Fate Modifiers: if a tree falls in the forest?

[Flib Jib]

I was wondering whether retroactive existence is a thing in 3E. Specifically looking at the ability on most of Euripides' crew.

 

Quote

The Old Ways: 

When this model performs a duel without any Fate Modifiers, it may suffer 1 damage to flip the card for that duel from the Discard Pile instead of its Fate Deck. Once the Duel is resolved, the flipped card is placed on the bottom of this model's Discard Pile.

So if a model performs an attack action targeting an enemy model and through some game mechanic had both a positive and a negative modifier imposed on the duel and subsequently canceled.  was that duel "without" Fate modifiers? Obviously the duel was not affected by modifiers, but I was just curious if the model could still have the agency to use it's ability, "The Old Ways".

 

Thoughts?

[Nikodemus]

Rules pdf page 9, under "Fate Modifiers":

Quote

There are two types of Fate Modifiers: positive modifiers (+) and negative modifiers (-). Each of these icons cancels one of the other icons, so a flip can only be affected by one or the other (or neither), never both.

 

[Flib Jib]

3 minutes ago, Nikodemus said:

Rules pdf page 9, under "Fate Modifiers":

Yep, those are the rules indeed. Thank you for referencing the rules pertaining to my question.

[Nikodemus]

They cancel each other out. Seems clear to me.

[Flib Jib]

2 minutes ago, Nikodemus said:

They cancel each other out. Seems clear to me.

But you still haven't stated any viewpoint? I mean I can infer your interpretation but you have simply reiterated a portion of my original question. In my original post I stated that the modifiers cancel each-other out.  

 

19 minutes ago, Thimblesage said:

...positive and a negative modifier imposed on the duel and subsequently canceled. 

So for the purposes of the duel there are no modifiers. But I was curious if anyone wanted to share thoughts on the principle word "without". 

I happen to agree with you @Nikodemus but was hoping for a discussion or at least a propositional statement. Seems unproductive to say, "Seems clear to me" and then not state a viewpoint. Was just wondering if anyone else other than me questioned if the word "Without" could be interpreted in multiple ways. 

[Adran]

The rules have to mean that if they cancel they don't count as affecting the duel, as it states that the duel can't be affected by both. As such I can't see an argument that says a flip without modifier is affected by any modifier. 

[santaclaws01]

40 minutes ago, Thimblesage said:

But you still haven't stated any viewpoint? I mean I can infer your interpretation but you have simply reiterated a portion of my original question. In my original post I stated that the modifiers cancel each-other out.  

 

So for the purposes of the duel there are no modifiers. But I was curious if anyone wanted to share thoughts on the principle word "without". 

I happen to agree with you @Nikodemus but was hoping for a discussion or at least a propositional statement. Seems unproductive to say, "Seems clear to me" and then not state a viewpoint. Was just wondering if anyone else other than me questioned if the word "Without" could be interpreted in multiple ways. 

As it can't have both  and , an action can only have fate modifiers, fate modifiers, or no fate modifiers.