Defensive Condition Duration Issues

[Allandrel]

(Edited to include additional sources of the Defensive Condition that others have pointed out.)

I was studying Shenlong's crew and realized there is some inconsistency when it comes to the duration of the Defensive Condition:

The Defensive Condition is defined in the rulebook as "Defensive +1: This model gains to all Df duels."

It does not have a specified duration, so it would fall under the default "removed at the end of the Turn" rule.

Some effects apply the Defensive Condition without specifying a duration either, so it would again default back to "removed at the end of the Turn."

These effects include (restricting my list to Ten Thunders cards):

- The "Slow Water Eternal Voice" ability granted by the Low River Style upgrade, as mentioned in the original post,
- the Monk of Low River's "Rapid Timeless Voice" ability,
- Shenlong's "(1) Burn Like Fire" attack action. (Note that the duration of the target's Defensive Condition would not matter, since mechanically it is being applied to Shenlong by the "Burn Like Fire" action, not by whatever source had previously applied Defensive to the target.)
- the Wastrel's "Swagger" ability.

BUT most other sources that I can find that applies the Defensive condition does so with the specified duration of "until the model's next Activation."

This includes (again, restricting my list to Ten Thunders):

- The "(#) Defensive Stance" general tactical action,
- Shenlong's "(0) Mastery" tactical action,
- the Peasant's "(1) Provide for the Temple" tactical action,
- the Ten Thunders Brother's "Df (Tomes) Bend As The Willow" trigger,
- the "To Positions!" ability granted by the "Blot the Sky" Upgrade,

In addition, there is the Guardian's "(0) Protect" action, which gives a target model the Defensive +2 Condition "until the start if this model's next Activation, or until this model is removed from play." (Note that the "next activation" here is the Guardian's next activation, not that of the model receiving the Defensive Condition as with other effects.)

So we have a stacking condition that defaults to the "end of turn" duration, and

1) Some effects apply it without specifying a different duration
2) Some effects apply it with a specified duration different from the default duration.

Is this intended?

If so, since stacking conditions are treated as a single condition, what happens when a model receives the Defensive Condition from both categories of effects? What duration applies?

The duration of the most recent condition applied to the stack? (This could result in the condition applying indefinitely.)

The next one to occur?

Or do we "split" the stack for purposes of duration even though there is nothing in the rules to support "splitting" a stacked condition this way?

This definitely needs a ruling or errata.

[Sevorin]

Pg 39 of the large rulebook: Defensive stance: gains the following condition until the start of its next activation.

[Dirial]

Pg 39 of the large rulebook: Defensive stance: gains the following condition until the start of its next activation.

 

Yeah, the OP mentioned that. His problem is that not every instance of gaining that condition specifies its duration like Defensive Stance does. The duration is not an inherent part of the condition.

[The Godlyness]

Pg 39 of the large rulebook: Defensive stance: gains the following condition until the start of its next activation.

 

Taking the Defensive Stance Action does that but in the instances he posted above the Action taken is not Defensive stance. therefor like he said it ends at the end of the turn.

[Sevorin]

 I guess I'm confused about it then. It would seem that the defensive conditions would stack until the models next activation, to me anyhow. 

 

 Defensive stance gives the defensive condition +1, it would seem that any other ability that gives defensive +1 would fall under the same rule. Giving how consistent the rulings have been, I would bet that would be the case, but perhaps I am incorrect.

[zFiend]

I guess I'm confused about it then. It would seem that the defensive conditions would stack until the models next activation, to me anyhow.

Defensive stance gives the defensive condition +1, it would seem that any other ability that gives defensive +1 would fall under the same rule. Giving how consistent the rulings have been, I would bet that would be the case, but perhaps I am incorrect.

This is how I would see it as well. It's still the same defensive condition?

[lusciousmccabe]

Seems like it might be be an oversight as there's practically nothing in the first book that gives Defensive outside of the Defensive Stance action and the description of the condition basically says look at the rules for Defensive Stance.

 

Just based on the written rules the OP is correct. The Defensive conditions from different sources end at different times, which means you might have to track them individually even though they stack.

 

Could probably do with some clarification.

[Kadeton]

Sounds like simple oversight to me. If you assumed that all Defensive conditions lasted until the model's next activation, I doubt any reasonable opponent would argue.

[Durza]

Well the guardians (0) Protect says

 

Target friendly model gains the Defensive +2 Condition until the start of this model's next Activation, or until this model is removed from play.

 

So I'd say if it doesn't specify a duration, it would probably be removed at the end of the turn, and if it is layered on one that does, I'd just remove the +1, so say someone takes defensive stance and gains defensive +1, and then gains defensive +1 from say the slow water eternal voice ability I'd drop the defensive from +2 to +1 at the end of the turn. It seems a bit complicated to track but thats my interpretation.

[Allandrel]

 

Well the guardians (0) Protect says

 

Target friendly model gains the Defensive +2 Condition until the start of this model's next Activation, or until this model is removed from play.

Thanks for pointing out another distinct specified duration. That would seem to indicate that the effects that do not specify a duration are not a simple oversight.

In the absence of a ruling, this is probably something to discuss before every game.

 

So I'd say if it doesn't specify a duration, it would probably be removed at the end of the turn, and if it is layered on one that does, I'd just remove the +1, so say someone takes defensive stance and gains defensive +1, and then gains defensive +1 from say the slow water eternal voice ability I'd drop the defensive from +2 to +1 at the end of the turn. It seems a bit complicated to track but thats my interpretation.

Yeah, while the rules just refer to removing the condition, I'm going to suggest this to my opponents until we get a ruling. Basically treat removal of Defensive as "reduce the Defensive Condition's value by the amount just added."

Complicated, clunky, and not spelled out by the rules, but it avoids having different effects cause the condition to end much earlier or later than they were supposed to.

[Hateful Darkblack]

Yeah, I think that needs to be specified somewhere. It's really unclear in the rules when how long Defensive lasts when it isn't from the Defensive Stance action.

(The Wastrel's Swagger ability also doesn't specify.)

[Stupid Bob]

I think assuming it's intentional is dangerous.

 

As Kadeton said above, the simplest solution that most definitely fits in the framework provided by the Defensive rules we have is to have any Defensive Conditions last until the model's next activation.

[brdparker]

I think it'd be similar to Armor or anything else that provides the timing.

 

Model has Armor +1 writ on the card

Model gains Armor +1 "until the end of his activation" from an ability

Model gains Armor +1 "while in base contact with another model"

Model gains Armor +1 "until the next time this action is taken"

 

These would all stack, and the effects would go away at different times if they do at all.

 

Similarly, the Defensive Stance action gives the Defensive +1 condition until the start of the next activation. Other actions could give the condition for different allocations on time. At least, those are my thoughts. I don't play those crews though.

[Hateful Darkblack]

Brdparker, I don't think there's a complication for a stacking condition having different durations. It works just like you say, yeah.

The problem is that Slow Water Eternal Voice, Swagger, and some others don't specify the duration. I'm pretty sure that's a slight oversight -- the rulebook kind of implies that you get it from Defensive Stance and it lasts until start of next activation, but the way it's written, it's not quite solid, could be another unspecified duration instead.

[Fetid Strumpet]

If it doesn't specify a duration it ends at the end of the turn.

[Hateful Darkblack]

If it doesn't specify a duration it ends at the end of the turn.

Is that noted in the rules somewhere? I remember that was the case in v1.5, but is it still true?

[brdparker]

Brdparker, I don't think there's a complication for a stacking condition having different durations. It works just like you say, yeah.

The problem is that Slow Water Eternal Voice, Swagger, and some others don't specify the duration. I'm pretty sure that's a slight oversight -- the rulebook kind of implies that you get it from Defensive Stance and it lasts until start of next activation, but the way it's written, it's not quite solid, could be another unspecified duration instead.

 

Ah, gocha. Sorry, glossed over the thread too much. But yes, conditions end EOT unless otherwise stated, as Fetid said. Don't have the rulebook on me or I'd cite the page, but I definitely remember that in M2E.

[Sevorin]

Ah, gocha. Sorry, glossed over the thread too much. But yes, conditions end EOT unless otherwise stated, as Fetid said. Don't have the rulebook on me or I'd cite the page, but I definitely remember that in M2E.

Pg. 52 under conditions, the last sentence under the Armor +1 condition example (left side of text). "Unless otherwise specified, all Conditions are removed from a model at the end of the Turn."