I am assuming Deaths grasp remains in play, even if the unit that applied it dies? I do not see anything that says otherwise.

I, similarly, see nothing saying otherwise in any of the included rules. Seems legit.

I'm seeing the same, most likely on purpose otherwise it'd be a bane.

Is there a reason that would be relevant?

Did we get any specific rules insert on conditions?

only thing im seeing is if a new unit applies the unique condition the old one goes away.

Nothing about the old one and a dead unit that applied it.

Agree, odd. I'd like to think there has.tk be a way out, but don't see one. Seems a bit huge for no recourse. I meleed your hero/siege block, it does now regardless? Harsh.

2 tray Deathknights charged a 9 tray oath sworn on turn 2. Turn 3 they died. Deaths Grasp killed 10 oath sworn over the next six turns, very cool.

1 minute ago, Drakoniss said:

2 tray Deathknights charged a 9 tray oath sworn on turn 2. Turn 3 they died. Deaths Grasp killed 10 oath sworn over the next six turns, very cool.

Problem is, can you believe for 5 points that is reasonable?

yeah that really feels like they forgot to give it a discard clause.

Its super easy for a 2x1 of DKs to just LEEEEROOOYYYY down the field, slam into something, turn2 action it to give it the condition and just try and stall as long as they can to keep them out of commission for abit. (it was a skill right?)

While on one hand, DKs are the most expensive cavalry so they should be a bit deadly, but on the other hand....THEY should be deadly not the 5pt card they simply have to not die turn1 to utilize.

Not really worried about it countering speedbump sieges since theyre usually like half the price of a 2x1 DK with DGrasp. That would be a net loss. But slamming into any large unit....even just spearmen....ouch

Again, all supposition:

On one hand rallying it off is too easy, the other the guantlet leaving play seems reasonable. Exhausting the guantlet causes the condition, to me it makes sense it leaving play would remove it. Much like needing to survive the attack to trigger Margath. As upgrades are discarded on kill, from the field, there is nothing causing the condition anymore. Again, wind runes cost 7 (I think), heartseeker 10, without a discard this is more powerful than both, for 5?

Well on the same token if you could Rally it off a good deal of units would be basically wasting a turn, so it has value there.

Rune Golems and (iirc) all heroes have a white rally mod, so they wouldnt give a crap.
However the majority of units the rally is the main dial, which means they arent moving or attacking that turn.

Its sorta the same mentality as immobilize or stun. You kinda have to rally those off because they can do too much damage if you leave them on, so they waste a turn at minimum. Heck, oaths definitely dont like rallying as the ONLY thing they can do is init3 +1def with it (since its atleast a quick rally). And theyre probably one of the bigger units that hate this card. Waste a turn, or lose a tray a turn...hmm...

I only think it's cool thematically. Not game play wise. Think about it from a movie point of view.

How about it persists after death the number of trays the unit had at the start.

Latari is my main army then Daqan is my second. I only play Waiqar in our test matches.

If I understand correctly, conditions are not banes. So it cannot be rallied off. Once you have the condition it cannot be removed unless another condition is applied.

Conditions

Each condition a unit receives is represented by a token that is placed near that unit on the play area and a card that explains the condition’s effect that is placed near that unit’s upgrades.

-When a player’s effect causes a unit to receive a unique condition, if that player’s effect previously caused a different unit to receive that condition, that copy of the condition is discarded before the new unit receives the condition.

-When a condition is discarded, discard both the condition card and token, and that condition’s effects end.

-A unit cannot receive a condition that it currently has.

@rowdyoctopus That doesn't answer the question, though, does it? It isn't the Death Knights that have the condition, but the enemy unit. Removing Obsacium (sp.) Gauntlet by killing the Death Knights does not remove Death's Grasp, though if the unit with that conditioned was defeated, you would discard both Death's Grasp and the corresponding token.

9 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

@rowdyoctopus That doesn't answer the question, though, does it? It isn't the Death Knights that have the condition, but the enemy unit. Removing Obsacium (sp.) Gauntlet by killing the Death Knights does not remove Death's Grasp, though if the unit with that conditioned was defeated, you would discard both Death's Grasp and the corresponding token.

I just typed out the rules for Conditions. No where does it say they are removed if the unit that caused the condition is also removed. It would persist. This seems to be intentional.

52 minutes ago, rowdyoctopus said:

I just typed out the rules for Conditions. No where does it say they are removed if the unit that caused the condition is also removed. It would persist. This seems to be intentional.

And that is what the debate is about, as it seems A) too easy to apply and B) far too potent for 5 points to be intentional. I am much more in the camp of oversight (would hardly be their first).

3 minutes ago, Darthain said:

And that is what the debate is about, as it seems A) too easy to apply and B) far too potent for 5 points to be intentional. I am much more in the camp of oversight (would hardly be their first).

Why would they even bother making Conditions different than Banes if what you say is true?

How can the creation of an entirely new mechanic that functions distinctly And differently be an oversight?

You think they introduced the game mechanic, went through internal and final playtesting, and NOBODY ever asked if conditions could be removed?

That seems way more far fetched than the simple answer, which is that Deaths Grasp is meant to be more effective the earlier it is applied.

@Tvayumat I (purportedly) know the internal processes for the rules writing portions for this particular beast, but cannot comment further on them.

It entirely possible it is entirely intentional I just feel it is excessive, and don't think the cause of a condition may need to remain in play is unrealistic. That's still a completely new mechanism regardless. I already feel DoT and the ilk/recurring effects are poor design as is, given a burden of book keeping.

It is entirely possible the answer is apply a different condition, but the problem is they should plan better about how they roll these things out then. Netrunner is a prime example of needing to wait for counters to new items...

3 minutes ago, Darthain said:

@Tvayumat I know the internal processes for the rules writing portions for this particular beast, but cannot comment further on them.

It entirely possible it is entirely intentional I just feel it is excessive, and don't think the cause of a condition may need to remain in play is unrealistic. That's still a completely new mechanism regardless. I already feel DoT and the ilk/recurring effects are poor design as is, given a burden of book keeping.

If you know of the internal processes for the rules writing portions for this particular beast, then why didn't you raise these concerns when they were being written? I'm sure the Dev team would have explained their rationale to the play-testers who tested this upgrade.

As it is, I've played this upgrade a few times, and while it certainly is useful, I have yet to find it exceedingly powerful. It is yet another tool in the Waiqar arsenal for handling High Defense, Low Wound models. Deathcall, MS modifier, O's Gauntlet, Carrion Lancers, etc. are all other examples of this same tool. It seems to be somewhat of a specialty of Waiqar's. O's Gauntlet is the most interesting, because of the Condition card that it gives out. However, I still prefer Deathcall/SCL/SO, as it's more reliable since it applies it's wounds over range. I'm not a fan of the 2x1 Death Knights w/ O's Gauntlet, they get blown off the table the second your opponent realizes what you're going to do with them. I've found the Death Knights have an interesting place in the faction, and interestingly enough, my opponents had 0 difficulty adapting to them. They handle them exactly as they've been handling Oathsworn Cavalry all this time.

Just now, rebellightworks said:

If you know of the internal processes for the rules writing portions for this particular beast, then why didn't you raise these concerns when they were being written? I'm sure the Dev team would have explained their rationale to the play-testers who tested this upgrade.

As it is, I've played this upgrade a few times, and while it certainly is useful, I have yet to find it exceedingly powerful. It is yet another tool in the Waiqar arsenal for handling High Defense, Low Wound models. Deathcall, MS modifier, O's Gauntlet, Carrion Lancers, etc. are all other examples of this same tool. It seems to be somewhat of a specialty of Waiqar's. O's Gauntlet is the most interesting, because of the Condition card that it gives out. However, I still prefer Deathcall/SCL/SO, as it's more reliable since it applies it's wounds over range. I'm not a fan of the 2x1 Death Knights w/ O's Gauntlet, they get blown off the table the second your opponent realizes what you're going to do with them. I've found the Death Knights have an interesting place in the faction, and interestingly enough, my opponents had 0 difficulty adapting to them. They handle them exactly as they've been handling Oathsworn Cavalry all this time.

1)I'm not quite as direct as that, unfortunately.

2) Glad to hear your experience though. I have not gotten to play with them yet.

3 minutes ago, Darthain said:

1)I'm not quite as direct as that, unfortunately.

2) Glad to hear your experience though. I have not gotten to play with them yet.

Play with them. I'd love to hear your opinions on how they actually play on the table, not just on paper. You might be surprised at how little O's Gauntlet *actually* does for 5 points. It's still a great item for their artifact slot, as nothing seems like a perfect fit for them yet. I'm planning on running it on Ardus sooner than later, and even on a block of Reanimates.

Lost 5 lancers to obcasium in a game getting suicide charged by DK 2x1. I really like the condition, but it's certainly in the 'too strong' area of power cards. I hope it's an errata, but if not I'll just resort to waiqar msu builds to work around it.

Regardless of how its categorized the point remains its simply too strong for something you literally cant do anything about. Thats the issue.

Rallying it off would be too simple and basically relegate conditions as just a "stun" token since it forces them to rally to remove it and waste a turn. Which atm sounds fine, but when we get more conditions they will all feel the same as a result.
Killing the origin unit doesnt do anything and thats where it should. The fact that a 2x1 can take it and suicide dive the biggest frontline unit is kinda silly.