Flesh and metal (Arcane emissary)

[Ludvig]

I'm not entirely sure on the timing of this.

Flesh and metal: At the start of this model's activation it may discard a card.
If it does, at the end of this model's activation, target other friendly non-leader in 6" may take a (1) action.

 

Is the targeting done when I discard the card or at the end of my activation? I usually lean one way or another on rules but I'm really confused. Do the two commas in the second sentence mean that you can treat them as sort of a parenthesis and read it without them to get the timing or do I go by same sentence - same timing? The weird sentence structure seems to be made to give the first result... Maybe?

 

Please help!

[so_diogenes]

From an english perspective I don't think the second comma is correct. I've always played it to mean the discard happens at the start of the activation, then at the end of the activation a friendly non-leader model within 6" of the emissary's current position may take a (1) action.

 

I don't think you can ignore the (at the end of this model's activation) part but maybe you can just consider the "if it does" to be equal to "then"

 

So if you discard a card at the start of its activation a friendly non-leader model within 6" of where it ends its activation may take a (1) action

[solkan]

The comma placement shouldn't be relevant, it doesn't change the clause structures. 

I think you have to target when you discard the card, because when you discard the card you trigger the "If it does so" clause, even though the effect won't be resolved until later.

Whereas it could be reworded something like "If it did so, at the end of the turn, ..." so that the clause doesn't trigger until later, and thus doesn't target until later.

But that's just my gut reaction, and I've not checked to see if that's a standard consistent with other effects.

[santaclaws01]

3 minutes ago, so_diogenes said:

edited

It still doesn't. It needs to have some conditional statement to make the (1) action dependent on the card being discarded. The best way would be "At the beginning of this models it may discard a card to target other friendly non-leader model within 6". At the end of this model's activation, the target may take a (1) action.


As for the main question, I'm leaning towards the targeting being at the end of the activation.

For the grammar argument, it's not grammatically illogical to have the two commas there. Just because there are commas on either side of some statement doesn't mean it isn't essential to the meaning of the statement. For something like "Jane, who had brown eyes, was sitting down." yeah, that's not essential. But when you're making a list, or describing a sequence of events, then you will have commas coming up fairly often, which each individual part being between two commas, but it should be obvious that each part is still essential.

An example of something that's within two commas but still essential to the meaning of the sentence is Allison Dade's Uncovering the Truth action. "Target a Scheme Marker. The opponent may reveal their Control Hand to you. If they do not, or if they have no cards in their hand, discard the target Scheme Marker" The "or if they have no cards in their hand" is essential to the meaning of the sentence even though its between two commas.

[Gulil]

I'd go for targeting at the end. In particular, because a more natural wording would have been:

If it does, target other friendly non-leader in 6" may take a (1) action at the end of this model's activation.

For some reason they put the phrase "at the end of this model's activation" in the middle of the sentence and the only reason I can think of is to (try to) clarify that targeting is also done at the end of the turn.

 

[Ludvig]

@so_diogenes

Using two commas to set something apart from the redt of the sentence is mentioned in several online dictonaries and can be done in other languages than english as well.

 

From an online dictoinary:

 

"Use a pair of commas in the middle of a sentence to set off clauses, phrases, and words that are not essential to the meaning of the sentence. Use one comma before to indicate the beginning of the pause and one at the end to indicate the end of the pause."

 

So by english grammar rules that part isn't essential to understanding the main sentence.

[Ludvig]

12 minutes ago, solkan said:

The comma placement shouldn't be relevant, it doesn't change the clause structures. 

I think you have to target when you discard the card, because when you discard the card you trigger the "If it does so" clause, even though the effect won't be resolved until later.

Whereas it could be reworded something like "If it did so, at the end of the turn, ..." so that the clause doesn't trigger until later, and thus doesn't target until later.

But that's just my gut reaction, and I've not checked to see if that's a standard consistent with other effects.

Thanks. I am leaning towards this interpretstion as well. Target when dropping the card but resolve later. Just confused by why the targeting is bunched with the resolution part instead of being in the same sentence as the effect letting ou do it.

[solkan]

2 hours ago, Ludvig said:

Thanks. I am leaning towards this interpretstion as well. Target when dropping the card but resolve later. Just confused by why the targeting is bunched with the resolution part instead of being in the same sentence as the effect letting ou do it.

For what it's worth, here are my reservations on the matter:

• I'm not sure that the rules are written to the required grammatical standard.  Case in point, the insertion of "one or more" expected to be a limiting clause but the insertion being ineffective.
• It does feel like it's over analyzing the text, and that it would be more natural to defer the targeting until the effect resolves.

So at the moment I'm rather spinning instead of just flip flopping on what I think the correct interpretation is.  

[Adran]

I think that it targets at the end of the activation. Largely because if they wanted it to target at the discard a card point, there are much better ways to write it (Not a great argument but if you clarify with opponent before hand it shouldn't be a problem, I don't see one as intrinsically more powerful than the other)

[Ludvig]

14 minutes ago, Adran said:

I think that it targets at the end of the activation. Largely because if they wanted it to target at the discard a card point, there are much better ways to write it (Not a great argument but if you clarify with opponent before hand it shouldn't be a problem, I don't see one as intrinsically more powerful than the other)

The insane charge may tempt you to overreach but if yoy know it's after the move you can use it in other ways. 

[so_diogenes]

7 hours ago, Ludvig said:

@so_diogenes

Using two commas to set something apart from the redt of the sentence is mentioned in several online dictonaries and can be done in other languages than english as well.

 

From an online dictoinary:

 

"Use a pair of commas in the middle of a sentence to set off clauses, phrases, and words that are not essential to the meaning of the sentence. Use one comma before to indicate the beginning of the pause and one at the end to indicate the end of the pause."

 

So by english grammar rules that part isn't essential to understanding the main sentence.

Well that's the root of your question isn't it? Is the comma separated clause essential? I believe it is and that's why the commas are grammatically incorrect. If they meant to target when the discard happens I would hope they would have said "Flesh and metal: At the start of this model's activation it may discard a card. Then, target other friendly non-leader in 6" may take a (1) action at the end of this model's activation."

[solkan]

7 minutes ago, so_diogenes said:

Well that's the root of your question isn't it? Is the comma separated clause essential? I believe it is and that's why the commas are grammatically incorrect. If they meant to target when the discard happens I would hope they would have said "Flesh and metal: At the start of this model's activation it may discard a card. Target other friendly non-leader in 6" may take a (1) action at the end of this model's activation."

The version you've just stated has the (1) action in the last sentence resolved whether or not the card is discarded.

 

[so_diogenes]

11 minutes ago, solkan said:

The version you've just stated has the (1) action in the last sentence resolved whether or not the card is discarded.

 

edited

[Flib Jib]

35 minutes ago, so_diogenes said:

Well that's the root of your question isn't it? Is the comma separated clause essential? I believe it is and that's why the commas are grammatically incorrect. If they meant to target when the discard happens I would hope they would have said "Flesh and metal: At the start of this model's activation it may discard a card. Then, target other friendly non-leader in 6" may take a (1) action at the end of this model's activation."

Or maybe a possible cleaner version:

Flesh and metal: At the start of this model's activation it may discard a card to target other friendly non-leader within 6”. 
At the end of this model's activation, the target may take a (1) action.

 

Not supporting an argument, just wishing the sentence was written clearer. 

[Ludvig]

This seems decidedly unclear. I'm sure there are plenty of alternative wordings but none of them help us settle the matter.

Should I just have a chat with my opponent before the game and persuade my them to go with whatever I think I will want it to be for the rest of that game then?

I guess assuming one sentence is referring the same point i time ao the targeting happens at the end is the easiest route. Wouldhave seemed a lot easier to just say "May discard to target" if it was at the beginning. Edit: Damn it, now I'm doing it!