Jump to content
  • 0
drafterman

Acquiring conditions (burning, poisoning) during the Upkeep.

Question

Scenario:

Lilith is within 1" of a Fire Gamin. Lilith has Burning +2 on her. The Fire Gamin has 1 Wd left. Lilith resolves the burning, takes 2 damage, triggering her Black Blood ability, damaging all models within 1". The Fire Gamin, being within an inch, takes damage and dies, triggering Flaming Demise. This causes 1 damage plus Burning +1 to all models within 1". So Lilith takes 1 damage (triggering her Black Blood again) and gains Burning +1.

Do the effects of that burning resolve during that turn's Upkeep or during the following turn's upkeep?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 1
5 hours ago, Bengt said:

I don't see the rules support for doing anything between applying the damage and removing the burning condition. How did you come to that conclusion? It's not like Malifaux has a effect stack like Magic the gathering.

The instructions for Abilities are that they apply when they say they apply.  And the instructions for Burning are that the two events happen in order:  The model suffers damage, then the condition is removed.

Quote

Models have special Abilities that change how they interact with the rules, such as making the model difficult to damage, or giving it strange ways of moving. A model’s Abilities are considered to be active during an Encounter unless otherwise indicated in their description. All Abilities are capitalized.

Burning states:

Quote

During the Upkeep Step any model with the Burning Condition suffers an amount of damage equal to the Burning value. The effect is then removed.

Black Blood states:

Quote

Black Blood: All models without Black Blood within :pulse1 suffer 1 damage when this model suffers damage.

That's all of the instructions necessary.  Black Blood changes what happens when the model suffers damage, as additional instructions.

Lilith suffers two damage from burning.  When she does so, Black Blood is applied because it says so, and that causes other model to suffer damage.  The other model suffers damage, dies, that damage application causes Explosive Demise to become relevant.

That's not a "stack" system, that's following instructions.

If Black Blood said that something like "After suffering damage, all models without Black Blood within 1" suffer 1 damage", then there wouldn't be the immediate loop.

Edit:  Do keep in mind that Malifaux does have General Timing, so the instructions on when events happen is significant enough to warrant instructions for how to resolve events specified to happen at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1

Lilith with +2burning, and a Fire Gamin at 1 Wd within 1" of Lilith. Unkeep:

1. The player choose Lilith to resolves her effects (at the end of the turn).

      2. Lilith Suffers 2 damage.

      3. Black blood makes 1 damage to the Fire Gamin which dies.

      4. Flaming Demise makes 1 damage to Lilith and gains Burning +1.

      5. Lilith now has burning +3, 

2. Burning condition is removed from Lilith.

 

Seems dumb to me, but it was I understand from the rules.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1
2 hours ago, solkan said:

No, if you gained Reactivate during the End Phase you would NOT resolve any activations.  Because models can only Activate during the Activation Phase, and that's just passed.

There are tricky sequences where the last model that can activate ends up causing other models to be able to activate, so that the Activation Phase gets a surprise extension, but the Activation Phase and the End Phase aren't going to overlap.

If a model somehow managed to gain Reactivate during the End Phase (like Joss being reduced to 1 wound due to conditions and/or Black Blood), in the most favorable interpretation that Reactivate is just going to sit on the model until the next turn.  In the least favorable interpretation, that Reactivate expires in the same End Phase that it's gained.

 

I must be thinking of one of those kooky situations then. Written out it would make sense since the models dinged from other conditions normally wouldn't. For the life of me I can't recall what that situation was, but I did preface the bit with "iirc", I just didn't this time. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
4 hours ago, drafterman said:

Scenario:

Lilith is within 1" of a Fire Gamin. Lilith has Burning +2 on her. The Fire Gamin has 1 Wd left. Lilith resolves the burning, takes 2 damage, triggering her Black Blood ability, damaging all models within 1". The Fire Gamin, being within an inch, takes damage and dies, triggering Flaming Demise. This causes 1 damage plus Burning +1 to all models within 1". So Lilith takes 1 damage (triggering her Black Blood again) and gains Burning +1.

Do the effects of that burning resolve during that turn's Upkeep or during the following turn's upkeep?

You're forgetting about the fact that resolving burning is a two step process:

Quote

Burning +1: At the end of the turn this model suffers +1 damage, then remove this Condition.

and that stacking combines Conditions together:

Quote

Conditions stack if the Condition's name includes a value and the Conditions have the same name, for instance Poison +1. When this is the case, the values are added together and the two Conditions become one. Conditions may also stack with Abilities which share the same name and include a value. 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 in your scenario, what happens is:

  1. Lilith starts resolving Burning by taking damage
    1. Lilith suffers 2 damage, triggering her Black Blood ability
    2. Fire Gamin takes damage and dies, triggering Flaming Demise
    3. Lilith suffers 1 damage and gains Burning +1, increasing the value of her Burning to +3.
  2. Lilith finished resolving Burning by resolving "then remove this Condition", removing the Burning Condition which currently has value +3.


So in this particular timing case, the new Burning +1 effectively disappears without any real effect.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 hours ago, solkan said:

So in your scenario, what happens is:

  1. Lilith starts resolving Burning by taking damage
    1. Lilith suffers 2 damage, triggering her Black Blood ability
    2. Fire Gamin takes damage and dies, triggering Flaming Demise
    3. Lilith suffers 1 damage and gains Burning +1, increasing the value of her Burning to +3.
  2. Lilith finished resolving Burning by resolving "then remove this Condition", removing the Burning Condition which currently has value +3.


So in this particular timing case, the new Burning +1 effectively disappears without any real effect.

I don't see the rules support for doing anything between applying the damage and removing the burning condition. How did you come to that conclusion? It's not like Malifaux has a effect stack like Magic the gathering.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 hours ago, solkan said:

The instructions for Abilities are that they apply when they say they apply.  And the instructions for Burning are that the two events happen in order:  The model suffers damage, then the condition is removed.

What you said makes a certain amount of sense and falls in line with other chain causes that seem to happen. However, I will note that conditions aren't abilities and the rules treat them differently on some aspects. Between all of the possibilities, yours makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I thought this had come up before. I will do some searching. My instinct falls in line with the new Burning will resolve next Upkeep. I can see Solkan's train of thought, but I'm not sure I agree with it. I swear this came up before...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
18 hours ago, solkan said:

If Black Blood said that something like "After suffering damage, all models without Black Blood within 1" suffer 1 damage", then there wouldn't be the immediate loop.

By that same token I would find your argument more compelling if Burning had an "after" in it, I'm not convinced "then" is supposed to be equivalent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

You can get the original conundrum (Can you burn twice in the same upkeep?) in a clearer form if you add another model to disconnect the events. Lets say Candy is chilling on the other side of the Fire Gamin with burning +2 on her. The Neverborn player gets the option to resolve Candy or Lilith first, if they chooses Lilith Candy gets an extra burning before she resolves and takes 3 burning damage, nothing strange there. But if they chooses to resolve Candy first she initially takes 2 burning damage and then gets burning +1 when Lilith resolves later, should she burn again or wait until next turn?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I'm with the camp that the damage/removing wounds part of the ability triggers other stuff to happen which you need to resolve before going back and removing the burning. I think it is the only sensible way to look at it. "Then also quite clearly ahows that it is a sequence and not simultaneous. It like the difference between "jump up and down AND clap your hands twice" vs "jump up and down THEN clap your hands twice"

The burning twice part really deserves it's own thread and I doubt can be resolved without an faq answer since the rules aren't very clear on it and both interpretations lead to problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
3 hours ago, enderwiggin said:

Iirc you can gain re-activate in the end step and get to resolve those actions immediately... So it would stand to reason you probably can burn twice.

No, if you gained Reactivate during the End Phase you would NOT resolve any activations.  Because models can only Activate during the Activation Phase, and that's just passed.

There are tricky sequences where the last model that can activate ends up causing other models to be able to activate, so that the Activation Phase gets a surprise extension, but the Activation Phase and the End Phase aren't going to overlap.

If a model somehow managed to gain Reactivate during the End Phase (like Joss being reduced to 1 wound due to conditions and/or Black Blood), in the most favorable interpretation that Reactivate is just going to sit on the model until the next turn.  In the least favorable interpretation, that Reactivate expires in the same End Phase that it's gained.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Reactivate expires without you using it if you gain it during the end phase. Joss does not like to burn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Likewise, you can't burn twice in a turn, once you've resolved the burning on a model in the end phase you don't go back to that model and resolve it again that end phase, just because it has burning on it

If you did that, poison just got a whole lot better....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

You wouldn't ever want to resolve the same Condition twice, but I think you would (in the current version of the rules) run into a situation where you could resolve the same named Condition on a model twice.

The complicating scenario for me is this one:

Fire Gamin A has 1 wound remaining and Poison +3 on it.

Some-Other-Model-Without-Interesting-Rules B nearby has Burning +2 and four wounds left, but is in range of A's Flaming Demise.

 

Sequence 1:  If I resolved A's Poison first, when A dies it's going to inflict a wound on B and increase the Burning condition to +3.  Then when B resolves Burning, the three damage kills it.

Sequence 2:  If I resolve B's Burning first, it gets reduced to 2 wounds left.  Then A dies to poison, B gets reduced to 1 wound and has Burning +1 on it again.  [What happens to the Burning +1?  According to the Unfavorable Interpretation, it's going to expire, too.]

 

I think it would be better if both sequences had the same result.  But to do that requires either:

1.  Change the rules to support the Best Possible Interpretation:  Language added to the End Phase rules so that any Conditions gained during the End Phase are delayed to some indeterminate point so that they don't combine with pre-existing Conditions that haven't resolved yet.  The goal would be that B in the example above starts the next turn with Burning +1 whether A resolves first or B resolves first.

2.  Submit to the Unfavorable Interpretation:  B ends up resolving Burning twice in sequence #2--it resolves the original Burning +2, and then after A dies it has to resolve the new Burning +1 during the same End Phase.

Unfortunately, I think it's less work to look at the current rules and find support for the Unfavorable Interpretation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I disagree. 

I would select a model, and resolve all the conditions on it. If it then gained new conditions in the upkeep phase, it doesn't matter, I've already done the upkeep phase for that model. 

I don't think the game can tell if its a condition that has ticked down or a new condition. Should the order, matter, as it does here, I will get to decide the order for my models. and if random model B belongs to another player, then the first player will resolve the models conditions first. 

My reading of the rules is that everything happens at once, unless the order matters, in which case, if its on my models I get to decide the order, and if it covers multiple players, then First player goes first.  This is a situation where order matters, but I don't see why I should go back to B after I've already resolved all the conditions on it. 

I can't tell the difference between a poison +2 that my model has because it resolved a poison +3 condition, and a burning +1 that it gained after I resolved the Burning condition. Why would I re-do the burning condition but not the Poison condition. 

What about if I gave model B the ever burning condition (I'm obviously Avatar Sonnia) They took Burning +2 dealing them 2 damage, and then added an extra burning from the death of the fire gamin to be at burning +3. I wouldn't expect therm to then have to take a further 3 damage. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information