Start of Activation Timing Questions

[Allandrel]

A pair of questions regarding Timing during the Activation Phase:

The Activation Phase rules on page 21 of the digital rule book included the following:
 

Quote

 

C. Activation. The chosen model Activates (it is now the Acting model) and follows the steps below:

1. Start Activation: Resolve any effects that happen at the start of a model’s Activation.

 

FIRST THING

It's clear that effects that go off "at the start of a model's activation" (such as Death Marshal's Hate The Dead) and effects that go of when a model "starts its activation" (such as Hamelin's Source Of The Contagion) resolve during Step C1. (The difference in phrasing just seem to be due to different context regarding "this model" versus other models.)

But some effects resolve "when a model Activates" (such as Death Marshal's Pine Box) or affect "models that Activate" (such as Witchling Handler's Goad Witchling).

I THINK this is meant to be the same as "at the start of the model's activation," just phrased differently due to the different context, and so would also resolve during Step C1.

But I can also see the reasoning that "when a model Activates" refers instead to the first, un-numbered part of Step C "The chosen model Activates," and such effects would thus all be resolved then, before moving on to Step C1.

Am I reading too much into the difference in phrasing to think they might be different?

Step C doesn't say anything about resolving "when a model activates" effects, leading me to think those effects are meant to have the same timing as "at the start of a model's activation." But like I said, I can also see the other reading.

SECOND THING

How do you determine which effects to resolve during Step C1? Do you

A) Check to see which effects would resolve, the active player chooses one to resolve, then you check again (with a possible different set now applying), the active player chooses one to resolve, and so on until when you check there are no applicable effects to resolve?

or

B) Check which effects would resolve when C1 starts, then resolve those in an order of the Active Player's choosing, even if resolving one would seem to make another inapplicable? And any effects that would not apply when you checked will not resolve, even if resolving another effect would cause those effects to apply?

Two examples to show what I'm saying:

Example 1: A Ronin (with On The Move) starts its activation 2" away from a Stolen (with Diseased).

Option A: The players check for "start of activation" effects, find that both On The Move and Diseased would resolve now, and the active player chooses to resolve On The Move, moving the Ronin so that it is now 5" away from the Stolen. The players then check again for "start of activation" effects, and find that there are none that would now resolve, as the Ronin is not within range of Diseased.

Option B: The Ronin starts its activation and the players check for applicable effects,  and find that On The Move and Diseased would both resolve. The active player chooses to resolve On The Move first, moving the Ronin so that it is now 5" away from the Stolen. Then Diseased resolves and the Ronin gains a Blight token, even though it is not currently within range of Diseased, because it was when the Ronin started its activation.

Example 2: This time, the Ronin (with On The Move) starts its activation 5" away from a Stolen (with Diseased).

Option A: The players check for "start of activation" effects, find that On The Move would resolve now, and the active player resolves On The Move, moving the Ronin so that it is now 2" away from the Stolen. The players then check again for "start of activation" effects, and find that Diseased would now resolve. Diseased resolves and the Ronin gains a Blight token.

Option B: The Ronin starts its activation and the players check for applicable effects,  and find that On The Move would resolve. The active player resolve On The Move, moving the Ronin so that it is now 2" away from the Stolen. Diseased does not resolve because the Ronin was not within range when it started its activation.

My inclination is to go with Option A, because that seems to be how general timing works, where you are constantly checking to see which effects would apply, and resolving one effect can render another effect inapplicable or cause a third effect to apply when it would not have before. But I have seen it argued both ways.
 

[mythicFOX]

To your first point; 

Just because two things are phrased differently doesn't automatically mean they work differently.  As you say you can only find one interpretation in the rules then the rules forum guidelines kick in;  "The answer will be explained in the rules, not hinted at."

To your second point;

There have been long discussions about 'checking again', see the thread below.  I come down on the side of NOT checking again because if you do check again it allows some really odd and clearly unintended stuff to happen.  For example; Ferdinand Vogel can go into a replacement loop and heal to full each turn while moon-walking across the board.

Again the rules forum guidelines kick in; "Where there are several ways to interpret the rules; the one that doesn't break the rest of the game will be right."

Other players may take a different view.

 

[solkan]

Edit:  Aargh.  The editor hates me right now. 😠  

Concerning the second part, for auras the rules imply that entering or leaving an aura (by distance or line of sight) would cause you to add or remove that effect to the list.  But that's specific to what the aura rules say.

 

[LeperColony]

Yeah, you can read the thread @mythicFOX linked to see how this issue has been discussed in the past.  I'm not going to rehash it, but I am going to point out that there is a difference between qualifying for an effect and resolving it.  

We know the rules for simultaneous effects, but an effect must qualify for it to be pending.  Once it does qualify, I don't think a simultaneous event can cancel it.

For instance:

Model A begins its activation in Hamelin's .  Model A has an ability that allows it to move 2" at the start of its activation.

Hamelin's aura and the movement are simultaneous effects, so Model A may resolve the movement before it has to get a Blight token.  However, it still has to get the token because the  already qualified (the model was within the  at the start of its activation), even if it managed to move out of the . 

Malifaux does not have a formal concept such as Magic: The Gathering's "the stack," but I do think simultaneous events create a kind of stack-like situation, where the active player chooses the order from among a number of pending effects.  Once an effect is pending, I don't believe you can cancel it by changing the circumstances (unless the action is no longer meaningful, like an effect that targets a model that is now dead).

[santaclaws01]

3 hours ago, mythicFOX said:

To your first point; 

Just because two things are phrased differently doesn't automatically mean they work differently.  As you say you can only find one interpretation in the rules then the rules forum guidelines kick in;  "The answer will be explained in the rules, not hinted at."

To your second point;

There have been long discussions about 'checking again', see the thread below.  I come down on the side of NOT checking again because if you do check again it allows some really odd and clearly unintended stuff to happen.  For example; Ferdinand Vogel can go into a replacement loop and heal to full each turn while moon-walking across the board.

Again the rules forum guidelines kick in; "Where there are several ways to interpret the rules; the one that doesn't break the rest of the game will be right."

Other players may take a different view.

 

One unintended interaction doesn't mean the whole thing is broken. And considering that costs cards to do, I would hardly call it breaking the game.

[Paddywhack]

Really wish they had kept the 2-part Activation step we had briefly during beta. Could have made all of these questions moot... 

[mythicFOX]

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

One unintended interaction doesn't mean the whole thing is broken. And considering that costs cards to do, I would hardly call it breaking the game.

It's game breaking in the sense that it's clearly bizarre and untended, not in the power level sense.  There were other examples of those sorts of consequences of 'checking again' in the thread I linked.  Malifaux isn't designed to not work, so the interpretation which leads to clearly unintended (and bizarre) consequences will be the wrong one.  Which is the general guidance we give for the rules forum.

[santaclaws01]

2 minutes ago, mythicFOX said:

It's game breaking in the sense that it's clearly bizarre and untended, not in the power level sense.  There were other examples of those sorts of consequences of 'checking again' in the thread I linked.  Malifaux isn't designed to not work, so the interpretation which leads to clearly unintended (and bizarre) consequences will be the wrong one.  Which is the general guidance we give for the rules forum.

The other examples involve redoing an effect ad infinitum, but nobody bats an eye at a new instance of burning appearing in the end phase and resolving that, and no ones is saying to resolve end phase effects ad infinitum even though you have to constantly check for new effects in there too.

[mythicFOX]

32 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

The other examples involve redoing an effect ad infinitum, but nobody bats an eye at a new instance of burning appearing in the end phase and resolving that, and no ones is saying to resolve end phase effects ad infinitum even though you have to constantly check for new effects in there too.

You're either 'checking again' all the time or you aren't, I don't see why you would take the burning damage if you gained the burning in the end phase unless you are 'checking twice'.

There's nothing in the rules about checking multiple times, and there's nothing in the rules that limits things only going off once per instance.  So the only way that makes sense is if you check once.

So again;  the rules interpretation that causes the least odd unintended consequences is check once and resolve what you find once.

[LeperColony]

Rehashing this is unlikely to end in a different result.

[santaclaws01]

24 minutes ago, mythicFOX said:

You're either 'checking again' all the time or you aren't, I don't see why you would take the burning damage if you gained the burning in the end phase if you aren't 'checking twice'.

What point are you trying to make here? It sounds like you're agreeing with me but that's clearly not the case based on your other thoughts on how it all works.

 

 

24 minutes ago, mythicFOX said:

There's nothing in the rules about checking multiple times, and there's nothing in the rules that limits things only going off once per instance.  So the only way that makes sense is if you check once.

There's also nothing in the rules about only checking one. But again, if game state is constantly being check the game literally breaks down. There's no way to use a majority of abilities if you aren't constantly checking for effects that need to be resolved. But for some reason it's only during the start activation phase that people have an issue with constantly checking for effects.

 

26 minutes ago, mythicFOX said:

So again;  the rules interpretation that causes the least odd unintended consequences is check once and resolve what you find. 

Hard disagree. As I've said, not constantly checking causes the game to break down at a base level. Checking constantly causes a single unintended interaction that wasn't caught and the idea that only during the start activation phase would you be repeating effects ad infinitum, as we know that new conditions need to be resolved that are applied during the end phase.

[TheJoyInGaming]

I believe in your scenario that Option A is the correct one because as @santaclaws01 says the game is designed around constantly checking the game state for effects.

I know this does create some weird interactions, see the eternally looping Ferdinand; but, in my opinion, it is more likely that this was an oversight of a rules interaction with a single model rather than the designers forgetting to add a clause to step C1 of activating a model that details to not constantly recheck game state for effects. The latter option fundamentally alters the way the game is played in comparison to every other phase of the game WAY too much to have been an oversight. Again though, this is my opinion.

[LeperColony]

The issue is not how often you check.  It's whether or not, at the time of checking, you meet all the conditions.  

These "at the start of activation" effects require they be applicable at the start of activation.  If they aren't applicable when the model's activation actually begins, then they won't meet the "start of activation" requirement even if they later meet some other requirement (for instance, being within the ).

But this was all argued to no consensus in the thread @mythicFOX linked.  There's not any good chance of movement.  

You're just going to have to talk it over with your group or your opponent on how you want to play it.

[TheJoyInGaming]

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

The issue is not how often you check.  It's whether or not, at the time of checking, you meet all the conditions.  

These "at the start of activation" effects require they be applicable at the start of activation.  If they aren't applicable when the model's activation actually begins, then they won't meet the "start of activation" requirement even if they later meet some other requirement (for instance, being within the ).

At what point during the resolution of the Ronin’s On the Move did it cease to be the start of activation? 

If it did not cease to be the start of activation, then it would logically follow that it is still the start of activation when the Ronin finishes its move. Therefore, the Ronin will gain, or not gain, a Blight depending on where she ends her movement.

[santaclaws01]

1 minute ago, TheJoyInGaming said:

At what point during the resolution of the Ronin’s On the Move did it cease to be the start of activation? 

If it did not cease to be the start of activation, then it would logically follow that it is still the start of activation when the Ronin finishes its move. Therefore, the Ronin will gain, or not gain, a Blight depending on where she ends her movement.

His argument is that "Start of activation" does not refer to the start activation phase, but to the instant the model starts it's activation. Basically creating a subphase for generating start of activation effects, and then one for resolving start of activation effects.

 

[LeperColony]

It ceased it's "start of activation" when it was selected for activation.  That instant is the start of its activation.  Every effect that is applicable at that moment will be resolved in order under the simultaneous effects rules.

After those effects are resolved, we're no longer at the "start" of the model's activation.  Time has passed.  Not just real time, but game time.  So any effects which become applicable by virtue of something such as distance (like walking into an ) fail to apply because the timing is no longer correct.  It's no longer the "start" of the activation.

Now, to be clear, this is an interpretation. 

The belief that the "start" of the activation doesn't mean the actual start, but rather the entire period before any action is taken, is the alternative interpretation some others favor.

No consensus was reached after a lengthy thread, and this isn't likely to change.

[LeperColony]

4 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

Basically creating a subphase for generating start of activation effects, and then one for resolving start of activation effects.

This is an incorrect analysis of our position.

"Start of activation" on abilities is a timing requirement.  It limits the effect by requiring it to be applicable at the "start of activation."  I understand "start" by its ordinary meaning, as in the beginning.  Whatever conditions exist at the instant the model is activated apply. 

Any conditions that are only applicable after resolving those effects are no longer occurring at the start.

The "Start of Activation" phase is simply when you resolve "start of activation" effects.

[TheJoyInGaming]

5 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

It ceased it's "start of activation" when it was selected for activation.  That instant is the start of its activation.  Every effect that is applicable at that moment will be resolved in order under the simultaneous effects rules.

After those effects are resolved, we're no longer at the "start" of the model's activation.  Time has passed.  Not just real time, but game time.  So any effects which become applicable by virtue of something such as distance (like walking into an ) fail to apply because the timing is no longer correct.  It's no longer the "start" of the activation.

Now, to be clear, this is an interpretation. 

The belief that the "start" of the activation doesn't mean the actual start, but rather the entire period before any action is taken, is the alternative interpretation some others favor.

No consensus was reached after a lengthy thread, and this isn't likely to change.

I understand your argument, as I have had similar discussions about these two conflicting viewpoints when I played as Hamelin vs. Misaki, but your argument seems to be an argument from silence.

I don’t see anything in the rules arguing that it ceased to be the start of activation when a model is selected for activation. In fact, I see the opposite. Page 25 (digital) states that Step B is when you select a model to activate. Step C is its activation. Step C1 is when you resolve any start of activation effects. Based on your interpretation, it seems the text should read “resolve any start of activation effects applicable when the chosen model was selected to activate in Step B.” As it is written now though, I believe my interpretation to be correct.

[santaclaws01]

3 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

This is an incorrect analysis of our position.

"Start of activation" on abilities is a timing requirement.  It limits the effect by requiring it to be applicable at the "start of activation."  I understand "start" by its ordinary meaning, as in the beginning.  Whatever conditions exist at the instant the model is activated apply. 

Any conditions that are only applicable after resolving those effects are no longer occurring at the start.

The "Start of Activation" phase is simply when you resolve "start of activation" effects.

Considering that c1 is both where you start your activation as well as resolve start of activation effects, it's not an incorrect analysis. I'm framing how you believe it to work in a way that it can actually be shown in the timing chart. The only other option is creating a non-existent timing point that would essentially be C0 which is non consistent at all with how the timing for anything is laid out.

[LeperColony]

27 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

Considering that c1 is both where you start your activation as well as resolve start of activation effects, it's not an incorrect analysis. I'm framing how you believe it to work in a way that it can actually be shown in the timing chart.

Except you're not, because I literally explained how you mischaracterized it.

You believe "start of activation" means that you resolve everything that happens before any action takes place, regardless of how much time passes or how many effects occur.  You believe "start of activation" is not a timing requirement, but a phase indicator.  You do these things in this phase.  If someone comes within Hamelin's  at any point before an action is taken, then the aura generates its effect.

I believe "start of activation" means the conditions that exist at the moment of activation are resolved, but not subsequent effects that have "start of activation" timing because they were not legal at the actual, literal start.  I believe "start of activation" is a timing requirement, and if the effect would not be legal at the moment of activation, it cannot subsequently be legal.

But we both believe these effects are resolved in the "Start of Activation" phase.

I can't decide if you're intentionally obtuse or if the distinction really is unappreciated, but again, it seems distinctly unlikely any movement will be achieved towards consensus. 

[santaclaws01]

21 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

Except you're not, because I literally explained how you mischaracterized it.

The part you're not getting is that the timing for how things works needs to be in the timing rules. That is what the timing rules exist for. You are saying that there is a timing point that is distinct from when you resolve start of activation abilities. The only way for this to be possible within the timing rules is for there to also be a timing point for the instant you start your activation. So sure, I guess I'm mischaractering your argument by framing in a way that it works within the timing rules.

[LeperColony]

Except the ability itself provides for its timing rules.  That's what "Enemies that start their Activation do X" means.  "Start their activation" is a timing indicator.  It doesn't say "during the Start Activation" phase.  If it did, then yes, any model that came within the aura during the phase, whether or not at the model's start, would be effected.

But instead, it indicates a specific timing in the ability itself.  Just like if an ability says "after this model takes a , discard a card to take the action again," the timing rules are built in (after taking the  action).  

Out of curiosity, using your reading, how would you phrase an ability that only effected models at the actual beginning of their activation?  That is, an effect that only occurs if it meets a particular condition only at the snapshot in time when you activate them?