Timing and measuring range (Nephilim example)

[Ludvig]

A terror tot is killed. Nearby it is a young nephilim. The terror tot's ability Brood resolves first but when do you measure the range for the Thirst for blood of the young nephilim, before or after moving due to brood? This has implications for other abilities as well like start of activation auras.

 

Brood: When this model is killed, all friendly Nephilim within 6" and LoS of it may immediately take a Walk Action directly toward the model that killed this model.

Thirst for blood: This model receives Fast when a non-Construct model within 3" is killed by another friendly model.

[Ludvig]

I think checking range to see which abilities even apply once at the time of a timing step applying seems more logical than needing to recheck it several times and models falling into or out of the resolution order depending on the new position.

It's like activating near Candy which has been discussed before. If you were close to her and first to activate and you have an on activation ability to push you would puah first but then resolve her aura effect even though you are now outside it. At the moment of activation you were near her. 

It might get tricky if multiple models with on death effcts are pushed. I could swear there was an faq answer about ice gamin and their demise in relation to pushes but now I can't find it.

[Myyrä]

13 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

It's like activating near Candy which has been discussed before. If you were close to her and first to activate and you have an on activation ability to push you would puah first but then resolve her aura effect even though you are now outside it. At the moment of activation you were near her.

It's exactly like that. The Candy case isn't any more unambiguous.

[Ludvig]

20 minutes ago, Myyrä said:

It's exactly like that. The Candy case isn't any more unambiguous.

I know but it should be worthy of faq. If we can just dig that thread up and possibly some others with similar quetions this may be worthy of the faqs attention?

[Kadeton]

12 hours ago, Myyrä said:

Existence of two possible interpretations is enough to prove that the rules aren't completely clear. It's you who needs to prove that one of them contradicts the rules if you want to claim you are right.

Well, that's what I've been saying - in my opinion, only one of your interpretations actually matches the text of the rule. Yes, there are two ways that you could in theory resolve abilities, but I don't see how the "check and resolve them all individually" method is something you can arrive at from that wording without a lot of mental gymnastics. That's why I was asking for a run-down on your second interpretation, as it didn't (and still doesn't) make any sense to me.

12 hours ago, Myyrä said:

The only reason I'm interested in this discussion, is that I loathe unnecessary ambiguity and would like to see it cleared away by a FAQ answer.

If all you're doing is agitating for an FAQ, that's really not necessary. Aaron reads everything on this board, just like Justin used to, and the questions that are chosen to go in the FAQ aren't the ones with the most responses.

I know that timing in the game is something that Aaron feels could be made much clearer. However, it's a big and very complex problem, and I don't expect that he'll want to jump in and deal with individual parts of it before nailing down a more coherent structure across all the timing issues in the game. So if you don't see it in the FAQ, it's not because you didn't jump up and down about it enough - it's because the answers aren't ready yet.

[Myyrä]

2 hours ago, Kadeton said:

If all you're doing is agitating for an FAQ, that's really not necessary. Aaron reads everything on this board, just like Justin used to, and the questions that are chosen to go in the FAQ aren't the ones with the most responses.

I know that timing in the game is something that Aaron feels could be made much clearer. However, it's a big and very complex problem, and I don't expect that he'll want to jump in and deal with individual parts of it before nailing down a more coherent structure across all the timing issues in the game. So if you don't see it in the FAQ, it's not because you didn't jump up and down about it enough - it's because the answers aren't ready yet.

I'm not making noise to get noticed. I'm voicing my disagreement, because that is really the only way of letting other people know that I disagree. There are a couple of examples mentioned in this thread where no one bothered to point out that the rules really aren't clear cut, and now we have people who think there is an agreement about how those rules should work.

I also believe there isn't any more progress to be made here, so we can just agree to disagree.