Induction - prevention and HtK

[trikk]

"Induction: Enemy models within a6 that suffer damage from the Poison Condition suffer an additional 2 damage from the Poison Condition."

 

Is the damage suffered 3 or 1+2? If its 1+2 I assume it bypasses HtK and if I prevent the initial 1 I don`t get the extra +2. There was a debate at A Wyrd Place and I see sides for both arguments.

[solkan]

From the FAQ:

Quote

87) When a model is suffering damage from Poison and it is within range of Sebastian’s Induction Ability, increasing the Poison damage being dealt, can the damage be reduced?
No. Damage dealt by the Poison Condition may not be reduced.

88) If a model with 2 wounds remaining is killed by the Poison Condition while within range of Sebastian’s Induction Ability, does Sebastian count as having killed the model?
No, the damage is still dealt by the Poison Condition, Induction just causes Poison to deal more damage.

Just getting that out of the way, it's not directly relevant.

Otherwise, it's one block of damage, not two blocks of damage.  In order for it to be two blocks of damage, the second block would be caused by Induction.

 

[Clement]

The specific logic of how a single soulstone always prevents all the induction-ed poison damage goes as follows:

1) Induction states "Enemy models within a6 that suffer damage from the Poison Condition suffer an additional 2 damage from the Poison Condition"

2) Poison condition damage *cannot be reduced* but *can be prevented*

Quote

13) Can a model spend a Soulstone to prevent damage dealt by the Poison Condition?
Yes.

3) If a Soulstone is used to prevent the 1 damage from poison, then they have not suffered damage.

Quote

17) If a model suffers 0 (zero) damage, does it count as having suffered damage?
No.

4) Since the model did *not* suffer damage from the poison condition because Soulstone, they do not suffer "an additional 2 damage from the Poison Condition"

Edited October 4, 2016 by Clement
added italics for clarity.

[solkan]

5 minutes ago, Clement said:

The specific logic goes as follows:

1) Induction states "Enemy models within 6 that suffer damage from the Poison Condition suffer an additional 2 damage from the Poison Condition"

2) Poison condition damage *cannot be reduced* but *can be prevented*

3) If a Soulstone is used to prevent the 1 damage from poison, then they have not suffered damage.

4) Since the model did *not* suffer damage from the poison condition because Soulstone, they do not suffer "an additional 2 damage from the Poison Condition"

That sequence of events requires an additional stipulation:

0.  The assumption that the model suffers 1 damage from Poison and then adds two damage from Induction, instead of Induction changing the amount of damage caused by Poison from 1 damage to 3.

 

[Clement]

Just now, solkan said:

That sequence of events requires an additional stipulation:

0.  The assumption that the model suffers 1 damage from Poison and then adds two damage from Induction, instead of Induction changing the amount of damage caused by Poison from 1 damage to 3.

 

Late night posting, sometimes I get caught up in the footnotes.  I was proving out the "one soulstone prevents the whole mess" logic.

Induction is VERY CLEAR about where the damage is coming from.  Once induction has finished doing what it does, the model in question is taking 3 damage in a single chunk, all being done by the poison condition (and therefore not by Sebastian)

[Kadeton]

Huh, I thought this one had been settled ages ago; the model within the Induction aura suffers 3 damage from Poison. If you prevent 1 damage, you suffer 2.

[Clement]

44 minutes ago, wizuriel said:

I'm not sure the answer but I've also seen it played as you suffer 1 poison damage and after you take 2 normal damage (the normal damage being reduceable since it is just damage and not poison)

That's just straight wrong though.   The tag on Induction of "additional 2 damage from the Poison Condition" means it follows all the rules of damage given by poison, specifically that it can't be reduced.  (Prevented yes, reduced no).

[Adran]

Bonus' to damage are not a separate source of Damage. So Induction does not make you suffer 2 groups of damage (neither does Critical strike). So it will not bypass hard to kill. 

I had thought it had been sorted to be either 0 or 3 damage. But looking closely, I think I'm wrong. 

I always took it like Critical strike, that if you flip the black joker for Damage, and so deal 0 damage, even with critical strike, you deal 0 damage (It counts as 0 damage so doen't get the while damaging bonus). This one is spelt out on page 52.

But you're right that damage prevention (page 53) doesn't happen until you have determined how much damage is dealt, which would be 3 in this case. 

 

 

 

[Ludvig]

I've been playing it as if you can reduce the 1 g to not suffer any based on the following rationale:

The ability to use soulstones is an ability. When something happens you check abilities on the active model before other models. I use my ability to soulstone-prevent against the 1point of poison and then we go to check Sebastian's aura and conclude that my model sidn't suffer poison damage so it does 't suffer the additional two points. 

I'm not sure that's 100% legit. 

I am however 100% sure that you cannot apply armour to the inducyion damage since it specifically says that it is considered to be caused by poison.

My way would neuter htk I guess because that would "fire" first. I'm not sure which way is the right one anymore but in case my old rationale could help the lawyers resolve this I thought I'd offer it.

[Clement]

11 hours ago, Kadeton said:

Huh, I thought this one had been settled ages ago; the model within the Induction aura suffers 3 damage from Poison. If you prevent 1 damage, you suffer 2.

 

Here's a quote from you on this same topic going the other way.

On 7/7/2015 at 9:34 PM, Kadeton said:

(This is different from the Induction ability because that makes a model suffer an additional 2 damage when they suffer damage from the Poison condition. If they don't suffer damage from Poison - because they prevented it using a soulstone, for example - then they don't suffer the additional damage.)

I didn't see when the consensus changed.  Got a link?

[trikk]

Is it me, or is this a valid FAQ question?

 

I`m personally leaning towards 1x3 damage but I really don`t care. Stupid Sebastian!

[Clement]

2 minutes ago, trikk said:

Is it me, or is this a valid FAQ question?

 

I`m personally leaning towards 1x3 damage but I really don`t care. Stupid Sebastian!

This is why the rules forum is occasionally such odd fun.   My sticking point isn't the interaction with HtK, I know that it's a single set of 3 damage.  But now we're off into the minutia of how soulstones works with it.

I could have sworn this was settled years ago the way I explained above, but I guess somewhere along the way it unsettled.

[Bengt]

20 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

I've been playing it as if you can reduce the 1 g to not suffer any based on the following rationale:

The ability to use soulstones is an ability. When something happens you check abilities on the active model before other models. I use my ability to soulstone-prevent against the 1point of poison and then we go to check Sebastian's aura and conclude that my model sidn't suffer poison damage so it does 't suffer the additional two points. 

I'm not sure that's 100% legit. 

I am however 100% sure that you cannot apply armour to the inducyion damage since it specifically says that it is considered to be caused by poison.

My way would neuter htk I guess because that would "fire" first. I'm not sure which way is the right one anymore but in case my old rationale could help the lawyers resolve this I thought I'd offer it.

Are you saying that you consider use soulstone to be an ability as in the game term "ability"? What do you base that on? Abilities are defined as the stuff listed under "Abilities" on the front of the card (page 21 RB). Use soulstone is just a rule as far as I can tell (with the exception of the Soulstone Miner, which has an actual ability called "Use Soulstone" ).

[spooky_squirrel]

The wording "Enemy models within 6 that suffer damage from the Poison Condition" might be what's throwing people off. When you take into consideration various interactions with the poison condition, the wording makes better sense. For instance, Poison Gamin heal instead of taking damage from poison.

It's a modification to the damage sustained (like added damage from crit strike), as was already mentioned.

[Kadeton]

9 hours ago, Clement said:

Here's a quote from you on this same topic going the other way.

I didn't see when the consensus changed.  Got a link?

Nope!

I certainly used to think it was 1 damage (preventable) that then expanded to 3, but I have a strong memory of it being clarified to a single instance of 3 damage. That probably means I had a conversation with Justin about it (probably about putting it into the FAQ), which is sadly totally unofficial.

[spooky_squirrel]

Page 53, under Damage Prevention: 

Quote

Masters and Henchman have an additional defense against damage. 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 seems pretty straight forward. You determine how much damage they would take, then make the prevention flip.

[Clement]

2 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

Another point is that you don't actually need to have your wounds reduced to have suffered damage.

from the FAQ:

17) If a model suffers 0 (zero) damage, does it count as having suffered damage?
No.

[solkan]

On 2016/10/4 at 0:16 AM, Clement said:

The specific logic of how a single soulstone always prevents all the induction-ed poison damage goes as follows:

1) Induction states "Enemy models within a6 that suffer damage from the Poison Condition suffer an additional 2 damage from the Poison Condition"

2) Poison condition damage *cannot be reduced* but *can be prevented*

3) If a Soulstone is used to prevent the 1 damage from poison, then they have not suffered damage.

4) Since the model did *not* suffer damage from the poison condition because Soulstone, they do not suffer "an additional 2 damage from the Poison Condition"

So you're preventing the damage before you determine how much damage the model is going to suffer.

Quote

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.

Note that Induction does not say that it suffers damage after suffering damage.  The model under the Influence of Induction is going to take 3 damage, not 1.

In other words, you're making the assumption that the model is suffering damage twice.  This would be acceptable if you're in the camp that Induction bypasses Hard to Kill.

Are you?

 

[Ludvig]

I'm pretty sure the dumb luck faq is a balance errata disguised as an faq.

The wording on soulstones being used after determining final damage settles it for me at least.

[santaclaws01]

2 hours ago, Ludvig said:

I'm pretty sure the dumb luck faq is a balance errata disguised as an faq.

I don't think Dumb Luck would become super strong if the self damage was based on how many wounds the target loses.

[Clement]

3 hours ago, solkan said:

So you're preventing the damage before you determine how much damage the model is going to suffer.

Note that Induction does not say that it suffers damage after suffering damage.  The model under the Influence of Induction is going to take 3 damage, not 1.

In other words, you're making the assumption that the model is suffering damage twice.  This would be acceptable if you're in the camp that Induction bypasses Hard to Kill.

Are you?

 

No...  which, as you point out, creates odd timing problems based on the wording of soulstone use.  I'm honestly having one of those weird cognitive dissonance moments over this.  Now I'm not sure on either the HtK thing or soulstone prevention any more.   I get why you can't have both though.

[santaclaws01]

1 minute ago, Clement said:

from the FAQ:

17) If a model suffers 0 (zero) damage, does it count as having suffered damage?
No.

The model isn't suffering 0 damage. It's suffering one damage per the rule for poison 

Quote

Poison +1: At the end of the turn this model suffers 1 damage, then lower this model's Poison Condition value by 1.

Take the Dumb Luck FAQ. 

Quote

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).

Well Dumb Luck states 

Quote

Dumb Luck: Instead of its normal damage, this Attack deals 4/6/8 damage to the target and this model suffers half damage equal to half of the amount the target suffers.

So now we have a trigger that forces you to suffer damage based on how much the target suffers. And per the FAQ you take half the damage amount flipped regardless of how much damage the target takes, which in the case of the example in the Dumb Luck FAQ, a model that suffers 4 damage but reduces it to 2 is still suffering 4 damage. The FAQ you quoted is for instances where a model is dealing 0 damage(some damage tracks are 0/0/1 for instance) and some other model has something that would proc off of the defender suffering damage.

[Artiee]

You can use a soulstone prevent the 1 damage that will stop the +2 damage.   It says if suffers 1 damage then suffer additional +2.   If you stone and stop the one damage, then you didn't suffer any damage so then you stop the additional +2.  

[santaclaws01]

Another point is that you don't actually need to have your wounds reduced to have suffered damage.

[wizuriel]

I'm not sure the answer but I've also seen it played as you suffer 1 poison damage and after you take 2 normal damage (the normal damage being reduceable since it is just damage and not poison)