Sloth and paralyzing slow targets

[Manxfaux]

I was just looking at Sloths Wiki entry and it suggests that using his ranged attack on a slow target will mean they can't convert it to slow so will become paralyzed.

from pg 52 big rulebook "Conditions presented without a value in their name do not stack, and a model that would get a second instance of a Condition simply ignores it (the second instance is not applied)"

So surely this means they can in fact 'gain' another dose of slow which has no further effect. The rules don't say they don't get (or gain) the Condition, merely it is ignored.

Thoughts?

*Edit*

I feel the wiki page is correct in its claim, despite my initial thought, and those of the following contributors.

This is because the rules specifically state that the second copy of a non stackable Condition is "not applied" (pg 52 big rulebook).

If the Condition is not applied it is in no way gained either, so paying two life to gain the Condition is not an option.

If the wording was pay two life and gain the Condition instead, that would be a small but significant difference.

[santaclaws01]

25 minutes ago, Manxfaux said:

I disagree with your interpretation of immune.

Lenny, like Ashes & Dust, is immune to all conditions. You can't choose to accept one even if it is beneficial. You can't even benefit from defensive stance or focus.

Although immunity does raise a few problems sometimes as "A model immune to a Condition can never receive the Condition". So a model immune to Slow cannot choose receiving Slow as an option, eg Sloth's passive aura. You would have to take the damage or discard.

In your example, being immune to burning would mean having to discard. You can't gain a condition you are immune to, by choice or by force.

Correct, you can't gain it. That doesn't mean you can't choose to gain it when given the option. What about a model that is immune to both paralyze and slow? Does the game just break down because they can't choose either option? Can Ashes and Dust not take the defensive stance or focus actions?

[Dogmantra]

imo: in this case you can choose slow even if you're already slow, and the fact you won't gain the condition doesn't make a difference.

Argument: you're allowed to choose if you're immune to the condition (e.g. Lenny can make a choice even though he's immune to both conditions), and that works the same way as if you already have the condition (i.e. ignores it and you just don't gain it). You're also allowed to choose things that won't do anything elsewhere, e.g. you can pick a "target must discard a card if able" trigger if your opponent has no cards, models that are immune to burning can freely not discard a card when they have to pick between +1 burning and discard a card.

On the other hand as Myyra said in the linked threa, since Sloth's heal specifies it heals you if you gained slow, then you would have to not be slow or immune to get healed.

[Manxfaux]

29 minutes ago, Dogmantra said:

imo: in this case you can choose slow even if you're already slow, and the fact you won't gain the condition doesn't make a difference.

Argument: you're allowed to choose if you're immune to the condition (e.g. Lenny can make a choice even though he's immune to both conditions), and that works the same way as if you already have the condition (i.e. ignores it and you just don't gain it). You're also allowed to choose things that won't do anything elsewhere, e.g. you can pick a "target must discard a card if able" trigger if your opponent has no cards, models that are immune to burning can freely not discard a card when they have to pick between +1 burning and discard a card.

On the other hand as Myyra said in the linked threa, since Sloth's heal specifies it heals you if you gained slow, then you would have to not be slow or immune to get healed.

I disagree with your interpretation of immune.

Lenny, like Ashes & Dust, is immune to all conditions. You can't choose to accept one even if it is beneficial. You can't even benefit from defensive stance or focus.

Although immunity does raise a few problems sometimes as "A model immune to a Condition can never receive the Condition". So a model immune to Slow cannot choose receiving Slow as an option, eg Sloth's passive aura. You would have to take the damage or discard.

In your example, being immune to burning would mean having to discard. You can't gain a condition you are immune to, by choice or by force.

[santaclaws01]

40 minutes ago, Paddywhack said:

I think that  is some mighty fine mental gymnastics.  You may be looking too hard at it. Let's see if they ever FAQ it. 

This is not productive at all.

[Myyrä]

Sloth's attack is different from its other abilities. With the attack, the target is choosing to suffer 2 damage to change the effect of the attack. Slow target can choose to suffer 2 damage just fine.

[santaclaws01]

1 hour ago, Manxfaux said:

But my point is that a Slow model cannot and does not gain another instance of Slow due to the ruling on pg 52 "the second instance is not applied".

If the second instance is not applied then at no point does a Slow model 'gain' a second copy and can therefore not satisfy the requirement "suffer 2 damage to gain the Slow Condition instead"

Sorry, not sure what you mean by the second bit.

Gaining slow is not what is required to not be paralyzed. It's you take 2 damage and gain slow or you can get paralyzed.

[spielervier]

The discussion comes down to whether "gain slow instead" is also part of the trigger. But it can't. If the trigger would be "suffer 2 damage" and "gain slow instead" there wouldn't be any (re)action at all that would be triggered. Therefore "suffer 2 damage" is the trigger that activates "gain slow instead".

[spielervier]

Quote

 

Sloths ability says that you can choose to take two damage and gain slow instead of paralyzed. The ruling says that conditions without a number don't stack and a when a model would get a condition a second time, it simply is ignored / cannot be applied. Because we have slightly different wordings I think it's not possible for the enemy to choose to gain the condition again (which would then be ignored) because it does not seem logical that I can choose to gain a condition (which I would guess it means that it has to be applied) that cannot be applied.

Unfortunately  @Myyrä has argued differently in this thread (last post), so don't take my interpretation as given, especially as gain is not clearly defined in the rules.

 

EDIT: Never mind my post, the guys got me convinced that it's the other way round. See my latest posting here on why

Edited April 16, 2016 by spielervier
Got convinced

[Manxfaux]

oops, didn't look as far back as August

I think the problem is the rules say both "Ignore" and "not applied", which are two different things, in the same sentence.

If you 'ignore' the second Slow it has still technically been 'gained' but if it is 'not applied' then it effectively never existed and therefore could not have been gained.

I suppose you could look at from the point of view of:

Does not applying a condition a second time allow you to effectively ignore it? Yes. The second application won't exist at all (so there is simply nothing to ignore, worded another way).

Does ignoring the second application of a condition mean it wasn't applied? Possibly not. Definitely its effects are ignored, but it is not crystal clear that the second copy of the condition doesn't still exist and has therefore been applied.

So only by using the first version can you be certain of fulfilling the wording of the sentence 100%

So... You cannot apply a second copy of fast/slow - the second copy ceases to exist the instant it is applied.

So... You cannot 'gain' fast/slow by choice if you already have it.

I think I've convinced myself

[Dogmantra]

30 minutes ago, Manxfaux said:

I disagree with your interpretation of immune.

Lenny, like Ashes & Dust, is immune to all conditions. You can't choose to accept one even if it is beneficial. You can't even benefit from defensive stance or focus.

Although immunity does raise a few problems sometimes as "A model immune to a Condition can never receive the Condition". So a model immune to Slow cannot choose receiving Slow as an option, eg Sloth's passive aura. You would have to take the damage or discard.

In your example, being immune to burning would mean having to discard. You can't gain a condition you are immune to, by choice or by force.

What's the difference in this between Lenny choosing which condition to (not) gain and choosing to target him in the first place with an action that only grants a condition?

[spielervier]

6 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

Correct, you can't gain it. That doesn't mean you can't choose to gain it when given the option. What about a model that is immune to both paralyze and slow? Does the game just break down because they can't choose either option? Can Ashes and Dust not take the defensive stance or focus actions?

I would argue that in Sloths case you get Paralyzed and can choose to get Slow (+ damage). As you can't get Slow you can't choose to do so. So Paralyzed is still applied (as only the option to choose has gone), it's applied, can't be applied and is ignored.

Difference is that you're loosing the option to choose (which in this case you wouldn't choose anyway because of the damage).

[Dogmantra]

59 minutes ago, Manxfaux said:

Triggers and won/lost duel effects such as Pandora's Sorrow are a reason to target such a model.

Nihilism (Hamelin and Nix) is what you're describing.

I was thinking more like sloth's heal or student of conflict's assist, things with no duels. Probably should have mentioned that.

 

I have another argument though - if you can't choose to gain a condition you already have/are immune to, why does Sloth's heal specify that it only works if they gained slow? If the rules worked how you're saying it would only need to say "target may gain slow to heal 3 damage"

[solkan]

 

8 hours ago, Manxfaux said:

I disagree with your interpretation of immune.

Lenny, like Ashes & Dust, is immune to all conditions. You can't choose to accept one even if it is beneficial. You can't even benefit from defensive stance or focus.

Although immunity does raise a few problems sometimes as "A model immune to a Condition can never receive the Condition". So a model immune to Slow cannot choose receiving Slow as an option, eg Sloth's passive aura. You would have to take the damage or discard.

In your example, being immune to burning would mean having to discard. You can't gain a condition you are immune to, by choice or by force.

Here's one of the situations for why that doesn't work.

Here's Sloth's abilty:

Quote

Lazy Sunday: Enemy models which start their Activation within 3 must discard a card or suffer 2 damage or gain the Slow Condition.

A Outcast player puts up this effect:

Quote

0) Hollow: Until the start of this model's next Activation, friendly models within 5 are immune to damage dealt by , , and effects.

summons a rat (so that it has slow), and then activates the rat with no cards in their hand.

The player has no cards in their hand, the model is immune to damage from Sloth's aura, and the rat can't gain Slow because it already has Slow.

Please explain how the player is to choose in that situation, and why it's any different when the player is immune to just a few of choices.  'You can't choose something you can't do' doesn't work.

 

[spielervier]

3 hours ago, Myyrä said:

Sloth's attack is different from its other abilities. With the attack, the target is choosing to suffer 2 damage to change the effect of the attack. Slow target can choose to suffer 2 damage just fine.

So your argument is (if I got it right), that the 2 damage is the penalty and the slow just "an addendum" that might or might not be applied regardless of any condition on the model currently? So the trigger for this effect is "take 2 damage" and therefore the trigger can be met and the outcome (get slow instead) is then handled according to the rulebook - meaning ignoring it if it's already on the model, right?

Sounds legit as well.

[santaclaws01]

@Manxfaux So what if a model is immune to BOTH Slow and Paralyze? Or the situation @solkan suggested where none of the effects of Sloths aura actually have any affect. What if a Nihilist model is targeted? They can just ignore slow(the same as would happen as if they had slow already) and just ignore paralyze. Also as @Myyrä said, Sloths heal is worded differently in that they have to have gained the condition to get the heal, not that they have to choose to gain slow to get healed. This is a significant difference in wording so that he can't heal models immune to slow (like in a Nico crew)

@spielervier No, both the 2 damage and slow are one of the penalties. There's just nothing backing the claim that you can't choose an affect that you are immune to or ignore.

[Manxfaux]

7 hours ago, solkan said:

The player has no cards in their hand, the model is immune to damage from Sloth's aura, and the rat can't gain Slow because it already has Slow.

Please explain how the player is to choose in that situation, and why it's any different when the player is immune to just a few of choices.  'You can't choose something you can't do' doesn't work.

 

This just means that Sloths aura is ineffective. The player doesn't have to make a choice as none of the choices available are valid, and you move on.

[Manxfaux]

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

@Manxfaux So what if a model is immune to BOTH Slow and Paralyze? Or the situation @solkan suggested where none of the effects of Sloths aura actually have any affect. What if a Nihilist model is targeted? They can just ignore slow(the same as would happen as if they had slow already) and just ignore paralyze. Also as @Myyrä said, Sloths heal is worded differently in that they have to have gained the condition to get the heal, not that they have to choose to gain slow to get healed. This is a significant difference in wording so that he can't heal models immune to slow (like in a Nico crew)

@spielervier No, both the 2 damage and slow are one of the penalties. There's just nothing backing the claim that you can't choose an affect that you are immune to or ignore.

As I've said, if the target is immune to both paralysed and slow then it cannot become paralysed by the attack and therefore is not required to choose to suffer damage and gain slow.

If none of the effects of the aura apply, then they don't apply. This is no different if there is one effect or twenty. If the same situation was set up but you had one card you couldn't say "I'll take the damage" or "I'll take the Slow" because you still had a valid option in discarding a card.

If a nihilist model is targeted it simply chooses not gain paralysed, even though it was applied, and once again is therefore not required to choose the damage/slow option. Nihilism is trickier but you have to remember it is not actually "immunity" and therefore is not governed by the "Condition may not be applied" rule.

And I agree with everyone on the heal, I always have. The target must actually gain the Slow Condition due to the action to receive the heal.

[santaclaws01]

2 hours ago, Manxfaux said:

As I've said, if the target is immune to both paralysed and slow then it cannot become paralysed by the attack and therefore is not required to choose to suffer damage and gain slow.

If none of the effects of the aura apply, then they don't apply. This is no different if there is one effect or twenty. If the same situation was set up but you had one card you couldn't say "I'll take the damage" or "I'll take the Slow" because you still had a valid option in discarding a card.

If a nihilist model is targeted it simply chooses not gain paralysed, even though it was applied, and once again is therefore not required to choose the damage/slow option. Nihilism is trickier but you have to remember it is not actually "immunity" and therefore is not governed by the "Condition may not be applied" rule.

And I agree with everyone on the heal, I always have. The target must actually gain the Slow Condition due to the action to receive the heal.

I know nihilist isn't immunity, it's ignore. Same as a slow model that is gaining another instance if slow. And how are you reconciling a model being unable to choose a penalty when it doesn't have any affect on the model but it can choose either penalty when both have no affect on it? 

[Manxfaux]

8 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

I know nihilist isn't immunity, it's ignore. Same as a slow model that is gaining another instance if slow. And how are you reconciling a model being unable to choose a penalty when it doesn't have any affect on the model but it can choose either penalty when both have no affect on it? 

But my point is that a Slow model cannot and does not gain another instance of Slow due to the ruling on pg 52 "the second instance is not applied".

If the second instance is not applied then at no point does a Slow model 'gain' a second copy and can therefore not satisfy the requirement "suffer 2 damage to gain the Slow Condition instead"

Sorry, not sure what you mean by the second bit.

[santaclaws01]

20 hours ago, Manxfaux said:

No, it's "take 2 damage to take slow".

If you have slow you cannot get it again, so you cannot pay the 'price' of 2 damage any more than you can 'gain' a second copy of slow.

Yes, the attack is you get the paralyze condition OR you can choose to take 2 damage and change the affect of the attack to gaining slow instead of Paralyze. Your ability to actually gain the condition has no bearing on what option you can choose. The reason we bring up the heal is because it specifically says if the model doesn't actually gain slow then it does get healed. This is a very clear difference in wording between the attack and the heal. The attack makes no mention of whether the model actually gains slow or not, just that they can take 2 damage and gain slow instead of gain paralyze

[Manxfaux]

5 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

Correct, you can't gain it. That doesn't mean you can't choose to gain it when given the option. What about a model that is immune to both paralyze and slow? Does the game just break down because they can't choose either option? Can Ashes and Dust not take the defensive stance or focus actions?

You can't choose it, no.

For the given examples: A model targeted by Sloths paralyse attack that is immune to paralyse cannot choose to accept paralysis, therefore choosing to gain slow and take damage instead is a moot point. It is not that they are choosing not to gain the condition, the original condition cannot be applied by the attacker. They would still be affected by the trigger and the fact they had lost the duel as normal.

A&D can indeed take the defensive / focus actions as spending AP and gaining the conditions are two different steps in that chain. But they are still conditions so they will not 'stick'.

If there was an attack that went: 'Target is Paralysed, they may take take 10 damage instead to remove paralysed', then a model immune to paralysed would be fine, because it can ignore the initial condition caused by the attack.

If there was an attack that went: 'Target suffers 10 damage, they may gain paralysed instead to remove the damage' then being immune to paralysed means you must suffer the damage as you cannot be affected by the condition and may not be given it, even if you would like it (because it would not affect you).

[Manxfaux]

5 hours ago, Dogmantra said:

What's the difference in this between Lenny choosing which condition to (not) gain and choosing to target him in the first place with an action that only grants a condition?

Triggers and won/lost duel effects such as Pandora's Sorrow are a reason to target such a model.

Nihilism (Hamelin and Nix) is what you're describing.

[Myyrä]

16 minutes ago, solkan said:

Please explain how the player is to choose in that situation, and why it's any different when the player is immune to just a few of choices.  'You can't choose something you can't do' doesn't work.

Why would it be better for the aura to do nothing because the player chooses something the model is immune to, than to do nothing because the player can't choose anything?

[Manxfaux]

7 hours ago, Dogmantra said:

I was thinking more like sloth's heal or student of conflict's assist, things with no duels. Probably should have mentioned that.

 

I have another argument though - if you can't choose to gain a condition you already have/are immune to, why does Sloth's heal specify that it only works if they gained slow? If the rules worked how you're saying it would only need to say "target may gain slow to heal 3 damage"

That's the opposite of what I'm saying.

Again, this is about a target which has no choice about being targeted, even if it a friendly model.

Sloth's heal can target a friendly model that has slow or is immune to slow, but because they cannot gain Slow they cannot fulfill the criteria of the action which is set out in the second sentence, and so therefore cannot receive a heal as the result. To target such a model would therefore be a waste on Sloth's part, but in no way against the rules.

If the heal read "target friendly model within 6" may gain the slow condition and heal 3 damage" then fine, it heals even if immune or currently suffering from Slow, as becoming slow because of the heal is not actually a condition (small c) of the action, rather a byproduct or additional effect.

I can only assume it was worded this way to limit its power as a (0) action, 6" range, 3 point no flip required heal is pretty damn strong if you have no downsides by targeting a model immune to slow/just been summoned, etc.

[Paddywhack]

I think that  is some mighty fine mental gymnastics.  You may be looking too hard at it. Let's see if they ever FAQ it.