Jump to content

Master Timing Chart


Khyodee

Recommended Posts

4d is incorrect - there are triggers that don't happen immediately that don't follow either of those timing rules, for example "when damaging". The "after" style timings are provided as examples of common timings that are not necessarily easy to intuit.

Quote

 A Trigger’s effect is resolved immediately unless another time is indicated in its description, as it may be resolved later - pg 26

 

6 is mostly incorrect. a is fine, b is incorrect, abilities like Black Blood happen "when" suffering damage, which is when the results are resolved, not afterwards (no citation here because "when" is never defined so it's reasonable to default to the English standard which means at the same time as - General Timing on pg 51 only states that triggers happen before abilities if they both happen at the same time) See also FAQ question 68:

Quote

68) If a model has an “After Damaging” Trigger which allows it to push/move and it kills a model with Explosive Demise, can it use its Trigger to push/move away from the model it killed before taking damage from Explosive Demise? No. Explosive Demise happens when the model is killed, which would be during Step 5 of the duel process (Determine Success, Core Rulebook pg. 33) and After Damaging Triggers occur after Step 5 (Core Rulebook pg. 32).

 

Also, c & d are wrong, you remove the model from the table immediately when it is killed ("If the model is reduced to 0 or fewer Wounds it is immediately removed from the game as killed." pg 51), and markers are dropped when you die too, so they also happen earlier. After Damaging triggers can delay the removal of the model until after the trigger has been resolved if the model was killed by the damage from the action, it is removed after fully resolving the trigger instead (pg 26)

(all citations from the rules manual)

 

Perhaps adding citations would help so that players can reference the book in the future, and to avoid making mistakes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Dogmantra said:

4d is incorrect - there are triggers that don't happen immediately that don't follow either of those timing rules, for example "when damaging". The "after" style timings are provided as examples of common timings that are not necessarily easy to intuit.

Fixed. I was trying to keep things in general terms, but I neglected other timing effects.

 

Quote

6 is mostly incorrect. a is fine, b is incorrect, abilities like Black Blood happen "when" suffering damage, which is when the results are resolved, not afterwards (no citation here because "when" is never defined so it's reasonable to default to the English standard which means at the same time as - General Timing on pg 51 only states that triggers happen before abilities if they both happen at the same time) See also FAQ question 68:

Fixed. B was moved to the end of step 5 as others have pointed out (I was confusing general timing rules).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dogmantra said:

Also, c & d are wrong, you remove the model from the table immediately when it is killed ("If the model is reduced to 0 or fewer Wounds it is immediately removed from the game as killed." pg 51), and markers are dropped when you die too, so they also happen earlier. After Damaging triggers can delay the removal of the model until after the trigger has been resolved if the model was killed by the damage from the action, it is removed after fully resolving the trigger instead (pg 26)

Fixed. Let me know if you see any other issues with the latest version (4.15.17.1)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to nitpick too much because I think this version is pretty much close to done but 6f is a little odd. It implies that you resolve both triggers and then do any passives which isn't quite true. Something like Black Blood would still go off when you suffer damage, e.g. if the Defender and Attacker both get an after resolving trigger. Attacker has Black Blood. Defender triggers to deal damage to the attacker, Attacker triggers to push away. What would happen is Defender's trigger goes off, deals damage, Attacker's Black Blood procs and then the Attacker pushes away.

 

I also thought perhaps you could add a note about nested actions and After Resolving style triggers? That's a fairly common mistake in my experience, where people can get confused about when exactly an After Succeeding would happen on an action that generates an action, particularly if that action has a trigger itself (the answer is after fully resolving the generated action and all triggers).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Dogmantra said:

Not to nitpick too much because I think this version is pretty much close to done but 6f is a little odd. It implies that you resolve both triggers and then do any passives which isn't quite true. Something like Black Blood would still go off when you suffer damage, e.g. if the Defender and Attacker both get an after resolving trigger. Attacker has Black Blood. Defender triggers to deal damage to the attacker, Attacker triggers to push away. What would happen is Defender's trigger goes off, deals damage, Attacker's Black Blood procs and then the Attacker pushes away.

Alright the latest version I hope clarifies this timing.

 

10 hours ago, Dogmantra said:

I also thought perhaps you could add a note about nested actions and After Resolving style triggers? That's a fairly common mistake in my experience, where people can get confused about when exactly an After Succeeding would happen on an action that generates an action, particularly if that action has a trigger itself (the answer is after fully resolving the generated action and all triggers).

Now you have me curious, are there any defensive triggers that generate an independent action? If so that makes me thing I need to add a clause in the "After" section about resolving non-new action triggers first then have a final one that basically resets things for the new action. Anyways, I made a change in the version to reflect this and let me know if it makes sense what I tried to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dogmantra
So an interesting note I've game across in regards to a model being immediately killed.

If you look at March FAQ, Question 52. In the Headhunter Strategy, when is the Head Marker placed? It is placed after completely resolving the Action and any Triggers it generated.

This means either Headhunter changes the timing rules or that a model doesn't get immediately removed until all triggers are resolved, because GG2017 Headhunter states that you place a head marker before removing the model. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

So for passives that go off when a model suffers damage, does that include models other than the attacker and defender?

The main example I know of is Sun Quiang, with "King of Medicine: Whenever another model within LoS suffers damage, this model may reveal a card from its hand and then place it on the bottom of its deck to push up to its Wk toward the model that suffered damage. If this model pushed at least 3", it may take a (1) Interact Action." Do we think this resolves with other damage-triggered passives during 5 (c), or as an aftereffect during step 6? 

This is particularly important during Headhunter (which, as we've seen, presents its own timing complexities). Does Sun Quiang get to take his push (and potential free Interact) after the Head marker has been placed, or must he do so before? One is mildly useful, while the other is extremely potent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My general rule is that nothing lets you push after the head is on the table. The FAQ now supports this rule. 

But the Sun Quing effect will happen at the "model suffering damage", and as its an ability it will happen after triggers, and after any abilities on the acting and defending model (assumign Sun Quin is not the acting or defending model).

Its When not after so 5c

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

So according to the general timing in the rules, triggers resolve before abilities if they have a timing conflict. However, there are several passive abilities that don't have specific timing and that negate triggers.

 

E.g.

Quote

Executioner

Certain Death: Models may not declare Df Triggers in duels with this model.

 

Does this mean that if there were at some point a passive trigger would it mean that it would resolve before passive abilities? does the "breaking the rules" callout box come into effect?

Quote

Breaking the Rules
Models in Malifaux have many unique rules which override the core rules. This goes for any special rules, even those from terrain or an Encounter. When a special rule explicitly contradicts these core rules, follow the special rule rather than the core rule. In the rare instance that two special rules contradict each other, the more specific of the two rules takes precedence.

 

Speaking of this callout box, would it at all be beneficial to have a clause somewhere in the timing chart to the effect of "In the rare instance that two special rules contradict each other, the more specific of the two rules takes precedence."

I know the idea is to resolve all ambiguity with a chart that has no loose ends but just in case, might be a nice clause. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would argue that certain death has a timing point. At the point when the opponent wants to declare a trigger, It says they can't. That is a set point in the game where it applies, which sounds the same as a timing point to me. 

I can't see how that could be confusing from a order issue. It can never clash with Triggers timing because its effect has to happen before they declare a trigger. 

I don't think that a "passive" trigger exists (at least by how I think you are defining passive) so there can't be an answer to your question. (I'm not sure that a passive ability exists either. It has to have a time it has an effect on the game or it doesn't ever do anything)

 

I think the word should be multiply . And Dumb luck does not multiply the damage, it changes the base damage track. so on this chart would 5.v.1 determine the base damage but the damage to the attacker is not worked out until 5.v.5

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Thanks for the work you've done on this, @Khyodee! Very useful for figuring out when things are meant to happen.

A couple more points to correct tho:

2).a).  with regards to a model having no choice but to take the lowest card flipped when on a :-fate flip, this should read the same as 5).b).iii. in that a model may always choose the Red Joker, even on a :-fate flip, as long as the Black Joker is not also flipped.

(Small Rule Book, pg. 18)

3).a).   should include a mention of who cheats first in a tie (eg, "The model with the lower duel total (or the Defender, in the result of a tie), must choose whether or not to cheat").

(Small Rule Book, pg. 26)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information