Opposed duels and accuracy modifiers

[t4zz]

Hi!

 

This question is about applying modifiers to damage flips.

 

The Wicked Mistress upgrade makes Lilith to gain an attack that pushes a model and, if that model ends in base contact with impassable or severe terrain, it suffers 1/2/3 damage.

The question is: Is that damage flip affected by the result of the attack?

 

The rulebook says it applies on any damage resulted from an opposed duel, but since the model has to end in base contact with the terrain, it doesn't happen always.

 

Also, trying to twist more the question, if a model with a Df trigger (like Lady Justice) makes direct damage after a failed attack against that model, is it affected by the accuracy modifier? That trigger is used during the opposed duel...

 

In both cases, we agreed to apply the accuracy modifier, but I'm not sure if we did it right...

 

What do you think?

 

Thank you!

[The Godlyness]

Lady j's df trigger is not an opposed duel. So it does exactly what it says to do.

On the lilth thing Idk tbh. I don't have her card in front of me to answer one way or the other.

[Bengt]

(1) Transfixing Gaze (Ca 8 / TN: 12 :mask / Rst: Wp / Rg: 12): Push target model its Cg towards this model. If this push ends with the target model in base contact with impassable or severe terrain, it suffers 1/2/3 damage and gains the Slow Condition.

[Myth]

I'm pretty certain that any damage flip listed in the attack results would be affected by the modifier, so I think accuracy would apply to Transfixing Gaze.

 

I'm less certain about Triggers. Defensive Triggers like Lady J's are not part of the attack, so I don't believe accuracy comes into play. But a damage flip that is built into an attack trigger, like Samael Hopkin's 'Ricochet'... I'm not sure how that would be handled. The rules seem to reference the triggers as being part of the attack's results (which would indicate they are affected by accuracy.) But that doesn't seem to be how the ability in question is intended.

[The Godlyness]

Triggers are unaffected by the accuracy modifiers. They are a separate damage flip that was not caused by an opposed duel. So no modifiers. That being said most of them restrict your ability to cheat the trigger flips through a or says can't be cheated. I would say yes on transfixing gaze. Since opposed duel into damage flip.

[Wild Razor]

It's actually a very good question, after all a trigger be it offensive or defensive is part of the result of the duel, it is from the duel total that the suits required to activate the trigger are drawn.  The rule does read "whenever a damage flip is the result of an opposed duel..." and with that in mind the damage flip from riposte is a result of the opposed duel.  I personally don't think it is the intention of the system that effects such as that or other similar abilities like the one possessed by Burt Jebsen are supposed to benefit from accuracy modifiers however there is really nothing definitive in the rules that explicitly states this.  The best argument against triggers and accuracy modifiers is that the book's examples solely reference the attackers damage flip as the one to be modified, but those are after all examples.  

 

On a more straight forward note with Lilith's ability since the damage flip is a direct result of the attack even if it doesn't always come into play, it would certainly benefit from the accuracy modifier as I read the rules.  A contrast to this would be some effect like the Toss ability which is a fully separate and non-opposed duel from the main action (not that toss has a damage flip involved but I'm going off the top of my head here).

[The Godlyness]

You just quoted why riposte is not effected. The damage flip from riposte was not made from an opposed duel. They did not flip cards to try to resist it. Nor did you flip any to make an attack. (Unless you saying after I declare my trigger we are going to make another opposed duel before resolving the original attack or some jazz) It just happens since it is a trigger.

The opposed duel damage flip was x/y/z not x/y/z + trigger that does x/y/z.

[Fastenhate]

Its an opposed duel that does damage only when the "If" condition is met and should use the accuracy modifiers.

 

Game events that cause a damage flip unmodified by an opposed duel will say how to flip it.

 

examples:

 

Riposte: "...this model deals damage 2/4/6 damage to the attacker. This damage flip receives a -(flip). 

 

(0) Shafted: "...enemy models which end a move...suffer 2/3/7 damage which may not be cheated."

[Wild Razor]

Triggers are a part of the duel result, because all their effects unless otherwise stated are resolved before the duel itself is considered resolved as per page 32/33 of the rulebook.  Therefore by the context of those pages Riposte is a damage flip as a result of an opposed duel.  The damage flip is occurring based on the flip result of the duel, because that's where the suits to activate the trigger come from, and the damage flip is made as a part of the duel resolution, so it's still a part of that opposed duel by the rules.  As I said originally, I accept this is not likely the intention of the rules, but it is the way they are written. 

[The Godlyness]

Step one declare the action

Step two make an opposed duel

Step three calculate final duel total and declare triggers

Step 3a did the attacker succeed if yes continue If no the action fails.

Step four flip for damage using accuracy modifier.

Now the defending model lady j in step 3 declares riposte and then succeeds in the duel triggering it. So riposte happens. For ripostes damage flip NO OPPOSED DUEL was made to determine its accuracy modifier so it would have been straight flip which since all damage flips can be cheated could have been cheated That is why it has a built in.

No Action "riposte" was taken No duels were generated. Riposte does not say after succeeding perform a (1) action great sword attack that suffers a to the damage flip and can't declare triggers. Cause then it would be a whole nother duel.

[t4zz]

Like you said, no action "riposte" was taken. She defended so well, she's going to hurt the attacker. It is a result from an attack. So, a result from an opposed duel. And any damage resulted from an opposed duel is affected by accuracy modifier... 

 

Having a negative flip means it also applies that. So if the accuracy modifier was a negative flip, the you have two of them.

 

That "which may not be cheated" could mean that, even if the result is 6+, or something makes you to be able to cheat any damage flip, you cannot cheat that one.

[Fastenhate]

Your argument was how riposte worked in 1.5 rules and it had language that described the process you are using. This is 2.0 and that is simply not how it works anymore. No where does the trigger direct you to consider the final duel totals. Its simply: the conditions of this trigger was met, make a damage flip with a negative flip.

[The Godlyness]

Riposte did not generate a duel. No accuracy modifiers are applied. The original duel is from model A attacking lady j. Which that action fails Since it did meet or succeed the defenders total. Ok so now all accuracy modifiers are disregarded since the action failed. Wait what's this my trigger does damage since I (lady j) succeeded had the suit and declared my trigger. Take 3/4/6? At a . Oh you are undead well since it is a damage flip it is affected by your hard 2 wound. So I am now at . .

[Myth]

It's actually a very good question, after all a trigger be it offensive or defensive is part of the result of the duel, it is from the duel total that the suits required to activate the trigger are drawn.  The rule does read "whenever a damage flip is the result of an opposed duel..." and with that in mind the damage flip from riposte is a result of the opposed duel.

 

The question is, though, what counts as being the 'result' of the duel? I think once it becomes an indirect result - which is to say, is not part of the 'results' line of the attack itself - it is no longer affected by the accuracy modifier. So a defender's trigger would not be affected, nor would a flip for Hazardous Terrain that I happened to push you into as part of the attack.

[t4zz]

That's exactly the question, Myth.

 

What count as being the 'result' of the duel?

 

And I think it's not clear enough... In Transfixing Gaze (pasted below), the 1/2/3 damage is part of the attack text, but it's also indirect, because it needs an impassable or severe terrain to happen.

 

Anyway, thank you, guys!

 

(1) Transfixing Gaze (Ca 8   / TN: 12     / Rst: Wp / Rg: 12): Push target model its Cg towards this model. If this push ends with the target model in base contact with impassable or severe terrain, it suffers 1/2/3 damage and gains the Slow Condition.

[The Godlyness]

In step 5 or is it 4 in the rule book after declaring triggers resolve the effects of the action. (Usally resulting in damage) This flip is modified by the accuracy modifier. So for lilth I would say yes the effect of the action does something and might cause damage. But triggers no. No no.

[Myth]

That's exactly the question, Myth.

 

What count as being the 'result' of the duel?

 

And I think it's not clear enough... In Transfixing Gaze (pasted below), the 1/2/3 damage is part of the attack text, but it's also indirect, because it needs an impassable or severe terrain to happen.

 

Anyway, thank you, guys!

 

(1) Transfixing Gaze (Ca 8   / TN: 12     / Rst: Wp / Rg: 12): Push target model its Cg towards this model. If this push ends with the target model in base contact with impassable or severe terrain, it suffers 1/2/3 damage and gains the Slow Condition.

 

Right, but I think in that case, it is direct - it is just also conditional. But it isn't caused by the terrain, it is an inherent part of the attack. But yeah, all of this is pretty much just interpretation, as I don't think there is anything definitive in the rules either way.

[Sezar]

rules Manual, Pg 25:

Opposed Duel Sequence:

1- Declare SS usage

2- Flip Card + add Stat

3- Choose Cheat Fate

4- Declare 1 Trigger

5- Determine Success

To me, Triggers, even the defensive ones, are part of an Opposed Duel, and are determines by the success of it.

[kyronkhan]

Is the duel total difference for riposte possible to be zero resulting in a - - accuracy modifier?

Simple answer no. If part of the table literally can not ever be applied, the table clearly does not apply at all.

[t4zz]

So, with that reasoning, if they want riposte to be affected by the difference, there should be another table without zero result? Or some explanations saying it doesn't matter if the zero is impossible to achieve? That's what make a rulebook a bad one.

 

The table must be a generic rule and if, in some special cases, one of the values cannot be reached, it won't care at all. If I have a table that says:

 

1-5 one thing happens

6-10 another thing happens

 

And I have a +7 to one specific roll, it doesn't make the table invalid, or not to be applied. It just assures I won't get the first result.

[The Godlyness]

Well riposte is not affected cause there was no opposed duel that causes the damage flip from riposte. Its a trigger and it does what it tells you to do. No more no less. But after repeating this ad nauseam I can not convince you guys otherwise.

"If the /bold Attackers final dual total is...." the riposte (lady j) is the defender so please tell me how it's affected. I really want to know.

The defender (lady j) is not the attacker how much more clear does one need to make this. Pg 30? I believe right there under damage and wounds.

One a trigger is not a result of the opposed duel. Success or failure which results into a damage flip if it has one is. 2 riposte is a defender only trigger. And if is going off there is no modifier since she is the defender.

But please continue.

[t4zz]

That's a good point. It says "Attacker" and "Defender", I think we can stick to that for Df triggers.

 

So, what about Lilith's attack? Is the damage part of the effect?

[The Godlyness]

Yes. The result of the attack is a push. And if it hits terrain it does damage. But it's still part of the result.