Terracotta Warriors - Mold of the Other

[Vastare]

Hey all, just wanted to make sure that I was confident on the Terracotta Warrior's abilities. 
So, if I use Mold of the Other on a friend, it says that on the next hit, the warrior may take the damage instead, blah blah blah, then the condition ends. Separate sentences. 
So, are we thinking that *no matter what*, the next time the model takes damage, the condition ends? Or is it only when the Warrior deigns to take the damage?
I am reading it as the former, and hoping for the latter 

[Myyrä]

It's considered polite to post the full text of the ability you are asking about. That way people trying to answer the question don't have to go dig out their books or cards.

"Ancient Protection: When this model suffers damage, a friendly Terracotta Warrior within 12" and LoS may suffer the damage instead. This damage may not be reduced and counts as having been caused by this Condition. Then, end this Condition."

The wording isn't 100% unambiguous, but it would be very weird way of saying that the Condition always ends the first time the model takes damage. If that was the intention it would make sense for the Condition to say "When this model suffers damage end this condition...".

[Seadhna]

Seeing as how the ability reads "a friendly Terracotta warrior MAY suffer the damage instead", the owner of the Warrior chooses when to apply the Condition's effects (or not).

[mythicFOX]

If the rule was only meant come into effect the next time the model took damage it would actually say that in the rule. The first sentence would almost certainly be; 'When this model next suffers damage end this Condition.' or a form of words to that effect.

I expect the overwhelming majority of people who read the rule understand it to work the way Myraa et al have indicated it works.  

The only argument for Vastare's interpretation hinges on one interpretation of the sentence structure of the rule, which is flimsy at best.

[Seadhna]

19 minutes ago, Vastare said:

I can certainly see the interpretation where everything is optional, and nothing happens unless the Warrior elects to take the damage. 

However, the worry is still that it starts with a *When* this model takes damage, and then ends with a *Then* end this condition. Sure, there is a maybe in the middle, but it is not explicitly linked to the "Then, end this condition."

I am also trying to make sure that I can be convincing enough for an upcoming TO

generally, "then" is used in wording to denote sequential events of cause and effect.

So, WHEN (protected model takes damage) => Terracotta Warrior MAY (take the damage instead, THEN end the Condition).

 

I can see how the case may be made in favour of your interpretation, but you have to really squint at the wording sideways and make an effort to read the ability in that unintuitive fashion.

[Vastare]

I agree with you on the may there. However, the thing that makes me nervous is that it reads as a *When* this model takes damage, the warrior may prevent.... Then end this condition.

So the argument here is that yes, the damage prevention is optional, however, the condition removal is not. 

So, it could be like the entire condition activates once damage is taken. Two separate effects: May prevent. End Condition.

I am happy to be wrong, as I now own then and want them to be as good as possible. I just want to be confident before I put them on the table

[Vastare]

I can certainly see the interpretation where everything is optional, and nothing happens unless the Warrior elects to take the damage. 

However, the worry is still that it starts with a *When* this model takes damage, and then ends with a *Then* end this condition. Sure, there is a maybe in the middle, but it is not explicitly linked to the "Then, end this condition."

I am also trying to make sure that I can be convincing enough for an upcoming TO

[Vastare]

 

2 minutes ago, Seadhna said:

generally, "then" is used in wording to denote sequential events of cause and effect.

So, WHEN (protected model takes damage) => Terracotta Warrior MAY (take the damage instead, THEN end the Condition).

 

I can see how the case may be made in favour of your interpretation, but you have to really squint at the wording sideways and make an effort to read the ability in that unintuitive fashion.

 

That is the problem - the TO and I feel that it takes a squint to read it as though ending the condition doesn't end after damage is taken, regardless of what the Warrior elects to do. 

The reading, using the same format would be:
WHEN (protected model takes damage => Terracotta Warrior MAY (take damage instead), THEN end the condition.

If the condition ending was in the same sentence, I would agree fully. But, given that it is a separate sentence, it can be seen as a separate clause.

[solkan]

On January 16, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Vastare said:

That is the problem - the TO and I feel that it takes a squint to read it as though ending the condition doesn't end after damage is taken, regardless of what the Warrior elects to do. 

Please id notify the tournament organizer, as a public service for people who wish to avoid being forced to use the incorrect interpretation.