Exploding So Hard You Live: Drache Troopers and Servant of Dark Powers

[Kharnage]

I'm not sure what the order on all of this is, but I know when Nekima dies, if she black bloods on something and kills it, it'll heal her out of being dead. 
With Drache Troopers, let's say I stacked on some mines, and he explodes on death, dealing 4 damage and 2 burning to models near him, killing a nearby model, and he has the Servant of Dark Powers upgrade. Servant of Dark Powers says when he kills things, he heals 2. Is he now alive? 

[santaclaws01]

1 hour ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

If the Drachen had a demise ability, it would fit either into A6a (if a heal) or A6c (effects upon death), as demise is an ability that is associated with the model's own death. If a demise was happening related to another model's death (such as "demise: heal all models within 4 inches", then it wouldn't be relevant).

So I'm not sure I understand your claim that the interpretation I've proposed above precludes demise abilities. There's nested layers here. You resolve the death in the listed way (which specifically includes text that would include the model's demise ability, but doesn't seem to care what is going on with other models at the time).

You're saying that sequential timing rules apply damage which would mean you need to completely resolve damage on a model before starting to resolve any new effects as a result of that damage. If that were the case demise abilities would not start to resolve until after completely resolving the damage since demise is an additional effect.

[Maniacal_cackle]

EDIT: Suggest skipping this comment and going to the next one. It's a much better breakdown.

2 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

You're saying that sequential timing rules apply damage which would mean you need to completely resolve damage on a model before starting to resolve any new effects as a result of that damage. If that were the case demise abilities would not start to resolve until after completely resolving the damage since demise is an additional effect.

I'm saying sequential timing applies to the damage suffered by the two models (since the damage occurs at separate times). For other effects that happen because of the damage, they have a process outlined on page 34. Section 6 is relevant here:

• 6a: resolves heal effects on the killed or replaced model
• 6b: resolve any after killing triggers
• 6c: any effects that resolve after the model is killed resolve
• 6d: remove the model

Demise abilities clearly fit into 6c (or 6a if a heal). This process clearly lines out how you would include a demise ability (it fits into the language of what is happening). You would resolve the demise ability that deals the damage (applying two damage to the other model), but you don't go through the damage resolution process until later (it just enters a queue waiting its turn to be resolved from what I can tell, as that is how the rules tell you to handle damage. If the damage occurs at the same time, resolve it simultaneously. If not, then do it sequentially).

So the damage is applied during 6c from demise causing an explosion, but I don't see why you'd go through steps 1-6 for the damage from the explosion yet (you're not finished resolving all the damage that has happened so far).

EDIT: Actually, I think only demise (heals) will fully resolve before death. Otherwise they're put into the resolve queue, see below for elaboration.

[Adran]

17 hours ago, Kharnage said:

It does matter. Because demise "when this model is killed" and Teach Them Fear "when a friendly model kills an enemy model" both occur simultaneously in step 6c, so the active player resolves their step 6c effect first. 

Apart from the fact they are both "After this model is killed" effects (I might still be in M2E timing with the when effects happen before after effects, I'm not sure that that still exists).  You would resolve all effects on active players  model, then all effects on non active players model.

 

1 hour ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Although I still don't get what the justification for resolving B's death in the middle of A's death is. True, the rules of damage progression clearly intend that if models suffer damage at the same time, you resolve them side by side.

 

I think the justification is that To resolve the demise effect you then fully resolve all things from that, which includes the dealing damage to model B, so Model B will go the whole way through the damage resolving steps as part of the resolving the Model A demise effects. I don't know if this is just old edition thinking anymore.

So for example, Black blood is an effect that happens after a model suffers damage, so would happen in step 5. The view is that this point of damage is then fully resolved  before you would get to step 6 of Model As damage process. Because to resolve the black blood ability we deal damage to another model, so that damage has to go through the whole damage timing steps to finish resolving that ability.

Example (with no healing effects to confuse the issue)

Model A Terror tot on 2 wounds(with a land mine) is within 1" of a Bayou Gremlin on 1 wound  and  a lucky effigy on 2 wounds.

The gremlin hits the tot with a Banjo bash with the Kabong trigger . We go to the damage timing

1 the tot can't spend stones

2 the damage flip happens. the Bayou flips over some cards and get weak. this is 1+1 from the kabong trigger, so 2 damage to the Tot

3 The tot has no damage prevention abilities

4 the tot lowers its wounds to 0

5 Black blood happens causing 1 damage to the bayou gremlin and the Lucky effigy - There is a break in the damage steps for the tot to deal with the damage here. (Damage a)

New damage timing a1 neither model can spend stones.

a2 there is no flip, its a straight 1 damage to all models in the pulse

a3 There is not damage reduction to apply here. If one of the models had shielded +1 then they would reduce the damage to 0. The armour doesn't apply because its 1 damage and the armour can't reduce it to below 1

a4 you lower the wounds for each model by 1, so the gremlin is on 0 wounds and the Effigy is on 1 wound. (Even if the damage was 2, the hard to kill of the effigy would reduce to 1 wound because of hard to kill)

a5 Neither model  has an after damaging effect.

a6 these steps will only apply to the gremlin, because the effigy isn't killed.

a6.a there is no healing

a 6.b there is no after killing trigger

a 6.c the demise effect of the Bayou gremlin will apply drawing a card, as will it placing a corpse marker.

a 6.d The gremlin is removed

we return to the Tots damage steps now we have resolved the black blood damage

the tot is killed so we go to step 6

6.a There is no healing.

6.b there was no after killing trigger declared by the gremlin

6.c the demise effect of the l;andmines goes off . We go into a new damage timing step, b

b1 nothing happens

b2 the landmines do 2 automatic dmage, so no flip required.

b3 The armour reduces the incoming damage by 1

b4 you lower the Effigy wounds by 1 from 1 to 0

b5 nothing happens

b6 the effigy is now being killed so will go through these steps. The only death effect it has is to drop a marker, so we put down a scrap marker and remove the effigy

We then return to the Tot step 6.c and  don't place a corpse marker because of the land mines.

6.d we remove the tot.

 

 

The only simultaneous damage being dealt during that process was the black blood. The banjo damage dealt to the Tot in the first place happened first, and the land mine damage happened last (although the banjo damage didn't finish resolving until the whole process was done).

[Maniacal_cackle]

@Adran, that all makes sense as a possible interpretation, but basically I reject it with the following line of reasoning:

1. Damage and sequential effects are all part of a broader category (Timing, page 34 of beta rulebook).
2. Sequential effects specifically states "Sometimes, an effect will create additional effects as it resolves. In these cases, fully resolve the initial effect before moving onto any additional effect. Additional effects are then resolved in the order they were generated, after any effects which have been previously generated have been resolved.

When considering the issue of a model dying (or taking damage for black blood), I would consider this to fall under sequential effects.

So if a model dies, and effects are generated, how do we handle it?

1. By default, from my reading of the rules, any new effects are basically put into the queue - they will resolve in the order they were generated.
2. Some effects will skip the queue (for instance, 6a offers a way to break the normal order of things).

Combining these lines of reasoning, I would see:

1. The model with demise (damage) goes through the process of dying.
2. At 6c, this results in other damage being applied to other models.
3. You place this damage into the resolve queue.

You are told to 'resolve' an effect (demise damage), but there are multiple things you're supposed to be resolving (the demise damage and the death of the demise model). When this is the case, you refer to how to resolve multiple effects: you resolve the one that happened first.

How then does a demise (heal) work? Well, 6a specifically includes a way to break the chain and skip to the demise (heal). If resolving an effect in 6a would result in saving the model, it provides a way to exit the normal resolution order.

As for the page 25 "killed" rules, I see those as merely foreshadowing the exact timing rules that come later ("if a model is healed after it was killed as a result of being reduced to 0 health, it no longer counts as killed"). This to me is repetition of the 6a rule, not a separate ruling unless I'm missing something.

[Adran]

31 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

@Adran, that all makes sense as a possible interpretation, but basically I reject it with the following line of reasoning:

1. Damage and sequential effects are all part of a broader category (Timing, page 34 of beta rulebook).
2. Sequential effects specifically states "Sometimes, an effect will create additional effects as it resolves. In these cases, fully resolve the initial effect before moving onto any additional effect. Additional effects are then resolved in the order they were generated, after any effects which have been previously generated have been resolved.

My Line of reasoning is if you just resolve the first damage until its complete, why do we have all those steps in there where things are clarified to happen. If it tells us to resolve an after damaging effect in step 5 of the damage timing, surely that's when we resolve it, not just wait until after the damage is all resolved and the model is killed>
So each stage of the damage timing is the "effect", not 1 big effect of "DAMAGE", or the purposes of sequential effects.

So spending a soulstone to add is an effect. And you fully resolve that effect at step 1 of the damage process before going to step 2. and so forth.

I can't make your reasoning work for the timing, but that might be because I'm not sure what you think "resolve" the effect means. If the effect is a 1/2/3 damage flip on each model within 2 after the model is damaged, when would you make the flip?  I would do it at step 5 of the damage, so before I have removed the first model, but you seem to be noting each model that is within 2 at that point, and then you will do the flip and damage them all after we have removed the initial target (assuming it was killed).

[santaclaws01]

1 hour ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

I'm saying sequential timing applies to the damage suffered by the two models (since the damage occurs at separate times). For other effects that happen because of the damage, they have a process outlined on page 34. Section 6 is relevant here:

• 6a: resolves heal effects on the killed or replaced model
• 6b: resolve any after killing triggers
• 6c: any effects that resolve after the model is killed resolve
• 6d: remove the model

Demise abilities clearly fit into 6c (or 6a if a heal). This process clearly lines out how you would include a demise ability (it fits into the language of what is happening). You would resolve the demise ability that deals the damage (applying two damage to the other model), but you don't go through the damage resolution process until later (it just enters a queue waiting its turn to be resolved from what I can tell, as that is how the rules tell you to handle damage. If the damage occurs at the same time, resolve it simultaneously. If not, then do it sequentially).

So the damage is applied during 6c from demise causing an explosion, but I don't see why you'd go through steps 1-6 for the damage from the explosion yet (you're not finished resolving all the damage that has happened so far).

EDIT: Actually, I think only demise (heals) will fully resolve before death. Otherwise they're put into the resolve queue, see below for elaboration.

Sequential timing says to not start resolving any additional effects until the after fully resolving the intial effect.

Damage is not fully resolved until step 6/6d(depending on if the model is killed) is done.

All demise abilties are an additional effect that can be generated by a model suffering damage which brings it to 0 health.

Since demise is an additional effect, under sequential timing where you CAN NOT START resolving additional effects until the initial effect is fully resolving, it will not start resolving until after step 6d.

 

What you are saying is that demise abilities actually will start resolving, which is ignoring the most important part of sequential effects, but then immediately pause at some arbitrary position and wait for the initial effect to finish resolving before going back. I don't think I need to say that you can't just ignore part of a timing rule while still claiming to be using that timing rule.

[Maniacal_cackle]

10 minutes ago, Adran said:

My Line of reasoning is if you just resolve the first damage until its complete, why do we have all those steps in there where things are clarified to happen. If it tells us to resolve an after damaging effect in step 5 of the damage timing, surely that's when we resolve it, not just wait until after the damage is all resolved and the model is killed>
So each stage of the damage timing is the "effect", not 1 big effect of "DAMAGE", or the purposes of sequential effects.

So spending a soulstone to add is an effect. And you fully resolve that effect at step 1 of the damage process before going to step 2. and so forth.

I can't make your reasoning work for the timing, but that might be because I'm not sure what you think "resolve" the effect means. If the effect is a 1/2/3 damage flip on each model within 2 after the model is damaged, when would you make the flip?  I would do it at step 5 of the damage, so before I have removed the first model, but you seem to be noting each model that is within 2 at that point, and then you will do the flip and damage them all after we have removed the initial target (assuming it was killed).

Good thoughts, still thinking this through!

To clarify, though, you're referencing a pulse ability. I assume this is the mine, but I don't think anyone has quoted the mine text yet. I don't actually know what that ability does. Would you mind pointing out where I can find it (or quoting it here)?

Thanks!

@santaclaws01 I explain it much better in my next comment, sorry, the one you're quoting ended up being a bit incoherent, as I discovered some inconsistencies while making the next comment.

[Adran]

Just now, Maniacal_cackle said:

Good thoughts, still thinking this through!

To clarify, though, you're referencing a pulse ability. I assume this is the mine, but I don't think anyone has quoted the mine text yet. I don't actually know what that ability does. Would you mind pointing out where I can find it (or quoting it here)?

Thanks!

@santaclaws01 I explain it much better in my next comment, sorry, the one you're quoting ended up being a bit incoherent, as I discovered some inconsistencies while making the next comment.

The final rules and model cards can be downloaded by following the M3 banner headline at the top of all the forum pages, which leads to here https://www.wyrd-games.net/news/2019/6/26/waldos-weekly-feet-dont-fail-me-now.

The land mine is an outcast upgrade.  It gives the ability Demise (Explosive +2): After this model is killed, models within 2 suffer +2 damage. This model does not drop any markers when killed.

The Pulse ability with a damage flip is an ability I made up, following the black blood rules but with a variable damage flip rather than a flat 1 damage, just to try and work out how you were applying  the rules.

 

[santaclaws01]

5 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

 

@santaclaws01 I explain it much better in my next comment, sorry, the one you're quoting ended up being a bit incoherent, as I discovered some inconsistencies while making the next comment.

You're still just trying to superimpose sequential timing over damage timing but only picking parts of sequential timing to use without any form of consistency. You're aslo treating being killed as a separate effect from damage which is not the case.

 

[Kharnage]

My brained is fully trained only on Breathing, Fine Dining, and playing Nephilim good, so I'm not able to quite follow what you're saying @santaclaws01. Are you saying that my original interpretation of "we said no nested effects,  but JK this a nested effect because we have to resolve each step before moving on" is correct? That is to say, it's possible to heal out of death by killing people with Demise effects with heal-on-kill abilities?

[Maniacal_cackle]

@Adran thanks for that!

Right, so I'll create an example scenario and run through that. I have no idea what the final answer will be, but let's work through it using my interpretation from above.

We'll assume land mines, and a made up ability with a 1/2/3 damage flip following the Black Blood rules.

Quote

Land mines: Demise (explosive 2): After this model is killed, models within 2" suffer +2 damage.

Quote

(Made-up) Blacker Blood: After this model suffers damage from an action or trigger, every model within 1" suffers 1/2/3 damage.

Let's assume a few models involved:

• Model A hits models B and C with one attack action, which is going to kill them both.
• Model B is Buffed Nekima: has blacker blood and heals after a friendly model kills someone.
• Model C is something with landmine and an ability that heals it after it kills someone.
• Model A is going to die from the damage from the other models dying (will this then heal up model B or C?)

So what happens?

First up, we have the attack action of model A. It is dealing simultaneous damage to both model B and model C. That's all that is happening so far, so we start resolving those.

How is simultaneous damage handled? "If multiple models suffer damage at the same time, resolve each step below on every model being damaged before moving to the next step."

Begin working our way through the damage process (NOTE: each step occurs for model B, then model C, or vice versa).

1. Models involved may spend soulstones to give the damage a - to the flip. We'll assume this to be irrelevant here - assume the models will die even at minimum damage.
2. Flip for damage (again, whatever the result, we're assuming the models are killed here). Here the damage flip isn't an 'effect' or anything, it's simply checking a number. "When resolving" triggers that increase or add damage resolve at this point. Essentially, anything that determines what the actual damage number is applies here.
3. Apply damage reduction - soulstones can be used here (again, the flip isn't an effect here, it's just checking a number). When resolving triggers that reduce damage apply here. Essentially, anything that takes the number from step two and then modifies the final result.
   1. NOTE: This may give two different numbers. This step is repeated for model B and model C at this stage. One might have armour, etc.
4. The model lowers its health by an amount equal to the final damage amount.
   1. Again, note that this stage has to happen twice. Once for model B, and once for model C.
5. Any effects that happen after a model is damaged or after a model is reduced to a specific health resolve.
   1. Blacker blood triggers. Damage from it goes into the resolution queue.
6. Go through the killing steps a-d.
   1. I'm unsure if you do 6a for both models, then 6b, or 6a-d for one model, then 6a-d for the next. However, it shouldn't matter.
   2. At 6a, no heals happen yet (they haven't killed model A yet).
   3. Resolve any after killing triggers (neither model has an after killing trigger, just after killing abilities). This stage is meant for if model A has a trigger, I believe.
   4. At 6c, resolve any effects after the model is killed.
      1. Model C goes through this stage, and starts demise (explosion).
   5. At 6d, both models are removed.

And so we have resolved the first set of damage. However, during the resolution of that damage, we gained other effects to resolve. Model B has blacker blood left hanging, and model C has demise (explosion) left. <EDIT> These both should probably be treated sequentially (since one happens in step 5 and one happens in step 6), but treating them as simultaneous here doesn't affect the end result.

Thus, we start the process again.

1. Model A may use a soulstone to give a minus to the blacker blood flip.
2. The damage flip now happens (with a -, if applicable). There are no applicable triggers here, as no suits are involved with the blacker blood or demise.
3. Apply damage reduction as before (again, no triggers apply, but this would be the stage for 'when resolving" that affect damage).
4. Lower model A's health (for damage from both abilities).
5. Any effects that happen when a model is damaged occur at this point.
6. Now the four steps of step 6.
   1. Resolve anything that heals THIS model (Model A). Model A has no effects available to heal it, so nothing gets placed in the resolution queue (if it did have something, such as an ability that heals it off B and C's death, it'd get saved here).
   2. Resolve after killing triggers (again, no triggers in this scenario, so not relevant).
   3. Any effects that resolve after the model is killed (model B and C are dead and off the board, so they no longer get to heal at this stage).
   4. Model A is removed (unless 6a ended the process).

I hope this helps clarify how I think it works! 

[Maniacal_cackle]

At a quick glance at how I worked through that, it seems like a good general distinction:

There are modifiers, and things that affect numerical calculations. These apply as soon as relevant in my interpretation.

There are effects (such as blacker blood dealing damage to something). These get placed into a resolution 'queue', and happen in a sequential order if the damage happened at different times, or in a simultaneous order if the damage happened at the same time.

Note the implication: you don't actually know how much damage blacker blood is doing while sitting in the queue (this part surprised me until I wrote the last post, I expected you to know the number as soon as it was put into the queue).

[Maniacal_cackle]

@santaclaws01, you're correct, I contradicted myself and found more errors. Hopefully this most recent working is cleaner and a better interpretation.

[Kharnage]

29 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

There are effects (such as blacker blood dealing damage to something). These get placed into a resolution 'queue', and happen in a sequential order if the damage happened at different times, or in a simultaneous order if the damage happened at the same time.

I don't think there's any reason to believe there's a queue of that nature. Magic the Gathering basically has a whole doctoral thesis on "the stack" and card resolution, but Malifaux does not currently. Let me run through a scenario.
A 2 health Nekima attacks and hits the 2 health Drache Trooper. 
1. He can give it a neg to soulstone (nope)
2. Nekima flips for damage, dealing 3 damage.
3. His armor reduces the damage.
4. He lowers his health to 0.
5. He has no after damaged or specific health effects.
6. He has no health, is "killed", then resolve the following.
6a. Drache has no Eternal or whatever, nothing happens.
6b. Nekima doesn't declare Feed the Young.
6c. Nekima places her healing into the "resolution queue"? The Trooper explodes, but for some reason this goes "on the stack"? 
6d. The model dies and is removed.
Step 7 that now exists because we decided there was a resolution queue: Nekima heals now, the pulse from the Drache trooper is measured from nowhere, nothing happens?
That's the issue, if the reading of Sequential Effects of

"Sometimes, an effect will create additional effects as it resolves. In these cases, fully resolve the initial effect before moving onto any additional effect. Additional effects are then resolved in the order they were generated, after any effects which had been previously generated have resolved."

means that the Demise isn't resolved until after the model is removed from play, then explosion Demise abilities would never have anything to measure from. Additionally, if I have to "fully resolve" step 6 before I can do anything actually in Step 6, Demise (Eternal) abilities would be put in "The resolution queue", then the model would be removed at step 6d, then would heal, but already be removed from the game. Either Resolve means "completely do this thing right now", and Demise Eternal works, or Resolve means "put it in the resolution queue", in which case it doesn't. It has to be nested.

[Maniacal_cackle]

@Kharnage, I think the queue is self-evident from the sequential rules.

If a crooligan triggers fading (remove a scheme marker) by teleporting, you don't remove the scheme marker until after the teleport. The fading doesn't happen until the current ability finishes resolving.

As for demise (explosion), it works perfectly fine in the situation I described above: at 6c you measure from the demise model, figure out who it hits, remove the demise model, then apply the damage.

Which is not to say I'm necessarily right. Just that my interpretation can resolve demise abilities, which seems to be the biggest objection.

Although it raises the question of the crooligan and measurement (does measurement happen upon the discard, or upon applying the effect?). So if one accepts my system, there is room for ambiguity there (although I suspect it works out fine due to no directions to resolve fading before moving the model, unlike demise).

And again demise (heal) abilities would not work under this system except 6a specifically includes language that makes them work.

If an effect would heal the dying model such that it won't die, it is no longer killed (negating 6b-c). Note the language is future tense (if the model would be healed by an effect, not IS healed by an effect). If a heal is waiting in the queue already, you know it is going to live, so don't kill it yet.

So again, I don't think there is a way to categorically say I'm right. But the demise objection doesn't really hold water, unless Im not understanding?

Edit: to clarify with your example. You measure demise distance at 6c, and apply the damage at 1 (your 7). There is no 7, it loops back to 1. Well, technically I think it would go 6 > Nekima heals > 1 for damage to Nekima. APNAP order applies, I believe, so the heal happens first if Nekima is active (though on phone, so can't see rules for this one).

[Maniacal_cackle]

Also note...

I think my system says that if Nekima dies, but black bloods something and kills it... She is still dead (she has damage in the queue, but no heal).

If there is an official position that black blood will heal up Nekima from death, I think that'd be solid evidence I'm wrong.

The initial question seems to accept it as fact that it works this way, so maybe I don't know something from earlier in the beta?

[Maniacal_cackle]

A key issue here is that multiple "resolve" instructions have been issued.

Yes, steps 6a and 6c instruct you to resolve demise abilities. However, at this point you have also been instructed to resolve the damage that already happened.

How do we manage multiple instructions to resolve different things? The sequential effects rule from page 34 (sometimes an effect creates additional effects. Finish resolving the first effect, and new effects resolve in the order they were generated).

Also, an ironic side note: if we were using Magic: the Gatherings complex stack system, it would work out that a model could explode then heal. With the stack system you can add stuff to the top of the stack which causes all sorts of funkiness.

While my interpretation is a little bizarre, I find the interpretation that requires resolutions within resolution a much deeper rabbit hole.

[santaclaws01]

2 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

 

As for demise (explosion), it works perfectly fine in the situation I described above: at 6c you measure from the demise model, figure out who it hits, remove the demise model, then apply the damage.

 

This is the issue here. By measuring what models would be affected you have started to resolve Demise Explosive. Sequential timing does not allow this, and the language for 6c and 6a are literally no different. Both say to resolve certain effects. Just like step 5 says to resolve effects that happen after a model is damaged. The very fact that multiple effects are being resolved during the course of a model resolving damage means that sequential timing can not apply to damage timing. The rules are contradictory to each other.

[Maniacal_cackle]

@santaclaws01 perhaps it would help if I understood your interpretation.

Can you give a detailed rundown of each stage interacting with the demise (explosion) and heal on kill?

Edit: or point to an existing post, if you think an existing post covers it.

 

[santaclaws01]

Just now, Maniacal_cackle said:

@santaclaws01 perhaps it would help if I understood your interpretation.

Can you give a detailed rundown of each stage interacting with the demise (explosion) and heal on kill?

 

The futher comment on what the crux of the issue with your interpretation. You say sequential timing applies to damage timing. Step 5 of damage timing says to resolve any abilities that happen after damaging. Step 6a says to resolve and after being killed abilities that heal or replace the mode. Step 6b says to resolve After Resolving abilities. Step 6c says to resolve any abilities that resolve after killing the model. You're saying to ignore the instructions set out in damage timing for how to resolve what happens during damage, and to instead use sequential timing, which means that after  damaging/suffering damage abilities, abilities that heal/replace on death, after resolving triggers, and abilities that happen on death would all in fact not happen until after step 6d.

I will restate what sequential timing says again. "Sometimes, an effect will create additional effects as it resolves. In these cases, fully resolve the initial effect before moving onto any additional effect. Additional effects are then resolved in the order they were generated, after any effects which had been previously generated have resolved." Emphasis mine.
 

Abilities that happen after damaging/suffering damage, after being killed, after killing, after resolving are all additional effects to the initial effect of damage. Sequential timing can not work on damage timing like you're saying it does because you're ignoring how damage timing tells you to resolve suffering damage.

[Maniacal_cackle]

@santaclaws01 thanks for that.

To clarify, are you saying that the damage is resolved simultaneously (and they alternate between steps 1-6 for each model), or the damage is resolved in a nested fashion (that is, damage to the second model, which occurred after the first damage, is resolved first)?

[santaclaws01]

23 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

@santaclaws01 thanks for that.

To clarify, are you saying that the damage is resolved simultaneously (and they alternate between steps 1-6 for each model), or the damage is resolved in a nested fashion (that is, damage to the second model, which occurred after the first damage, is resolved first)?

Kind of both. Damage is nested up until it reaches the step it was damaged in. So a model damaged by a step 5 effect resolves 1-5 before either model can go to step 6. A model damaged in step 6c will either resolve all of step 6 or go up to step 6c depending on how specific the damage timing rule is about every model needing to resolve every previous step before any can go to the next step.

How you determine what order the models resolve individual steps in could be handled by sequential timing, but as the damage timing rules say that they're suffering damage at the same time I would err on using simaeultaneous timing rather than sequential, as well as sequential still not quite fitting since each stel isn't a seperate effect.

[Maniacal_cackle]

7 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

Kind of both. Damage is nested up until it reaches the step it was damaged in. So a model damaged by a step 5 effect resolves 1-5 before either model can go to step 6. A model damaged in step 6c will either resolve all of step 6 or go up to step 6c depending on how specific the damage timing rule is about every model needing to resolve every previous step before any can go to the next step.

How you determine what order the models resolve individual steps in could be handled by sequential timing, but as the damage timing rules say that they're suffering damage at the same time I would err on using simaeultaneous timing rather than sequential, as well as sequential still not quite fitting since each stel isn't a seperate effect.

Putting my interpretation aside for a moment, how do you reconcile this with the part of Timing right before damage:

Quote

Ability Timing Most Abilities are passive and always in effect, but some occur as a result of another game effect. In these cases, the Ability will use the word “After.” These Abilities happen after the effect in question is resolved.

That's not even part of the sequential events section, it's just general ability timing. I'd see this as black blood 'happening' after all the damage applied to Nekima has been completed. Or are you suggesting that the wording of damage implies it is an exception to this general order?

I see section 5 and 6 of damage merely providing some guidance on what order all the effects will happen in after damage is complete. It's a way to take a bunch of things that trigger from the same damage (black blood, demise, corpse marker) and sort them into sequential rather than simultaneous APNAP order.

[Maniacal_cackle]

Of course, ultimately I think play groups will have to decide which interpretation they accept and we'll need some sort of official ruling.

What form does that usually take? Wyrd does FAQs, right?

[Adran]

9 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Also note...

I think my system says that if Nekima dies, but black bloods something and kills it... She is still dead (she has damage in the queue, but no heal).

If there is an official position that black blood will heal up Nekima from death, I think that'd be solid evidence I'm wrong.

The initial question seems to accept it as fact that it works this way, so maybe I don't know something from earlier in the beta?

I am assuming you know of the ability on Nekimas card that friendly models heal when they kill, and its just that in your timing you haven't got to her damaging a model, and so killing a model when she is removed, so she doesn't get to heal before the removal.

 

My biggest problem, and I think the one that Santaclaws is questioning, is that for your method to work you have to calculate which models are affected at the step in the damage timing, which is part of the resolving an effect, but then you stop, finish the first damage and then go back and finish the resolving part of the second damage packet that you had to start resolving to calculate who it effects, but then you stop randomly .

 

In relation to Kharnmage looking bat it at thinking it matters who is the active player, has lead me to realise something else that is slightly problematic. According to the timing chart, Demise and marker dropping happen at the same time. According to the rules on killed, they don't. (You would do the demise then the marker dropping, so demises that say you don't drop markers actually mean something).