Homework: the Mordikaar + Hollow Interaction

I didn’t want to dilute the rules thread on this topic, but I did want to address a quote from there. :slight_smile:

I politely disagree with the above assertions. :slight_smile: But, I’m going to pull a So-crates on this one, and instead of just spelling out the answer, ask you to do some homework and come up with your own answers. :slight_smile:

Up front: I’m really, truly not picking on you or being a jerk. I think there are a lot of complications here that you haven’t considered, and seeing how you work through the following (please show your work, heh) will help generate understanding. :slight_smile:

Here’s the full rules text of Hollow:

  1. If the last line in Hollow was not present, what is the state of the replaced model once it is no longer on the table?

  2. Does that cause any bookkeeping complications for the Skorne player? (There’s no way to ask this question without giving away the answer, but consider this anyway.)

  3. We’ll limit the rules discussion as much as possible, and discuss only Mordikaar’s card itself. Do the answers to #1 and #2 cause any edge cases or any potential oddities or annoyances with only Mordikaar’s rules alone?

  4. This rule should prevent the player from “double-dipping” (getting two benefits from the same action) by both collecting the trooper model’s soul and getting a free Void Spirit. Where in the timing chart is it possible to do this?

  5. Regarding this:

As written, the model is destroyed by Hollow. Is that an issue? Is there precedent for such a situation in other game rules?

  1. If the last sentence was not present, and model was not destroyed by Hollow, can you think of any complications that might arise? On the Skorne player’s side, limit the analysis to only Mordikaar’s card and the key soul-collecting models in the Immortals army.

On the opposing player’s side, consider the following use cases:

a) Berserk on Prisoner 102822.
b) Any model with a Harpoon-style weapon. (For argument’s sake, Aiakos 2 triggers Skewer on his Harpoon.)
c) Cleave
d) Deathly Domination (Sacral Vault and others)
e) Eruption of Ash (Thamarite Archon and others)
f) Electro-leap
g) Snacking

Not all of these are necessarily pertinent, and indeed some have very straightforward answers.

But, can you spot the common oddity among all the rule resolutions?

  1. Last but not least, and given all of the above: how could the rule be rewritten to accomplish the main idea (enemy kills your dude, a Void Spirit pops out, the Skorne player doesn’t double-dip and get a soul/corpse token along with a free Void Spirit), without the rule becoming an essay, and without it creating undefined game states?

That’s all. :slight_smile:

1 Like


First, let me answer your question with another question: why? Is it just for the sake of the debate, or are you a Dev/Infernal? It’s pretty hard to tell who’s who these days.

That being said, you’ve asked a lot but I’ll get to it.

Can’t promise you’ll get a complete answer within 24h though, so please be patient :wink:

1 Like

I’m not a dev or Infernal; I’ve just been around for a very, very long time. :slight_smile:

I do sincerely appreciate the civil tone of your reply. :slight_smile: Chiefly, I asked because, over the years, I’ve frequently observed people comment that a particular rule is bad, only to follow up with a “fix” that doubles down on problematic rules interactions. It demonstrates that they didn’t really think through the interaction in the first place or think through the ramifications of their suggestions.

I just happened to have thought about this exact rules interaction last month (or whenever it was) when the Immortals rules dropped, and I happen to think the rule is written in a very clean and efficient manner.

So, when I saw your reply, I just had the impulse to ask so that people could understand the thought process that goes into crafting functional, elegantly-written rules text. :slight_smile:

That’s all! :slight_smile:

I’m surprised the model is not removed from play.

Ok here I go.

  1. I can’t find it anywhere. Maybe it’s from mk3, either the rulebook or an infernal ruling but I remember replacement usually involve removed from play. Well actually, I’m not sure since Gorenshade’s Deathwalk says “remove the boxed model from play and replace it”. Then I guess each “replace” rule needs to say what happens, but it should be clearer in timing.

  2. I assume you’re referring to tracking which models are RFP and which are Destroyed for the purpose of returning them to play with Revive or the Battle Engine’s Vault of the Faithful. This “bookkeeping” isn’t new at all or new to skorne.

  3. Ok. Revive. The skornergy would be obviously bad. Destroyed is probably necessary, but not written that way in that place.

  4. As a non-dev, what makes you certain that double-dipping should be prevented? Personally I have no idea about the power level of the Army so I don’t know what ruling is necessary for balance. Regardless, to answer your question, the Wraith Engine does exactly that:

The destroyed model is removed from play and does not provide a soul token.
(of course here maybe we’d leave the RFP part)
I don’t see how the timing chart is relevant here.
However, it does sound like the problem comes from this rule trying to be too efficient: sounds like they want the trigger at disabled to avoid enemy triggers that could normally intervene but without the negative of losing friendly effects that need destroyed (soul collection, returns, etc.) but the wording isn’t explicit enough about that.

  1. Destroyed by Hollow implies abilities that trigger on Destroyed by an attack don’t work, denying the opponent the use of things such as Blood Boon, Berzerk, Sprint, etc. Again a feeling of “I want Destroyed for my benefits but also denying you the same benefits”. It also interferes with some soul collecting abilities, such as Body Count. Looks like all Skorne soul collection was standardised to Requiem and doesn’t care who destroys the model.
    I can’t think of a specific precedent literally saying “the model is destroyed”, they’re mostly RFP, but I think there is. There are things like self-sacrifice but the main difference is the model being attacked is not the model that ends up Destroyed. The only real situation I can think of is Sanguine Bond / Bond of Brotherhood where the model no longer suffers Damage from the attack but from its ability, therefore if it suffers enough damage from the attack to be disabled etc it is destroyed by its ability and not by the attack.

  2. I don’t really understand your question here. I’m not talking about removing that last line and leaving the rest of the rule as it is, I’m talking about writing the rule in a way that makes sense and doesn’t raise questions like this one. (Side note: it might be my lack of faith in the devs, but I’m reading the absence of an official answer here as a “we haven’t anticipated this issue when writing the rule and need time to figure out what it should be”, not as “the rule is fine as it is and we have a clear idea of how it should work”)
    I think I’ve mentioned all the “complications” above.
    a) as mentioned before, if the rule RFPs or Destroys the model, doesn’t trigger. If the rule triggered at Destroyed, Berzerk would trigger and leave an opportunity for the prisoner to use her berzerk attack on the Void Spirit.
    b) Skewer moves the model “after the attack is resolved” so would not work in any possible version of the rule.
    c) same as berzerk
    d) triggers at boxes so does not trigger whether Hollow Destroys or RFPs. It would stop Hollow if it triggered at Boxed or Destroyed.
    e) same as d
    f) e-leaps are on a hit so before Hollow
    g) same as d
    I don’t really see how any of these were relevant. The only common thing I see here is “you can’t have both”: either these rules RFP their target and stop other rules from working, or they are stopped by the removal (RFP, Destroyed or Replacement) of their target. Nothing new here.

  3. I think it can’t be all at once. The most straightforward solution would be a wording similar to the Wraith Engine’s Soul Bondage. And yeah, boohoo, poor skorne players don’t get to ignore all other rules (those rules that would trigger on Boxed before it) and have infinite recursion. If they want Destroyed, then we all get Destroyed. If they want to Replace at Disabled or Boxed, then it’s not Destroyed, so no soul no recursion.

That’s all :wink:

(I have been super busy for the last few days. I haven’t had a chance to come back and read through and respond to the replies yet.)