Leveticus - Channel Damage Prevention

[Endalaus]

Would you be able to use Soulstones to prevent the damage from Channel on Leveticus if he were at two remaining wounds?

If you can prevent the damage, would you still receive the benefits of Channel even though you did not receive the damage?

[dreads]

I would like an official Wyrd ruling on this.

 

 First off yes, he CAN use a soulstone to prevent the damage. In doing so, the ability does not go off being as he has not met the full requirements for said ability to occur. Leveticus' channel ability states:

"Channel: When declaring an Action, this model may suffer exactly 2 damage to gain + to all duels and damage flips for the remainder of the Action; the Action fails if this model is killed by this ability."  

The key words here are, "suffer exactly 2 damage". If you use a Soulstone to prevent damage, and you prevent the damage. You are not suffering damage, and then healing. The damage has been prevented. It's like it never happened. Page 53 of the small rule book states: 

"After determining how much damage the Master or Henchman model would take, but before applying the damage, the model may spend a Soulstone to make a damage prevention flip."

The key words here are "before applying the damage." Therefore the condition of Leveticus taking 2 damage still has not yet been met so the ability does not trigger. 

Referencing the Errata/FAQ under Core Rules Questions number 18:

"18) Q: If a model suffers 0 (zero) damage), does it count as having suffered damage?

A: No"

Once again if all damage has been prevented, it states here that no damage has been done therefore the requirement has not been met.

Now what if you channel, Soulstone, and prevent only one of the damage? Again the requirement of "this model may suffer exactly 2 damage" has not been met. The ability would not trigger.

[PeregrineFalcon]

No Channel states he needs to suffer exactly 2 damage.

[PeregrineFalcon]

2 minutes ago, Icemyn said:

That's not exactly true.

Suffer does not mean taken in the world of Malifaux. He must suffer two damage to gain the channel, but nothing is stopping him from stoning to prevent that damage.
Taking the full 2 damage is not a prerequisite to gaining the channel ability. 

I'll respectfully disagree. The use of soulstones states that it reduces the damage suffered. Page 29 small rulebook. 

Quote

"Prevent damage Some models can spend Soulstones from the Crew’s Soulstone Pool to avoid suffering damage. For more information on damage prevention, see page 53."

Channel states suffer exactly 2 if you prevent any you have not suffered 2.

You have a good point on your "Death By Suffocation" example so he'd need to prevent exactly 1 for it to succeed, so he suffers exactly 2 still. But in the general case he needs to suffer exactly 2 for it to count.

[Endalaus]

Actually, I believe Dreads used the correct citation:

"After determining how much damage the Master or Henchman model would take, but before applying the damage, the model may spend a Soulstone to make a damage prevention flip."

This clearly says, " After determining how much damage the Master or Henchman model would take". The key word here is "would". They have not suffered damage yet. Before the model is damaged by anything, you are using the equivalent of an Instant in MtG to sneak in before damage to prevent any damage that model would suffer. 

So I read the Channel and see it says the model must suffer exactly 2 damage "to" gain. It to me sounds like a prerequisite. You must suffer exactly 2 damage to gain something. If you do not suffer 2 damage, you did not meet the requirements to move forward in the clause.

In regards to the gremlins/ D engine, etc. From what I can tell so far those are all triggers, and might not be applicable in this case. "This answer applies to any Triggers which generate something based on the amount of damage suffered by the target"

 

 

[solkan]

 

I can't help noticing the coincidence involving all of the other abilities and conditions which use the word exactly:

Quote

Entwine Spirit: When this model declares a Ca Action, it may sacrifice exactly one friendly Spirit within 2" and LoS to gain +2 Ca for the duration of the Action.

Quote

"Adrenaline +1: At the end of the Turn, this model heals exactly 1 damage and then lowers this Condition's value by 1."

Quote

Channel: When declaring an Action, this model may suffer exactly 2 damage to gain to all duels and damage flips for the remainder of the Action; the Action fails if this model is killed by this Ability.

All three rules appear to be taking what would otherwise be an rule that a player could take advantage of multiples and saying "You are only allowed to benefit from this as specified, no multiplication allowed."  Because all three of those effects would certainly be more attractive if you could take advantage of them multiple times.

In other words, the reason why Channel specifies "exactly 2 damage" is to prevent Leveticus from suffering four damage to get to a single action.  Not to forbid any rules mechanics from ever interacting with the damage process.

 

[TruAskew]

still cant just discount the actually Prevention flip section in the book.  It is the only thing that is directly relevant. it clearly state it would come before you step one.

 

[SubParNinja]

3 hours ago, Skillmatic said:

Damage Prevention says you spend a soulstone to reduce damage.

So whenever a model, suffers, takes or is dealt damage it can be prevented with a soulstone.

If Damage Prevention involved the term Reduce, and Leve's attack states you cannot reduce damage, then you would not be able to prevent damage with Soulstones, making his trigger to prevent Soulstone use for prevention redundant. There is a significant difference between the terms Reduce and Prevent.

 

Prevention is the crux of the argument presented, as the term suggests that you prevented the damage from ever occurring and therefor never suffered it. 

[Bengt]

3 hours ago, Skillmatic said:

Damage Prevention says you spend a soulstone to reduce damage.

So whenever a model, suffers, takes or is dealt damage it can be prevented with a soulstone.

Now, if Wryd did not want the Channel damage to be prevented, they would have said, "cannot be reduced..." like it says for "Strum the Threads"

Soulstones "prevent" damage, which is not the same thing as "reduce" (which among other things Armour do) in Malifaux.

From the FAQ:

12) Q: Can a model use a Soulstone to prevent damage which may not be reduced?
A: Yes. Damage prevention is different than damage reduction.

[Icemyn]

20 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I'll respectfully disagree. The use of soulstones states that it reduces the damage suffered. Page 29 small rulebook. 

Channel states suffer exactly 2 if you prevent any you have not suffered 2.

You have a good point on your "Death By Suffocation" example so he'd need to prevent exactly 1 for it to succeed, so he suffers exactly 2 still. But in the general case he needs to suffer exactly 2 for it to count.

I did also note models such as the Desolation engine that say exactly this:
"Restabilize: After Damaging, this model heals an amount of damage equal to the amount of damage suffered from this attack." (emphasis mine)

The FAQ makes it reasonably clear that the damage suffered by a model is not what the model actually takes. 
 

Spoiler

13) 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 and Lelu’s Drink Blood Trigger).

Order of operations as I see supported by the FAQ:
1) A model suffers damage
2) A model applies any effects that may reduce that damage.
3) The wounds are then marked off the stat card. 

Edit: I don't believe the rulebook quote you used actually supports your argument honestly, in fact I believe it supports mine. In order to use ss you need to have suffered damage. And you do "suffer" the damage as required it's just not placed onto your stat card. 

[Icemyn]

 

8 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

This may seem pedantic but FAQ states that the answer "applies to any trigger...", which channeling and dmg suffered do not. The answer appears to only apply to triggers and effects. Using soulstones (as far as I know is not an effect), while healing (or armor) is. By drawing a relation between damage prevention and other effects in the game I think it is a stretch and in no way do I see anything in the rules that supports that (but happy to be told otherwise).

Furthermore, I am not sure if was stated directly by Wyrd or posted officially somewhere (don't have reference), but as far as I know an FAQ answer specifically references the things it is answering and any other conjecture does not provide enough precedence as proof for answers to other questions unless directly reference.

That is why I initially stated that it is not technically relevant. 

The FAQ and rulebook both differ on what suffered means as a game term. 
Dreads FAQ post shows that "suffered" means damage taken.
Another FAQ post shows that "suffered" means initial damage.

There is certainly no right answer at the moment so feel free to rule it as you see fit, but your argument hinges on the words "exactly" and "suffers".
You can see how previous FAQ entries and rules quandaries have shown that relying on dictionary definitions is a fallacy.

[trikk]

I`m no English major, but I would say that the logic saying that the word "exactly" is there to prevent multiple usages per Attack (so 4 damage and ) seems compleing and convincing.

On 5.04.2016 at 8:31 PM, Icemyn said:

That's not exactly true.

Suffer does not mean taken in the world of Malifaux. He must suffer two damage to gain the channel, but nothing is stopping him from stoning to prevent that damage.
Taking the full 2 damage is not a prerequisite to gaining the channel ability. 

Let's pretend Leveticus has the "Death by Suffocation" upgrade attached to him from the Hodgepodge Emissary.
Now whenever he takes damage from an ability it is increased by +1.
So he channels and takes 3 damage does he now not get the benefit of channeling in your opinion?

While not technically relevant you can look to the FAQ on the Desolation Engine/Seamus/McMourning healing to see that the damage a model takes or marks on its card can be different than the damage suffered. IE. Desolation does 6 and heals 6 but the enemy model only took 3. 

The same is Dumb Luck vs Armour

[PeregrineFalcon]

On 4/5/2016 at 6:31 PM, solkan said:

 

In other words, the reason why Channel specifies "exactly 2 damage" is to prevent Leveticus from suffering four damage to get to a single action.  Not to forbid any rules mechanics from ever interacting with the damage process.

 

Well he actually can do this but isn't part of OP's question, but for clarity will put it here:

1. Channel
2. Charge
3. Channel
4. Attack with 
5. Lose one   cause first attack ended
6. Channel
7. Attack with 
8. Lose both   cause charge and second attack have ended

*Assuming he has enough wounds to channel three times

[Shadowdragon]

In my mind damage suffered is totally different from actual wounds lost. The ability doesn't say his wounds total has to be reduce by exactly 2, it just says he has to suffer 2 damage. So he suffers 2 damage, which fulfills the condition to get the , then the damage is modified in whatever way (like through soulstone use), then Levi marks off the appropriate number of wounds. The actual number of wounds Levi loses has no bearing on getting the from Channel. Plus, typically if damage can't be reduced or prevented the ability will specifically say so. Of course, it would be nice if I was actually wrong about all this as Channel is still a disgustingly powerful ability even without being able to stone to prevent the damage.

[Skillmatic]

Thank you, I missed that in the faq...i am getting old...

[PeregrineFalcon]

34 minutes ago, MrDeathTrout said:

It seems like a lot is being read into the word "Exactly".  Why Channel says "exactly 2 damage" rather than "2 damage" I do not know.  My best guess is inconstant verbiage that all means the same thing, there are many examples of this in the rule books.  Given that is seems like a stretch so say the word "exactly" means the effect fails if that exact amount of damage is not taken. 

You are ignoring words to 'help' your interpretation.

34 minutes ago, MrDeathTrout said:

The issue of if a model can prevent/reduce/be immune to the "cost" of an action/ability/trigger and still gain the effect has come up many times.  IIRC Wyrd has not addressed any of these questions and the consensus is usually they can prevent/reduce/be immune and still gain the effect.  

This is simply not true. If you are immune to paralyze you do not gain paralyzed condition. Not sure where your consensus is coming from on that? With that said I'm pretty sure this question has been answered, I hope this question can be closed soon.

[Icemyn]

1 hour ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

No Channel states he needs to suffer exactly 2 damage.

That's not exactly true.

Suffer does not mean taken in the world of Malifaux. He must suffer two damage to gain the channel, but nothing is stopping him from stoning to prevent that damage.
Taking the full 2 damage is not a prerequisite to gaining the channel ability. 

Let's pretend Leveticus has the "Death by Suffocation" upgrade attached to him from the Hodgepodge Emissary.
Now whenever he takes damage from an ability it is increased by +1.
So he channels and takes 3 damage does he now not get the benefit of channeling in your opinion?

While not technically relevant you can look to the FAQ on the Desolation Engine/Seamus/McMourning healing to see that the damage a model takes or marks on its card can be different than the damage suffered. IE. Desolation does 6 and heals 6 but the enemy model only took 3. 

[PeregrineFalcon]

3 minutes ago, Icemyn said:

I did also note models such as the Desolation engine that say exactly this:
"Restabilize: After Damaging, this model heals an amount of damage equal to the amount of damage suffered from this attack." (emphasis mine)

The FAQ makes it reasonably clear that the damage suffered by a model is not what the model actually takes. 
 

  Reveal hidden contents

13) 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 and Lelu’s Drink Blood Trigger).

Order of operations as I see supported by the FAQ:
1) A model suffers damage
2) A model applies any effects that may reduce that damage.
3) The wounds are then marked off the stat card. 

This may seem pedantic but FAQ states that the answer "applies to any trigger...", which channeling and dmg suffered do not. The answer appears to only apply to triggers and effects. Using soulstones (as far as I know is not an effect), while healing (or armor) is. By drawing a relation between damage prevention and other effects in the game I think it is a stretch and in no way do I see anything in the rules that supports that (but happy to be told otherwise).

Furthermore, I am not sure if was stated directly by Wyrd or posted officially somewhere (don't have reference), but as far as I know an FAQ answer specifically references the things it is answering and any other conjecture does not provide enough precedence as proof for answers to other questions unless directly reference.

[MrDeathTrout]

It seems like a lot is being read into the word "Exactly".  Why Channel says "exactly 2 damage" rather than "2 damage" I do not know.  My best guess is inconstant verbiage that all means the same thing, there are many examples of this in the rule books.  Given that is seems like a stretch so say the word "exactly" means the effect fails if that exact amount of damage is not taken.

The issue of if a model can prevent/reduce/be immune to the "cost" of an action/ability/trigger and still gain the effect has come up many times.  IIRC Wyrd has not addressed any of these questions and the consensus is usually they can prevent/reduce/be immune and still gain the effect.  

[Endalaus]

..

 

 

Edited April 5, 2016 by Endalaus
double post

[Skillmatic]

Again I assumed, and maybe incorrectly, the term reduce/prevent were interchangeable. The crux of this argument is the interchangeability(new word, just made it up) of the suffer/dealt/taken and prevent/reduce conundrum. if they each have a separate definition pertaining to this game, for each word, then that is fine the debate needs to rage on. Wyrd can really end this by saying these words are interchangeable. And I don't see it invalidating or confusing past or future abilities, conditions, attacks or triggers.

But I still stand by my interpretation of the correct ruling.

[Skillmatic]

I would like to throw in my two cents on this matter, but I must preface my reply with a quick disclaimer:

I don't have a horse in this race, Im a new Levi player and I didnt even think this was a discussion at first. I normally refrain from posting on forums because the greatest discussions normally degrade into name calling, trolling and inside jokes that are neither funny inside nor outside, hence my limited number of posts. Ive played ALL KINDS of table top skirmisher games and I like to have a grasp on rules for the sake of GETTING IT RIGHT, not BEING RIGHT. Disclaimer over.

So, lets define somethings first, since I'll be asking questions and you guys cannot answer in real time, I'm going to assume you are nodding in agreement.

The terms Suffer, Taken and dealt damage are all interchangeable as a way to describe a models wounds being removed. I think this is something the rule writers assumed would be understood, because ...ADULTS.

Damage Prevention says you spend a soulstone to reduce damage.

So whenever a model, suffers, takes or is dealt damage it can be prevented with a soulstone.

Now, if Wryd did not want the Channel damage to be prevented, they would have said, "cannot be reduced..." like it says for "Strum the Threads"

The wording of "exactly" within the Channel description was there to say you cannot suffer 4 damage to get a to an action. Im understanding the ability cannot be used twice when performing the action. I might be WRONG about that one, I would love for someone to show me the error of my ways for that!

In conclusion, what I'm saying is YES you can use a soulstone to reduce the damage of Channel and still receive the benefits.