activation passes to player two. Player two now having two activations in a row, uses both actions as allowed and then plays the same ploy card to effectively get a third action in a row!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lord of Deeds I don't completely dissagree but will say that this card does not clearly indicate what Actions can be made, as under the normal circumstances in order to make an Action there is still a sub-set of additional rules to be followed. As mentioned, a model who Charged cannot Activate again, a model who Moved cannot Move or Charge again.

Just because there is no reminder in place doesn't mean that the usual rules can be skipped upon. In that same example, you cannot preform attack Actions if you do not have a legal tagret in range or make actions on models (such as The Warden) who Charged as it cannot be Activated again. In other words, a card not having a reminder doesn't mean you can skip all rules.

What I believe the intention here remains:
- Make an Action with a model that can be Activated and make a legal Action.
- The next Activation the player has who used this ploy will have to automatically pass in his next Activation. This means you do indeed give up an Activation.

The largest issue I have with this card is actually how it states Skip your next Activation and how this in the terminology isn't used. 'Skipping activation' could mean you skip the step an Action phase, Action phase and Power step or even a full Round. We don't really know at this point...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point with this bad wording is:

- Does the card tell you that you can do something that you normally can't do? If not, you cannot do it.

You say the card doesn't restrict you but it also doesn't tell you that you can. So to me it falls under normal rules.

According to the rules: "Some ploy cards allow you to make Move or Attack actions with your fighters - you can do this even if normally they would not be able to (e.g. because they have made a Charge action)"

Time trap doesn't say that it allows you to make an attack action with a fighter that already charged or to move a fighter that already moved.

To me is not about the restrictions that the card has written on it but the things that the card allows you to do it because they are written.

The only one I could accept is to attack with a fighter that charged because the card is not saying "activate a fighter" just make an action. Same way with Brightshield inspired you could react even if you charged.

However I wouldn't allow a charge or move action to be made with Time Trap if you already made a move or charge action because the card doesn't let you do it. It doesn't tell you that you can and the rules already say that you cannot so it doesn't need to restrict it.

About skipping I think you skip the next power phase because, if you think about it, it doesn't matter. You can keep playing ploy cards or upgrade cards after using Time Trap because is still a power phase. Then your opponent has an activation, with its power phase. You skip your activation and power phase but it doesn't matter because you had a power phase just a second ago, then your opponent has another activation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Wallack said:

 

The rulebook states that a card might allow you to do something that is, otherwise, not allowed. With that in mind:

- Could you charge with a fighter that already charged? It says take an action no activate a fighter. But rules says that a fighter can charge only once. But rules also say that a card can allow you to do something otherwise not allowed.

- Could you attack with a fighter that already charged? same reason as before. A fighter that charged cannot be activated again. But this isn't an activation is just taking an action. Is like using sidestep in a fighter that charged.

- Skips your next activation, but, do you flip the token? I assume so, would be too OP otherwise I'd say. Is good enough because, for example, it lets you charge with 2 characters (without considering the previous two questions) to kill an enemy. Your opponent will have two activations in a row too but the initiative is better in your case. You could use to finish a strong fighter, the warden of the sepulchral guard for example or a very upgraded one.

 

Firstly, I'm not mega happy about the image of the card but I think for the purpose of the question it's okay. If I hear anything from GW, it's going.

For me, the answer to this is yes for everything. The Card allows you to do something against the core rules, so your can charge or fight with a model that has already done these things and wouldn't be a target to do an action. Also for flipping the token over, I would say yes as you skip it.

I've posted this on the Warhammer Underworlds Facebook page as this should be passed over to the design team and we might see it FAQed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly think that it shouldn't be allowed as the card specifically doesn't say is allowed, it just tells you to take an action with the fighter you chose. It doesn't states that can charge or move again so that should be enough to follow then the rulebook that doesn't allow you to do that.

I would allow a character that charged to attack because a charge prevent activation but no actions, and this card allows you to take an action the same way an inspired Brightshield can have an attack action from her reaction even if she charged. However the actions the fighter can take with this card are still ruled by the book, meaning no charge or move if already done so.

A warden could take an action to revive or move 2 other fighters but never to charge if already charged as the rules say that only one charge or move action per fighter and phase and this card doesn't contradict that which is the main point of the, I think page 17 in the rulebook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I discussed thoroughly with friends, this afternoon, and we cannot come to an agreement that satisfies everyone's points of view.
My interpretation is pretty much the same as Wallack above: you can use Time Trap on a warrior who had previously charged (or moved) but you cannot move again (so no charge, either).
This said, there's the whole Page 23 thing that makes me doubt of my position...
I think we'll have to wait an official FAQ bt GW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After a ride on the train I've basically found the awnser which so far doesn't speak against itself. It's two parts so feel free to grab a cup of coffee.

Choose a fighter. They can make an Action.
1. You can make another Action with the model again if it's a legal Action as the game only allows you to make legal Actions to begin with (this applies for Move, Attack etc.)
1a. The moment you Charged with a fighter you have made a Move and Attack action. Based on how Move actions are defined you cannot make two Move actions with a single warrior ever. You can also not make another Charge as a charge consists out of a Move and Attack action.
1b. The moment you Charged with a fighter you cannot Activate him again, however as we do know from other examples, we can make multiple Attack actions with a model that Charged in several occasions, such as with Reactions.

Based on this, I'd say part 1 allows the Action to do the following:
- Make a Move Action if the model has not made a Move Action.
- Make a Charge Action if the model has not made a Move Action (or thus Charge before).
- Make an Attack Action (there is no restriction put on this Action)
- Go on Guard.

These four options are the only Action options a fighter can make. It does indeed mean that a model who has made an Attack Action before can make another one, Move, Charge or go on Guard aswell. It even allows a model who previously Charged to go on Guard.

Skip your next Activation.
2. "Skipping your next Activation" is an inccorect use of a game term that likely should mean Pass. Skip(ping) has multiple meanings. Which leads to the following options, all are fine by me:
2a. Jump or bounce over (British), and since opponents share Activations I feel you should then just be able to jump over your opponent.
2b. Omit or pass (over), and since this is a game option. I feel you should then just choose Pass for your next Activation.
2c.  Fail to attend, this way you basically leave the tournament. Leave all your gear in the place, just go.

I strongly believe the intend here is that 2b is the term we should think of here. Meaning you choose Pass for your next Activation.

I believe this solves all the previous questions. The continious issue that appears is that some assume making a Charge Action is one Action while in reality it isn't. However we can declare it as one if a fighter has not made a Move Action yet. I have corrected myself on that subject over and over again aswell. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite frankly its also an incredibly good card. Though your opponent can indeed do the same after it ;)

For all decks there is something to say for this card honestly as it allows for an Attack and Charge, though so can your opponent afterwards but still thaking initiative can lead to some sick Objectives being scored that otherwise couldnt. It feels like another auto include for all...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Killax said:

Quite frankly its also an incredibly good card. Though your opponent can indeed do the same after it ;)

For all decks there is something to say for this card honestly as it allows for an Attack and Charge, though so can your opponent afterwards but still thaking initiative can lead to some sick Objectives being scored that otherwise couldnt. It feels like another auto include for all...

Yes, you let your opponent do the "same" (he cannot charge and attack with the same fighter but has 2 activations in a row) but is better to have 2 attacks you and then 2 attacks your opponent than 1-1-1-1

I see it very good for reavers to shut down a stormcast for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

@Wallack I've posted your question on the Warhammer Underworlds Facebook page and had a reply it's being passed onto the Designers. So an Offical Answer should happen soon ;) 

Thanks!

I also added some questions about the shardfall and the objective of holding all objectives for the sepulchral guard.

We are going to get more faqs real soon. They could have worded the cards a bit better to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wallack said:

Yes, you let your opponent do the "same" (he cannot charge and attack with the same fighter but has 2 activations in a row) but is better to have 2 attacks you and then 2 attacks your opponent than 1-1-1-1

I see it very good for reavers to shut down a stormcast for example.

Yup, though frankly its good for everybody in those 3rd phase situations where one key model has to do all the work.

46 minutes ago, Wallack said:

Thanks!

I also added some questions about the shardfall and the objective of holding all objectives for the sepulchral guard.

We are going to get more faqs real soon. They could have worded the cards a bit better to be honest.

Agreed. I think that mostly the intend is clear but it would be very helpful to have it in a faq. 

In essence 4 pages of terminology would have awnsered a lot of potential future questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Certainl, I think that this card together with Illusory Fighter are probably the most powerful cards. Both in conjunction with each other offcourse but also seperate because they lead to a lot of combinations that guarantee great income and really can remove key models at unexpected times. 

From a designers perspective (and we obviously still do not know the intended use 100% for certain) I probably would not have designed the card the way it is. However because it is there I do think that almost every deck needs a good reason to not have it.... Same with Illusory Fighter.

The current most defensive deck Ive played is Sepulchral Guard and even there the idea of a Harvester charging into a group of models and basically attacking them all twice is just worth the effort. The same also applies to the Champion versus any 4 Wound model, it's a lot for an opponent to handle. Sure the model in question might die but as we all know a Leader is often worth more as any other model.

All in all I will probably go forward playing both this and Illusory Fighter in all my decks... I see no reason to not do so. It's fantastic as @Wallack showed it but also a card that can solidify your lategame win. It's arguably even better as a responsive card when you charge (and kill) the model who just recieved some great offensive Upgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, it says take an action. Not take an activation.  So pick a fighter and take an action. Seems simple enough. You are not activating a fighter again. You are simply using a fighter to take an action. Like many other cards that let you take another action out of turn (except most of those tell you what action they are) those cards don’t tell you to activate. Just to take an action. My 2 cents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, CanHammer-darren said:

Personally, it says take an action. Not take an activation. 

As can be seen above, it clearly states thake an Action and skip an Activation. Whatever skipping an Activation means it does suggest that it will indeed also thake up or 'pass' an Activation in addition to thaking an additional Action.

I agree with you that the fighter is not activated again, this isn't suggested by anyone either. What we still need to know is what skipping an Activation menas. We have the pass option and so far I've been playing it last weeks with (forcefully) choosing to Pass with the first following Activation.

Hope to see the FAQ soon, there is much more to debate about...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I play in Paris, for the moment i agree with all the other players I have met:

-take an action with a fighter, doesn't not matter if the fighter has charged or move; they can charge or move again.

-then you flip your next "activation token"

May be it is a question of language, but it is very clear for me: skip = "passer" in french= don't do anything without coming back= use your next activation to pass (without the power phase)

 

another wording of the card would be: take an action etc. The only thing you can do in your next Activation is to Pass. etc."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is clear for me. when you pass your next activation, you are able to play cards in your power step. 

If you look the other way on the situation it would mean, that your opponent could not play ploy cards which have effects on the "first attack in the next activation". If he would play it in his powerstep the card wouldn't work, because you are passing. he should have the right to play ploy cards for his own upcomming activation.

Otherwise timetrap would do two things. 1st let you activate a fighter and 2nd stop your opponent from playing ploys for his own folluwing activation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And we have an answer:

 

Time Trap (#368) Q: Time Trap instructs you to skip your next activation. Does this mean you have to take a Pass on your next activation, or do you get an extra activation and therefore change the turn order? A: When you use Time Trap you take an extra action (not an activation). This action happens in the power step, and you do not flip an activation token when you take the action. You cannot use this action to do something you could not normally do (e.g. make an Attack action with a fighter that has already made a Charge action in this phase). Once you have taken the action, the power step continues. You must take the ‘Pass’ player activation as your next activation, which will be followed by the power step as normal. Time Trap does not change the turn order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...