All flips - no damage flip mentioned

[Vorschlag]

As per the discussion in the guild forum when a rule says all flips but does not specifically state damage flips are damage flips included.

Think recalled training and corrupted hounds.

  On 11/07/2017 at 11:50 PM, Aaron said:

People seemed to be confused about whether it affected damage flips, so I just put it right on the card. The function is the exact same, but hopefully I get to avoid another FAQ.

There is that bit in the rules about "Effects that modify the damage flip will state they do so explicitly." (The last sentence of the Damage Flip rules...)  

 

Just hoping for a ruling or agreed view for future tournaments.

[Myyrä]

In this case it's rather important to quote the whole paragraph: "Damage flips are often the result of a duel. They do not gain any of the modifiers (Fate or otherwise) that were applied directly to the duel that might have caused the damage flip. Effects that modify the damage flip will state that they do so specifically."

The part that says that effects only affect damage flips if they state that specifically is actually there to clarify the previous sentence that says that for a duel does not automatically transfer to damage flip. 

[Vorschlag]

15 hours ago, Myyrä said:

In this case it's rather important to quote the whole paragraph: "Damage flips are often the result of a duel. They do not gain any of the modifiers (Fate or otherwise) that were applied directly to the duel that might have caused the damage flip. Effects that modify the damage flip will state that they do so specifically."

The part that says that effects only affect damage flips if they state that specifically is actually there to clarify the previous sentence that says that for a duel does not automatically transfer to damage flip. 

So we can safely assume that all flips "should" include damage flips and that is what was intended?

[Ludvig]

48 minutes ago, Vorschlag said:

So we can safely assume that all flips "should" include damage flips and that is what was intended?

Yes. It's just meant to avoid people claiming pluscto damage wheb they have plus to "attack flips".

[Jernmajoren]

After rereading the rulebook again, i have to disagree with the statement that the "all flips" are intended to include Damage flips.

The rules is rather clear that Damage flips are excluded from gaining + flips, unless specifically included in the effect modifying the flip.

Based on the specific wording in the rules i.e. (highlight by me) 

Quote

"Damage flips are often the result of a duel. They do not gain any of the modifiers (Fate or otherwise) that were applied directly to the duel that might have caused the damage flip. Effects that modify the damage flip will state that they do so specifically."

Thus it must be specifically stated that Damage is included, otherwise it is excluded by default.

Following that according to the wording in the rulebook, neither Recalled Training, Corrupted Hounds or Large Arachnids would have their effects give + to Damage flips.

For the "all flips" statement to include Damage, flips that would have to be either clarified through Errata or FAQ'ed.

[solkan]

Perhaps you shouldn't mistake a casual comment on why a card was changed for a ruling.

After all, the new version of Swordfighter -does- explicitly mention damage flips.

[Vorschlag]

That is why I'm asking if the lack of that inclusion means other abilities do not Include the damage flip.

Again just wanting verification as it seems the rule quoted by the other poster does in fact suggest that corrupted hounds ability and recalled training would not provide + to damage.

[Ludvig]

1 hour ago, solkan said:

Perhaps you shouldn't mistake a casual comment on why a card was changed for a ruling.

After all, the new version of Swordfighter -does- explicitly mention damage flips.

It's the explicit statement from the rulebook that makes it an interesting question. The new upgrade is just what made people discuss it.