Improved harness

[Sergey Loginov]

Hoffman new upgrade, Improved harness. Can some thing Ignor this rule?

1. Poison. 

2 Some other rule that says "may not reduce damage". 

3. Or "Smell Weakness: Until the end of the turn, enemy models within 6" which are targeted with an attack action lose Armor and Hard to Wound abillities and conditions for the duraction of the attack action"

4. Another rules?

[Ludvig]

Agreed, the poison condition isn't an enemy effect so Sebastian still hurts.

[Ludvig]

No, the harness specifically trumps any rule that would ignore the armor, that is the whole point of it.

[Sergey Loginov]

Even  Poison ?

[Ludvig]

Not sure. Does it say it can't be ignored by enemy model's actions or just can't be ignored at all? Poison is nrver caused by an action but is just a neutral effect.

[Adran]

57 minutes ago, Sergey Loginov said:

Even  Poison ?

During the Upkeep Step, any model with the Poison Condition suffers 1 damage that
may not be reduced or negated. (page 62 rules manual)

Can you see a reason that Improved harness wouldn't stop this (other than the fact that under almost all circumstances armour can't reduce damage below 1, and poison only deals 1 damage)

 

[Franchute]

10 minutes ago, Adran said:

During the Upkeep Step, any model with the Poison Condition suffers 1 damage that
may not be reduced or negated. (page 62 rules manual)

Can you see a reason that Improved harness wouldn't stop this (other than the fact that under almost all circumstances armour can't reduce damage below 1, and poison only deals 1 damage)

 

Indeed, most of the time it wont be relevant. I guess the main issue is situations that involve Sebastian who may increase the damage from poison. My interpretation is that Improved harness would ignore the reduction in these situations too, as the upgrade says "Friendly Constructs within 6 of this model may not have their Armor ignored and may reduce damage regardless of any enemy effects that state otherwise".

 

[Adran]

2 minutes ago, Franchute said:

 "Friendly Constructs within 6 of this model may not have their Armor ignored and may reduce damage regardless of any enemy effects that state otherwise".

 

Ah, the wording...

There isn't an enemy effect stating it, so I think it can't armour reduce poison

[Tahsarith]

So, removing armor as ability with acolyte still allow to reduce damage?

[Adran]

42 minutes ago, Tahsarith said:

So, removing armor as ability with acolyte still allow to reduce damage?

I think the acolyte would still remove armour

Likewise with things like the large arachnid that gives Armor-1. They aren't ignoring the armor and there isn't an enemy effect saying the damage can't be ignored. 

[Ludvig]

1 hour ago, Tahsarith said:

So, removing armor as ability with acolyte still allow to reduce damage?

They will still have armour because the effect is caused by the acolyte which is an enemy model.

[santaclaws01]

28 minutes ago, Adran said:

I think the acolyte would still remove armour

Likewise with things like the large arachnid that gives Armor-1. They aren't ignoring the armor and there isn't an enemy effect saying the damage can't be ignored. 

50) What does “ignore” mean in the rules? For example, Rusty Alyce’s Burn Out Action says the damage cannot be ignored. Ignore refers to any way to avoid the game effect, be it through redirection, Conditions, or other game rules. For example, the Terracotta Warrior’s Ancient Protection Condition seems to allow the Terracotta Warrior to suffer the Burn Out damage instead of the initial target. This means the original target of the Burn Out Action is not impacted by the Burn Out Action, and therefore it was ignored. A Terracotta Warrior would not be able to use Ancient Protection to suffer the damage caused by Rusty Alyce’s Burn Out because it cannot be ignored by the initial target.


That kind of muddies what it means to ignore something.


 

1 hour ago, Ludvig said:

Agreed, the poison condition isn't an enemy effect so Sebastian still hurts.

Induction is an enemy effect though? Sebastian is the one causing the extra damage.


Actually after thinking about it some more, I agree with Ludvig. Induction doesn't say the damage can't be reduced, Poison does, and Poison isn't an enemy effect. Induction just adds onto Poison's damage.

And in regards to Smell Weakness from the Acolyte, and Torn to Shreds from the Large Arachnid, as those are conditions placed on the model, I would also say they aren't enemy effects.

Edited February 2, 2018 by santaclaws01

[Ludvig]

27 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

50) What does “ignore” mean in the rules? For example, Rusty Alyce’s Burn Out Action says the damage cannot be ignored. Ignore refers to any way to avoid the game effect, be it through redirection, Conditions, or other game rules. For example, the Terracotta Warrior’s Ancient Protection Condition seems to allow the Terracotta Warrior to suffer the Burn Out damage instead of the initial target. This means the original target of the Burn Out Action is not impacted by the Burn Out Action, and therefore it was ignored. A Terracotta Warrior would not be able to use Ancient Protection to suffer the damage caused by Rusty Alyce’s Burn Out because it cannot be ignored by the initial target.


That kind of muddies what it means to ignore something.


 

Induction is an enemy effect though? Sebastian is the one causing the extra damage.


Actually after thinking about it some more, I agree with Ludvig. Induction doesn't say the damage can't be reduced, Poison does, and Poison isn't an enemy effect. Induction just adds onto Poison's damage.

And in regards to Smell Weakness from the Acolyte, and Torn to Shreds from the Large Arachnid, as those are conditions placed on the model, I would also say they aren't enemy effects.

Smell weakness isn't a condition, it is an ability that says enemy models within aura 6 loses armour or whatever. The action doesn't add a condirion to the acolyte or the models affected, it is just an unspecified effect.

[santaclaws01]

2 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

Smell weakness isn't a condition, it is an ability that says enemy models within aura 6 loses armour or whatever. The action doesn't add a condirion to the acolyte or the models affected, it is just an unspecified effect.

Oh, alright, so that wouldn't get around the armor then.

[WWHSD]

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

Oh, alright, so that wouldn't get around the armor then.

No, Smell Weakness would get around Improved Harness. Smell Weakness does not ignore Armor and Hard to Wound it causes the target to temporarily lose those abilities or conditions. During the attack the target has no Armor for Improved Harness to interact with.

If a Steamfitter attacked a Peacekeeper that was under the effect of Smell Weakness he couldn’t use his Heat Up trigger since it does not have Armor +1 during the attack.

[santaclaws01]

5 minutes ago, WWHSD said:

No, Smell Weakness would get around Improved Harness. Smell Weakness does not ignore Armor and Hard to Wound it causes the target to temporarily lose those abilities or conditions. During the attack the target has no Armor for Improves Harness to interact with.

It's an enemy effect that attempts to ignore their armor. Improved harness stops enemy effects from doing so.

[WWHSD]

4 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

It's an enemy effect that attempts to ignore their armor. Improved harness stops enemy effects from doing so.

No it’s not. It is an enemy effect that removes Armor. There’s nothing in Improved Harness that stops the Armor ability or condition from being removed. It’s not really any different from an enemy using offensive condition removal to remove the Armor condition from a model. I don’t think that anyone would argue that Improved Harness would prevent that. The only difference between condition removal and Smell Weakness is that Smell Weakness is temporary.

[santaclaws01]

3 minutes ago, WWHSD said:

No it’s not. It is an enemy effect that removes Armor. There’s nothing in Improved Harness that stops the Armor ability or condition from being removed. It’s not really any different from an enemy using offensive condition removal to remove the Armor condition from a model. I don’t think that anyone would argue that Improved Harness would prevent that. The only difference between condition removal and Smell Weakness is that Smell Weakness is temporary.

"Ignore refers to any way to avoid the game effect, be it through redirection, Conditions, or other game rules."

[Squirrelich]

(1) Small Weakness: Until the end of the Turn, enemy models within 6 which are targeted with an Attack Action lose the Armor and Hard to Wound Abilities and Conditions for the duration of the Attack Action.

 

Adaptive Armor: Friendly Constructs within 6 of this model may not have their Armor ignored and may reduce damage regardless of any enemy effects that state otherwise.

question: does "... lose the..." in Smell Weakness = "... ignored ..." in Adaptive Armor

same page now?

[Squirrelich]

I agree with @WWHSD on this one though. 

Hoffman player: "you cannot ignore this thing I have" (cannot ignore)
Aracnist player: "are you sure you have this thing?" (lose armor)

They have removed it, they are not circumventing (i.e. ignoring it) it. There is nothing to ignore if it has been removed.

[Ludvig]

It's an enemy effect that states that you will somehow not reduce the attack according to your armour value, improved harness says that you may still use your armour to reduce damage. 

[WWHSD]

2 minutes ago, 7thSquirrel said:

I agree with @WWHSD on this one though. 

Hoffman player: "you cannot ignore this thing I have" (cannot ignore)
Aracnist player: "are you sure you have this thing?" (lose armor)

They have removed it, they are not circumventing (i.e. ignoring it) it.

That’s a great way of illustrating it.

[Squirrelich]

2 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

It's an enemy effect that states that you will somehow not reduce the attack according to your armour value, improved harness says that you may still use your armour to reduce damage. 

Right, IF you have armor you may still use it regardless of the other persons abilities. Smell Weakness says you do not have armor.

[WWHSD]

3 minutes ago, Ludvig said:

It's an enemy effect that states that you will somehow not reduce the attack according to your armour value, improved harness says that you may still use your armour to reduce damage. 

No, it’s an enemy effect saying that you don’t have Armor. There’s a difference.

Would you not allow Johan to remove the Armor condition from a model affected by Improved Harness?

[Ludvig]

Just now, WWHSD said:

No, it’s an enemy effect saying that you don’t have Armor. There’s a difference.

Would you not allow Johan to remove the Armor condition from a model affected by Improved Harness?

It doesn't make you immune to condition removal so you can remove the condition but smell weakness seems like a way to ignore my armour. Ignore isn't a well specified game term as far as I know so removing it is a way of ignoring it. It isn't struck out from my card, if I move out of the aura I am back to having armour, right? That means it is an enemy effect temporarily ignoring the armour of my model in my reading.

[Squirrelich]

You are free to use your armor to its fullest with Improved Harness. I cannot prevent you reducing damage with armor, I cannot bypass the armor ability, and I cannot ignore your Armor ability. I CAN, however, remove the Armor ability from your card.

"(1) Small Weakness: Until the end of the Turn, enemy models within 6 which are targeted with an Attack Action lose the Armor and Hard to Wound Abilities and Conditions for the duration of the Attack Action."

the target has lost the armor ability. They do not have armor. for the duration of the attack it might as not be on their card. There is nothing to ignore if you do not have the ability.

the effect, and I would go as far as RAI, is pretty much that it is being ignored. I agree with that though