Damage Reduction and Dumb Luck/Healing Attacks

[rgarbonzo]

Just a quick question to get everyone's opinion on this. Let us say that Seamus uses Live For Pain (or a Gremlin Dumb Lucks some damage) the model that is suffering damage uses a SS to prevent damage. This prevents the damage to 0. What would happen from the wording of Dumb Luck/Live For Pain/other actions which cause healing off of damage suffered by a model

 

a. DL does 4 damage Gremlin takes 2/LFP hits for 2 damage Seamus heals 2

 

b. DL/LFP does 4 damage all damage is prevented so nothing happens since the target didn't suffer any damage.

 

c. gremlin still takes 2/Seamus doesn't heal because target suffered 0 damage

 

I can see ti one of these 3 ways just curious how others are handling it, and wondering if it might need to be FAQed...

[The Godlyness]

FAQ go. Its answered there.

My copy paste skills are supreme

Q: When a Gremlin deals damage and activates the Dumb Luck Trigger, does the gremlin take half of the total damage flipped, or half of the damage actually put onto the target? For example, if Dumb Luck caused the target to suffer 4 damage, but the target had Armor +2, reducing that damage to 2, would the Gremlin take half of the original 4 damage, or half of the 2 damage suffered after accounting for armor.

A: The Gremlin takes half of the total damage flipped, so the Gremlin in the example would suffer 2 damage (4 divided by 2). This answer applies to any Triggers which generate something based on the amount of damage suffered by the target (for example, the Desolation Engine’s Restabilize Trigger).

[Hateful Darkblack]

I'd say that the damage you "suffer" is the amount you cross of your Wd. SS prevents that, which means that Dumb Luck and Live For Pain are prevented as well.

[Hateful Darkblack]

Huh, or maybe the FAQ says differently!

[rgarbonzo]

But prevention isnt'treduction even though it is similar.

[The Godlyness]

According to the faq what ever you flip is damaged suffered for triggers. I assume abilities also. What the model takes after reduction and prevention has no bearing on things like dumb luck. Again according to the faq.

Not my rules I just follow them.

[Sholto]

Which means a nice boost for Live For Pain on Seamus

[Csonti]

According to the faq what ever you flip is damaged suffered for triggers. I assume abilities also. What the model takes after reduction and prevention has no bearing on things like dumb luck. Again according to the faq.

Not my rules I just follow them.

Butbutbut... wait, so does that mean that after damaging triggers (activated on 1 or more damage suffered) can be used on targets that prevented the incoming damage to 0?

Also, does that mean that if Nekima prevents an incoming damage to 0 she still activates Black Blood (activated when this model suffers damage)?

[The Godlyness]

No no no. After Damaging triggers happen after you apply reduction and prevention. And if all that happens and the model still apply wounds to itself triggers go off. Same with black blood. It doesn't actually work Untill you start ticking off wounds.

[Csonti]

No no no. After Damaging triggers happen after you apply reduction and prevention. And if all that happens and the model still apply wounds to itself triggers go off. Same with black blood. It doesn't actually work Untill you start ticking off wounds.

Yeah so far I played this way too but:

In case of Dumb Luck we say "damage target suffers" = "original damage dealt with the Attack before reductions and prevention".

In case of Abilities and after damaging triggers we say "damage target suffers" = "final damage total dealt with the Attack after reductions and prevention". 

To me these two things look a bit contradictory.

[Bengt]

My take is that "damage suffered" doesn't refer to damage at a specific point. It can be used to refer to damage sums from the start to the end and gets lowered or increased by various triggers and abilities during the resolution of the action. So when "damage suffered" gets copied by yet another effect, how much is copied depends on when that effect is located in the resolution chain.

[mythicFOX]

<casually stands up and takes mod stick off safety>

[Math Mathonwy]

<casually stands up and takes mod stick off safety>

o_O

This conversation has been nothing but polite. I find this remark really, really weird.

[Csonti]

My take is that "damage suffered" doesn't refer to damage at a specific point. It can be used to refer to damage sums from the start to the end and gets lowered or increased by various triggers and abilities during the resolution of the action. So when "damage suffered" gets copied by yet another effect, how much is copied depends on when that effect is located in the resolution chain.

 

Yeah, this could be a solution but if this is true then this is a very unfortunate situation. Ie. using exactly same words on totally different kind of things without explicitly define the differences in the rulebook. It would be much clearer to use say "damage dealt" for the starting sum and "damage suffered" for the final damage.

On a sidenote: this still not explains the use of Abilities like Black Blood. Reading Black Blood with the above in mind I couldn't decide for sure if "when this model suffers damage" refers to the starting damage amount or the end total.

 

 

<casually stands up and takes mod stick off safety>

 

???

[The Godlyness]

On the After Damaging triggers I see no debate. Its after you damage. If you don't do damage no trigger.

On black blood.....I see the wording and yeah I would have to say you bleed even if the damage is prevented.

Black Blood: All models without Black Blood within p1 suffer 1 damage when this model suffers damage.

The faq mentions triggers only. But I see no reason why it would not apply to abilities.

Welp maybe some one will come by to clarify

[MasterDisaster]

 

<casually stands up and takes mod stick off safety>

 

 

Hehehe I just imagine Mythicfox waiting to bash some heads whilst smoking in a dark corner spinning his mod stick like a Victorian London bobby and whistling a jaunty tune. These sorts of rules debates often get heated. It's just a friendly reminder to keep calm and carry on 

[rgarbonzo]

According to the faq what ever you flip is damaged suffered for triggers. I assume abilities also. What the model takes after reduction and prevention has no bearing on things like dumb luck. Again according to the faq.

Not my rules I just follow them.

This is what I figured as well then I looked at prevention and thought well... hence the question. Though that does make Black Blood/Bloated Stench a bit weird.

[mythicFOX]

Hehehe I just imagine Mythicfox waiting to bash some heads whilst smoking in a dark corner spinning his mod stick like a Victorian London bobby and whistling a jaunty tune. These sorts of rules debates often get heated. It's just a friendly reminder to keep calm and carry on 

 

This.

[Sholto]

I can see a distinction based on the wording of the FAQ that differentiates it from "after damaging" triggers.

 

This answer applies to any Triggers which generate something based on the amount of damage suffered by the target

 

 

"After damaging" triggers go off regardless of the amount of damage, provided it is more than 0. The FAQ is talking about triggers that produce a different result for different amounts of damage. This means that eg. Black Blood is not affected by the FAQ since it is a binary either/or result. Either the model with Black Blood took damage or it did not.

 

A trigger like Restabilise produces a range of results (Heal x) for a range of events (Cause x damage). Only triggers like this are affected by the FAQ as I see it.

[DocSchlock]

 "This answer applies to any Triggers which generate something based on the
amount of damage suffered by the target (for example, the Desolation Engine’s Restabilize Trigger)."

That is exactly what this line is trying to say, it's just not particularly clear about it.

The keyword is "Generate". Generate means "create a value" here and this only applies to things that create a value based on damage amounts.

[Justin]

No no no. After Damaging triggers happen after you apply reduction and prevention. And if all that happens and the model still apply wounds to itself triggers go off. Same with black blood. It doesn't actually work Untill you start ticking off wounds.

 

This is correct.

[Math Mathonwy]

We seem to be moving towards the bad old days of damage != Damage != wounds != Wounds 

[Justin]

We seem to be moving towards the bad old days of damage != Damage != wounds != Wounds 

 

No, not really. Triggers just have different timing than abilities.

[DocSchlock]

I really don't get all the debate. The FAQ makes clear what this ruling pertains to and what it doesn't.

It is basically trying to say when you need to generate a number based off damage done, use the flipped damage, not the damage actually put on the target model.

Edit: I know the problem comes with the multi-faceted use of "suffers," but I still think people are reading a little too much into this.

[Justin]

It is basically trying to say when you need to generate a number based off damage done, use the flipped damage, not the damage actually put on the target model.

 

Exactly. Black Blood is a binary state, and doesn't need to generate a total, so it doesn't fall under this ruling. It is also an Ability with different timing than the Triggers in question, and the FAQ specifically states it only applies to certain Triggers.

 

An FAQ exists to clear up specific points of confusion or plug holes as they come up; not to redefine the language of the game or be applied outside of the things that they specifically reference. Is it perfect? No. But if it was perfect we wouldn't need an FAQ at all.

 

Anyway, that's all I'll say on it. Discuss away.

[Sevorin]

 

Anyway, that's all I'll say on it. Discuss away.

 That's enough. 

 

 The question originated from whether there was a difference between reduction abilities, and prevention, due to the whole damage that cannot be reduced can still be prevented part of the FAQ. So it created some confusion (albeit small) on whether prevention is treated differently with the new ruling on "flipped" vs. "suffered". 

 

 I think it has been covered.