Manipulative and Disengaging Strikes

[Kharnage]

So Manipulative reads as follows:
"Manipulative: If this model has not yet Activated this Turn, enemy Attack Actions that target this model suffer a - to their duel."

I figured, pretty straightforward, once it activates, Manipulative drops, so attacks that a model might suffer in its own activation, such as disengaging strikes, wouldn't be affected by Manipulative. An opponent of mine however, pointed out last night the wording in Step C3 of the activation phase:

"End Activation: Resolve any effects that happen at the end of a model’s Activation. The model is considered to have Activated this Turn."
His argument is that because it expressly calls out that the model is considered to have activated at this step, that the model isn't considered to have been activated until this step, the end of its activation. I think that this kind of goes against, well, things like how Life Leech resolves or what have you, but what is the rules-monkey consensus at large? 

[LeperColony]

This is an interesting question that, in my opinion, isn't going to have a clear answer.  Rather, it'll come down to interpretation.  So if I were you, I'd be cautious of any reply that seemed to set down a gospel truth and would probably just discuss it with my group.  If we couldn't come to a consensus, just flip for it.

The rules do say that you "activate" a model in Step B of the Activation Phase.  "Activated" is the past tense of "Activate," so it is possible to argue that Manipulative no longer qualifies from this point on.  In fact, I think this is probably the intention, and it's how I've been playing it (though I've never considered this before).

Your opponent's reading is perfectly consistent with the wording of the rules.  But in my opinion, I think the intent of the "The model counts as having Activated this Turn" of C(3) is to render the model ineligible for further activation under step B.

[Ogid]

Rules lawyering at its finest lol.

Considering the step C is called "Activation" and C(1) "Start activation"... it's hard to argue that a model that has been activated and is taking actions haden't been activated yet... 

[Adran]

Last edition I tried claiming a model was activating so it had not yet been activated. The faq went against that. The wording of the rules this edition do seem to support that as a third state, at least in regards to C3. I would want to read more carefully before I committed to an answer. 

[Jesy Blue]

"I have activated."

"I am activated."

If we only used a better language than English this game would be so much simpler.

[santaclaws01]

22 hours ago, LeperColony said:

Your opponent's reading is perfectly consistent with the wording of the rules.  But in my opinion, I think the intent of the "The model counts as having Activated this Turn" of C(3) is to render the model ineligible for further activation under step B.

That's a really weird thing to include if the only intention is to have the model not be able to activate again. I would really like to see the argument from someone that if that phrase didn't exist you'd be able to infinitely activate a model.

As far as I know, the only other things that work off of models being Activated or not is Misaki. Her From Shadow says "...for every two models that have Activated this turn, this model has -1 Mv..." and her bonus action Abandon Honor says "For each other friendly model that has not Activated..."

Now the From Shadow doesn't really tell us anything either way about how we should interperet if a model has Activated for the purses of effects that care about if said model has Activated, but Abandon Honor does. Namely there's no reason to include "other" if Misaki would never qualify as a model that has not Activated(unless of course she somehow took the bonus action outside her activation).

[LeperColony]

38 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

That's a really weird thing to include if the only intention is to have the model not be able to activate again. I would really like to see the argument from someone that if that phrase didn't exist you'd be able to infinitely activate a model.

I'm trying to divine intent, so there's necessarily a margin of uncertainty.  But my reading is that since Step B requires a model that has "not yet Activated this turn," C(3) is the means by which that status is tracked.  

As I mentioned in my initial reply, this is a matter of interpretation between two equally consistent readings.

41 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

Namely there's no reason to include "other" if Misaki would never qualify as a model that has not Activated(unless of course she somehow took the bonus action outside her activation).

There are reasons.  Obey, as you mentioned.  Or Action copying, which is reasonably common in the game.

[santaclaws01]

9 hours ago, LeperColony said:

There are reasons.  Obey, as you mentioned.  Or Action copying, which is reasonably common in the game.

None of which allow a master to take a bonus action outside their activation/copy a bonus action from a master.

[LeperColony]

6 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

None of which allow a master to take a bonus action outside their activation/copy a bonus action from a master.

Cassandra can copy a bonus action from a master (if that bonus action is a tactical action).

Though I have to admit at this point to having lost the thread of what your argument is, or which way you think Activated works in these situations.

[santaclaws01]

13 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

Cassandra can copy a bonus action from a master (if that bonus action is a tactical action).

Though I have to admit at this point to having lost the thread of what your argument is, or which way you think Activated works in these situations.

That you aren't Activated until step c3.

And yeah, I forgot about Cassandra but she can also only copy from friendly models, so that wouldn't apply to Misaki.

[LeperColony]

3 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

That you aren't Activated until step c3.

And yeah, I forgot about Cassandra but she can also only copy from friendly models, so that wouldn't apply to Misaki.

Ultimately I don't have a strong feeling on the subject, so whatever the general consensus ends up being is fine by me.  I've always done it as activated upon activation, but that was reflexive.

[Maladroit]

On 8/27/2019 at 6:57 AM, Jesy Blue said:

"I have activated."

"I am activated."

If we only used a better language than English this game would be so much simpler.

Not something I had considered but the wording appears to be that "it is now the Acting model" p26 during its activation. So perhaps it is Unactivated --> Acting --> Activated . . . .