Jump to content
  • 0
dreads

Sonia’s Scorch the Soul against incorporeal models

Question

Sorry if this has been clarified before. If Sonia’s Scorch the Soul is done on an incorporeal model with 4 burning, does the mode take 4 or 3 damage? It says damage from burning so I would assume it would take 4.

 

9D82ED47-9BD6-4323-9596-F740E2C206AE.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 4

My opinion is as follows but others would say different:

3 damage as Incorporeal requires 1 thing to work and that says if its an attack action which this is. 

The reason they had to mention burning is so that models immune to burning damage dont take damage. 

The reason burning is not normally stopped by incorporeal is because normally it doesnt come from an attack action, but this is still an attack action.

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1
3 minutes ago, dreads said:

But the damage doesnt come from the attack action. It comes from burning 

if it came from burning it would do 2 damage? it requires an attack action to do said damage so it is caused by an attack action. 

incorporeal states that it reduces damage from attack actions by 1 to a minimum of 0. this is an attack action, whatever the source of damage it is an attack action. so to complete said attack action the incorporeal reduces damage by 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1

under the timing layout in the rules everything to do with an action is included in part C.2. so until that is complete then the action is not complete. so any damage cause by an action under this must have come from that action. if its an attack action then incorporeal can reduce it.

on the obey thing, you have to finish your action as in part c.2 before carrying out the obeyed action so a different action altogether.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1
25 minutes ago, dreads said:

So in either case the incorporeal model WOULD suffer the full amount of damage? Correct?

Yeah, if it says "the model takes damage from the burning condition", then I would say Incorporeal would not stop the damage. It's taking damage expressly from a condition, which is relevant in other ways (Like if you're flameborne, for example, then Sonnia's Scorch the Soul would have no effect)
EDIT: Though one might argue that in the same way that a model can either suffer damage from triggers or actions, but there are triggers that are within actions, that Scorch the Soul damage qualifies as both damage from a condition and damage from an attack. Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1
35 minutes ago, Kharnage said:

Yeah, if it says "the model takes damage from the burning condition", then I would say Incorporeal would not stop the damage. It's taking damage expressly from a condition, which is relevant in other ways (Like if you're flameborne, for example, then Sonnia's Scorch the Soul would have no effect)
EDIT: Though one might argue that in the same way that a model can either suffer damage from triggers or actions, but there are triggers that are within actions, that Scorch the Soul damage qualifies as both damage from a condition and damage from an attack. Thoughts?

I think it's clear that the damage comes from both the attack and the condition, because it's the result of an attack action, and the action specifies that it's from Burning. I can find nothing in the rules that says that damage can't, in this fashion, have two sources. Others seem to disagree, though, so, on that basis, a FAQ is probably in order.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1
1 hour ago, katadder said:

its still from an attack action. the damage is from an attack action and until the action is complete then it stays an attack action including any damage mitigation. This means incorporeal does reduce damage as it says nothing about conditions. its only requirement is that its an attack action and scorch the soul is.

I don't think you can have multiple sources for the same damage as it creates weird interactions. If my attack action moves a Hazardous marker over you, is the damage from an attack action?

 

I think Malifaux rules don't have context outside of their parent. So if the damage is from Burning but it's during the attack action it's still just damage from Burning, but not damage from the Attack Action.

 

3 hours ago, Kharnage said:

EDIT: Though one might argue that in the same way that a model can either suffer damage from triggers or actions, but there are triggers that are within actions, that Scorch the Soul damage qualifies as both damage from a condition and damage from an attack. Thoughts?

That's why the RB states:

Quote

Action Triggers are tied to specific Actions and can only 
be used with that Action. They are found below an Action’s 
and are subject to all game effects that affect 
the Action¸ such as Incorporeal or + flips to damage

 

 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1

 

11 hours ago, Mycellanious said:

 Similarly, the damage from Scorch the Soul has a special qualification for its damage: it comes from the burning condition and not from the attack action. 

I think you've got this wrong. The rules state that "Some game effects cause models to suffer damage from a condition. Damage suffered in this way is affected by any effects that refer to the condition. "

That is not saying that the damage is not from an attack.

In fact the rules then go on to say "If an action would kill a model from damage suffered from a condition (such as an Action that states "target suffers 2 damage from the burning condition"), the model taking the action is considered to have killed the model.

(Taken from page 28).

So this clarifies that the damage, whilst from the burning condition, is still considered to be from the model and from the action. It does mean models that are immune to damage from burning, won't take any and models that heal instead of taking burning damage would heal.

 

So Incorporeal will work on scorch the soul.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

So obey is an attack action. Correct? If you obeyed an incorporeal model to fall and take falling damage. Would you still reduce the damage by one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I disagree the action taken as a result of the obey would fall under the umbrella of the obey action. The obey action would not be resolved until the obeyed model has completed the action they were obeyed to do. Obey does no damage in and of itself, as does Scorch the Soul. The damage from obey would come from what ever action the obeyed model is told to do, as does the damage from Scorch the Soul comes from the burning 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
22 minutes ago, katadder said:

if it came from burning it would do 2 damage? it requires an attack action to do said damage so it is caused by an attack action. 

 

So, there's this thing in the Incorporeal rules:

Quote

Some game effects cause models to suffer damage from a Condition. Damage suffered this way is affected by any effects referring to the Condition.

to make it explicit that rules like Flameborn or whatever apply to this sort of situation.

Isn't that explicit enough that this an attack which is causing the model to suffer damage from the Condition and not from the attack?

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
3 minutes ago, dreads said:

I disagree the action taken as a result of the obey would fall under the umbrella of the obey action. The obey action would not be resolved until the obeyed model has completed the action they were obeyed to do

Sorry, M3 timing is different to M2. Your answer was how it used to work. The new rules with resolve the obey entirely and then do any new actions generated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
33 minutes ago, katadder said:

under the timing layout in the rules everything to do with an action is included in part C.2. so until that is complete then the action is not complete. so any damage cause by an action under this must have come from that action. if its an attack action then incorporeal can reduce it.

on the obey thing, you have to finish your action as in part c.2 before carrying out the obeyed action so a different action altogether.

See "Actions Generated by Effects". (Page 34 of the PDF, page 70 printed.) 

Quote

ACTIONS GENERATED BY EFFECTS

Many effects in Malifaux, (such as Actions, Abilities, and Triggers) can cause a model to take an Action.

When this happens, the new Action is always resolved after the previous Action is completely resolved, including any “After Resolving” effects, but before any other new Action can be taken.

Actions generated in this way follow the normal sequence for Actions and do not count against a model’s Action limit.

So, no, you don't resolve the action generated by Obey during the Obey.  Not even Disengage has overlapping Actions, Disengage ends up breaking into little pieces of effects in order to avoid having nested Actions.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 minutes ago, Kharnage said:


EDIT: Though one might argue that in the same way that a model can either suffer damage from triggers or actions, but there are triggers that are within actions, that Scorch the Soul damage qualifies as both damage from a condition and damage from an attack. Thoughts?

That’s a good point. But arnt triggers part of actions, where as conditions are separate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

That’s why I brought it here. If the damage is from two sources. Then wouldn’t the damage from Scorch the Soul be 0 and the damage from burning be X. So therefore the incorporeal would negate 1 of the 0 damage fro Scorch the Soul and take the full damage from the burning. If the damage is from one source. The card clearly says that the damage is from the burning condition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

its still from an attack action. the damage is from an attack action and until the action is complete then it stays an attack action including any damage mitigation. This means incorporeal does reduce damage as it says nothing about conditions. its only requirement is that its an attack action and scorch the soul is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
35 minutes ago, katadder said:

its still from an attack action. the damage is from an attack action and until the action is complete then it stays an attack action including any damage mitigation. This means incorporeal does reduce damage as it says nothing about conditions. its only requirement is that its an attack action and scorch the soul is.

Normally Incorporeal reduces damage from an Attack Action, but not from every Attack Action. For example, an Attack that deals irreducible damage is not reduced by Incorporeal. Even tho it is still an Attack Action, the specific rule overrides the general rule for Incorporeal. Note, that irreducible damage does not say "this action is not an attack action," but rather it is a special qualification of the damage itself. Similarly, the damage from Scorch the Soul has a special qualification for its damage: it comes from the burning condition and not from the attack action. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 minute ago, Mycellanious said:

Normally Incorporeal reduces damage from an Attack Action, but not from every Attack Action. For example, an Attack that deals irreducible damage is not reduced by Incorporeal. Even tho it is still an Attack Action, the specific rule overrides the general rule for Incorporeal. Note, that irreducible damage does not say "this action is not an attack action," but rather it is a special qualification of the damage itself. Similarly, the damage from Scorch the Soul has a special qualification for its damage: it comes from the burning condition and not from the attack action. 

Excellent explanation!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Few things, Irreducible damage doesn't overcome Incorporeal because it's not an attack action, but rather, because the damage can't be prevented. Also, the attack doesn't get two damage spreads, one from the attack and one from Burning, rather one incidence of damage that is both from an attack action (and so, regardless of other aspects except for "Ignores Incorporeal" or Irreducible, affected by Incorporeal), and from Burning.

The wording of Scorch the Soul says the damage is from the Burning Condition. It doesn't say the damage isn't caused by the action.

Share this post


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

So obey is an attack action. Correct? If you obeyed an incorporeal model to fall and take falling damage. Would you still reduce the damage by one?

The result of the Obey action is, the target takes an action. That action is a separate action, so, despite the fact that the reason the target takes an action is the attack action Obey, the separate action, Walk, resulting in falling damage is not an attack action. 

There is no such distinction between actions with Scorch the Soul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
9 hours ago, Mycellanious said:

Normally Incorporeal reduces damage from an Attack Action, but not from every Attack Action. For example, an Attack that deals irreducible damage is not reduced by Incorporeal. Even tho it is still an Attack Action, the specific rule overrides the general rule for Incorporeal. Note, that irreducible damage does not say "this action is not an attack action," but rather it is a special qualification of the damage itself. Similarly, the damage from Scorch the Soul has a special qualification for its damage: it comes from the burning condition and not from the attack action. 

Irreducible is within its rule irreducible which is why it cant be reduced.

Burning doesnt say its irreducible or that it ignores incorporeal. The reason burning noraly ignores it is because it happens in the end phase and so isnt an attack action. However as this is an attack action and that is the only qualification incorporeal requires then it reduces damage.

Burning is a general rule in the book, incorporeal is a special rule on a card, cards over ride book so incorporeal reduces this damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
51 minutes ago, Adran said:

 

I think you've got this wrong. The rules state that "Some game effects cause models to suffer damage from a condition. Damage suffered in this way is affected by any effects that refer to the condition. "

That is not saying that the damage is not from an attack.

In fact the rules then go on to say "If an action would kill a model from damage suffered from a condition (such as an Action that states "target suffers 2 damage from the burning condition"), the model taking the action is considered to have killed the model.

(Taken from page 28).

So this clarifies that the damage, whilst from the burning condition, is still considered to be from the model and from the action. It does mean models that are immune to damage from burning, won't take any and models that heal instead of taking burning damage would heal.

 

So Incorporeal will work on scorch the soul.

This had to be explicitly pointed out because without that, the model wouldn't have counted as the killer. It kind of proves the opposite because it it would be damage from an attack action it would be clear that the model made the kill.

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...