Malifaux Errata and FAQ

[EricJ]

I am pleased to announce the official Errata and FAQ to support Malifaux. We have been listening closely to the Malifaux community and wanted to do our best to fix any issues that have arisen in the printed rules, as well as answer all your common questions about the game. We have worked to create a comprehensive document the first time around in order to avoid making future errata. While this created a document slightly longer than we had hoped, we were focused on getting it done right the first time around.

The majority of the document is dedicated to clarification, but there are a few changes that are included as well. We sincerely hope that these documents can work to enhance your enjoyment of Malifaux. Please note, this replaces any previous Errata, and is a comprehensive document.

Errata (http://www.wyrd-games.net/Ezine/Malifaux%20Errata.pdf)
FAQ (http://www.wyrd-games.net/Ezine/Malifaux%20FAQ.pdf)

We have also created printer-friendly versions:

Printer-Friendly Errata (http://www.wyrd-games.net/Ezine/Malifaux%20Errata%20Print.pdf)
Printer-Friendly FAQ (http://www.wyrd-games.net/Ezine/Malifaux%20FAQ%20Print.pdf)

Thank you,
Eric

[nerdelemental]

Wait? There's a FAQ? When did we start talking about that?


;)

[TheBugKing]

Dude. You are BANNED!

[RangerRob]

Thanks for the comprehensive FAQ and Errata. I can see why it took some effort to finalize it all. With the huge number of updates to cards, is there any chance of either 1) an updated reprint of cards would become available, or 2) Electronic forms of the cards might be made available so they could be printed with the updates?

[mbowsher76]

And the people rejoiced!!! :bump:

Thanks for all the hard work guys!

[nilus]

Wow lots of stuff in here. Thanks for all the hard work Marshalls and Designers.

[Cenotaph]

That has to be the longest Errata I have ever seen. I second the call for updated cards we can print.

Glad to see all the issues being addressed so thoroughly though. :clap:

[EricJ]

A good deal of the length of the thing comes with the fact we wanted to design it so you could reference models easily. So if you notice something like "Frozen Heart" shows up 5-6 times referencing the same change, just for each model who has it.

Quite a few of the changes are somewhat cosmetic as well, simply clarifying language so there would be no chance to misinterpretation.

[dgraz]

Awesome. Thanks. Tonight is Malifaux nite at my LGS so this is good timing.

[Deathjester]

As being brand new to this game this erratta and FAQ is immense, thanks for the hard work, I would like to reiterate the question about the stat cards being changed - any chance of updated cards??

[Kagelong]

So glad to see this! Thank you so much!

[CaptMorgan]

on page 2 of the errata, in the movement effects section under toward/away, the last sentence only applies to the "toward" but not the "away" right?? so it should read, "A model moving in this manner cannot end the movement further from/closer to the thing than it began."

bold text added by me...

thoughts?

[Keltheos]

You are 100% correct, sir.

[Poko]

Ahem...page 4 and 5, Resisting model calculates total.

on page 4 it refers to Casting Cost as the TN for resisting, and further on always to Casting Total. I assume the Cost is a misprint in this case?

Anyway, that's the only wierd thing I noticed, apart from that a resounding "great job!" is due for the amount of work put in there:)

[Keltheos]

Should be total.

[RangerRob]

Looking good, I only had one question.

“Terrain Blocking LoS: A model’s LoS is blocked to a target if it cannot draw a line to the target’s base through terrain or game effects or its Height and the Height of the target is equal to or less than that of the terrain.”

Maybe I'm reading that rather long sentence incorrectly, but should it actually be:

“Terrain Blocking LoS: A model’s LoS is blocked to a target if it cannot draw a line to the target’s base through terrain or game effects AND its Height and the Height of the target is equal to or less than that of the terrain.”

[Pavic]

Well, I have mostly been lurking recently, but I have to say, this is definitely worth a post. Thanks so much for all the hard work folks! It's nice to know that the company you support is willing to put this much effort into making sure that your enjoy their product.

[Brian_conatser]

Thanks for sending everything out in an E-mail as well. I saw it in my box first and came here to say thanks.

[perplexiti]

Thanks for the hard work guys, it's good to see a game being supported well by it's creators.

[acid_gaming]

I think I'll make a trip to the printers today and run off a heap of copies for my loyal customers.
Thanks for the hard work lads!

[L D P]

A big thank you to all of the Team that have worked very hard to put out these documents. It is very much appreciated and the clarity and professionalism is superb.:top:

[Wombats]

Groovy.

Gogo printing and laminating frenzy.

[EricJ]

I really hope this explains nearly everything! We pretty much kept our ear to the ground around here and other forums as well to see what issues were coming up. The goal was to really fix all the problems with clarity, and make sure everything played as smoothly as we want. Hopefully this will be it, but as we know it life, nothing is ever done. There were actually very few changes, just clarifications really. :)

[Amidian]

Thank you for the efforts - its appreciated.

[Sneek]

Fantastic documents guys. Thanks for the effort that went into them.

[assimilation]

The previous errata changed Obey for Hamelin, Perdita and Zoraida. This is not in this new one. Does that mean the changes have been revoked?

[Keltheos]

It means we somehow dropped those entries accidentally during the update. They are still in effect and it will show back up on the errata. Obey can only be used on non-Masters.

[Justin]

Having only skimmed, I'm probably missing something, but I don't see anything that would prevent two mosquitoes next to each other infinite movement...

That said, great job, guys! I love the willingness to actually answer concerns and questions so quickly, and all the hard work that was done.

And thank God Lilith can't jump over houses anymore!

And I am saddened flame burst is a ranged attack. I understand, but I am still saddened. I thought that was neat.

Defensive stance has to be the first action. Happiness. It overwhelms me.

Ok, well, that's all the thoughts my skimming resulted in. Perhaps reading will raise a few more.

[Minotaure]

Wow, that's a huge amount of corrections.

I hope no one gets discouraged from getting into the game by this. It surely is an expression of your perfectionism.

Coming to perfectionism I have a little complaint, that could easily be addressed in an overhauled version of the documents later on.

Simply put: You swapped the page layouts in the full versions of both documents. Meaning the even pages are layouted as uneven pages and the uneven pages are layouted as even pages.

If you print them doublesided and tack or bind them together you'll get the page numbers on the inside of the booklet not on the outside.
No big thing really.

And by the way: Great work, great game and really great miniatures! I love them.

[n0signal]

THIS (http://www.wyrd-games.net/forum/showthread.php?t=9759) was also not corrected in the Errata; I don't know whether it was intentionally left out or an oversight.

[Nick]

Great work! You can really see it's cost a lot of effort! I'm printing it right now

Thanks!

[Keltheos]

Hey all, looks like a couple things were overlooked before this went live. Here's a link to a compilation of any errors/omissions we and you are finding:

http://www.wyrd-games.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10309

[Justin]

Hey all, looks like a couple things were overlooked before this went live. Here's a link to a compilation of any errors/omissions we and you are finding:

http://www.wyrd-games.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10309

Ok, cool.

So, should I assume the mosquito thing was intentional?

...or I'm completely missing something?

[Keltheos]

:fight:

Added


PAGE 13
Giant Mosquito
Larva
Replace "Sacrifice 1 friendly model" with "Sacrifice 1 friendly Gremlin model".

[ispep]

:fight:

Added

Really? *sigh*

[Wombats]

This is a million times better than Games Workshop's FAQ's which misquote the codex they are meant to be errata'ing.

I was a bit taken aback by the size at first...

...but having played with it we only need to have those parts which work with our models.

Very carefully thought out.

[nerdelemental]

And some sections like movement are simply re-written in their entirety to cut down on copy and pasting. Even more is greater depth of explanations and expanded language for clarification. Writing rules is really more art than science - you need to be as absolutely brief as possible to cut down on the space it takes up. But you can have absolutely zero ambiguity. Add in that we're using the English language and it gets even more wonky.

A good Faq/errata set will be pretty robust just to be complete and thorough.

[Justin]

I was a bit taken aback by the size at first...

...but having played with it....

Bigger is better.

[Cenotaph]

Would it be possible to provide the errata sections for the character cards in the same font and layout as the card sections they replace with little cut lines around them. That way we can print them out and stick them over the cards. I've tried to do it myself but without the original font face/size details it is difficult to get it right.

They did this a few years back with the errata for the D&D GM's screen and it made adding the changes a lot easier and nicer looking.

At the end of the day the easier you make it for people the more people will use the updates.

[acid_gaming]

I was a bit taken aback by the size at first...

...but having played with it...



Bigger is better.


That's what my missus said.

[Keltheos]

That's what my missus said.

Approves.
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/blogs/channelsurfing/uploaded_images/michael_scott-723101.jpg

[Justin]

Alright, I pulled out my rulebook, sat down, and finally really read the errata tonight. (the rules discussion is evidence of that) and I have a few questions:

In the old errata there was something about models not providing cover to other models. I can't seem to find this in the new one. Was this an oversight or was it intentional? I liked that rule...

Sooey! has an errata but, for the life of me, I can't see how it's different than the way it is written in the book. Can anyone explain this to me?

Thanks!

[RangerRob]

Eh, actually I do remember that from the previous errata/faq, but don't see it now. I don't see any difference in sooey either from the rule book. perhaps the card is printed differently?

[Justin]

Eh, actually I do remember that from the previous errata/faq, but don't see it now. I don't see any difference in sooey either from the rule book. perhaps the card is printed differently?

Pg. 24 last sentence of the first paragraph:

"Targets partially obstructed by other models or terrain features may receive cover."

Sorry to sound like the errata myself. I can see why you missed it. That damn line took me the last 20 minutes to find. But I knew it was there.

Edit: You edited on me!

Hmm, good point, I'll go get my cards.

[Justin]

Nope, the cards are the same.

[Reptor]

Raaaa love Wyrd ! thanks for this !!!

[Justin]

Also, defensive stance says, "This must be the first (1) action this model makes this turn."

So, it could still make an unmodified charge and then go into defensive stance afterward since charge is a (2) action. So, why give a minus to both walk and charge?

[WEiRD sKeTCH]

Also, defensive stance says, "This must be the first (1) action this model makes this turn."

So, it could still make an unmodified charge and then go into defensive stance afterward since charge is a (2) action. So, why give a minus to both walk and charge?
That's not the intent.

The intent is that if you want to have a model enter Defensive Stance, it has to be the first Action it performs.

[Justin]

That's not the intent.

The intent is that if you want to have a model enter Defensive Stance, it has to be the first Action it performs.

Yeah, I know. Or, at least, I suspected. But that is not how it is currently written. So, a friendly heads up.

[Justin]

http://www.wyrd-games.net/forum/showpost.php?p=115265&postcount=4

[Talishko]

That's not the intent.

The intent is that if you want to have a model enter Defensive Stance, it has to be the first Action it performs.
I thought the intention was that it is the first action you perform apart from (0) actions.

[Justin]

I thought the intention was that it is the first action you perform apart from (0) actions.

That's another one. You could leap and then defensive stance.

[Talishko]

That's another one. You could leap and then defensive stance.
Indeed. But surely, leaping into a safer position makes more sense than charging at someone with the intent of defense..:twitch:

Edit:
Oh you're right, the original restriction excludes moving as well as charging... Then leaping breaks the intention.
Tho some would argue that leap is a special ability of some highly agile models, so having this advantage is kinda part of the deal.

[Klingenkalle]

Why can't Graverobbers "Search" anymore but " but Scavengers can? That is quite a big change ...

[Wodschow]

Why can't Graverobbers "Search" anymore but " but Scavengers can? That is quite a big change ...

It's for balance..

Take for instance Canine Remains that cost 2SS each, clearly broken if they could make a corpse counter each turn.

Currently there's only like 5 scavengers in the game and you'll seldomly see any of them searching for scrap, there's simply better things to do most of the time as scrap counters aren't that critical.

[MrNybbles]

Why can't Graverobbers "Search" anymore but " but Scavengers can? That is quite a big change ...

I heard about this. Basically 2ss Canine Remains could use all their actions to generate corpse counters which could be used by another model to summon more Canine Remains. Dogs creating more dogs. . .

[catniplick]

Have these been removed? The links for both the errata and faq are invalid

[Buhallin]

Have these been removed? The links for both the errata and faq are invalid
They're OBE - the new Rules Manual includes them all, and is the new gold standard for rules.

[Ratty]

that + currently Kels signiture and the Rising Power Card Project..

[Bleeding Through]

The links load up a wyrd page not found are they down or broken?

[Kreation]

Link says "not found" for me too...for all four links.

[Wodschow]

Link says "not found" for me too...for all four links.

The links load up a wyrd page not found are they down or broken?

....

Seriously.. Do you guys even read before posting?

This thread was necroed by someone asking that and was just answered..

The errata was replaced by rules manual / V2 cards.

Just close this thread already please..