Kirai rules question - Vengeance

[Bachelor in Transmortis]

Hi, need a bit clarification about vengeance. does it happen when model with vengeance killed or not? I went to one LGS said yes the other said no, so it's getting confusing.

[Maniacal_cackle]

Edit: I was wrong!

[Paddywhack]

They were likely confusing Vengeance with Triggers. It is 'after resolving the action', but it is an Ability, not a Trigger. Triggers that Resolve After do not take effect if the model is no longer in play. 

Vengeance is an Ability so it should take effect regardless of if the model is still in play. 

32 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Vengeance should happen in step 5 of damage.

I think it would be Step 6 of Actions or Step f. in the detailed timing chart, after the Damage Steps. But again, it's not a Trigger so isn't bound by the rule about triggers not taking effect if the model is not in play. As an Ability it seems like it happens no matter what as long as the requirements are met (targeted and damaged by an Action).  Most people believe it also has to be an Attack Action which I am mostly on board with, but could see it being read as any Action. 

[Maniacal_cackle]

3 minutes ago, Paddywhack said:

They were likely confusing Vengeance with Triggers. It is 'after resolving the action', but it is an Ability, not a Trigger. Triggers that Resolve After do not take effect if the model is no longer in play. 

Vengeance is an Ability so it should take effect regardless of if the model is still in play. 

I think it would be Step 6 of Actions or Step f. in the detailed timing chart, after the Damage Steps. But again, it's not a Trigger so isn't bound by the rule about triggers not taking effect if the model is not in play. As an Ability it seems like it happens no matter what as long as the requirements are met (targeted and damaged by an Action).  Most people believe it also has to be an Attack Action which I am mostly on board with, but could see it being read as any Action. 

Whoops, you're right. I thought it was after she takes damage, but it is "after resolving an action that targeted and damages this model, the attacking model suffers +1 damage." But agree, it should still take effect.

Interesting point about action vs. attacking action. It only says action, but then says attacker. Confusing!

[Graf]

Is there even a defining word for a model which causes damage on a non-attack action?

[Maniacal_cackle]

54 minutes ago, Graf said:

Is there even a defining word for a model which causes damage on a non-attack action?

Not that I can think of. So it seems reasonable to include any tactical action that both targets and damages (such as Stitched gamble your life).

[Paddywhack]

37 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Not that I can think of. So it seems reasonable to include any tactical action that both targets and damages (such as Stitched gamble your life).

The issue there is that Francis can then trigger Vengeance when targeting friendlies with his Tactical. In the rules forum is seemed more people fell on the side of it only being Attack actions since they capitalized 'Attacking'. I'm not 100% sure that's the intent, but willing to live with it as it doesn't break anything or make Vengeance bad. At least until or if it gets a FAQ.

It would have been very easy for them to use the term 'Attack Action', which is a defined game term. And there is room on the card as the ability already dips into 3 lines and adding one word would not have altered the card layout at all. 

[solkan]

There is a lot of Ability text where the authors went through and tried to generalize, changing M2E "Attack" to "Action" in M3E.  For instance, Flurry says "After this model resolves a Action" when you'll win the Malifaux trivia lottery when you manage to find a Tactical Action.  And you see tons of defensive triggers that say "If this Action is a Action, the Attacking model suffers ..."  (The game mechanics are rigged up so that if you manage to get a defensive trigger involved, you're on the receiving end of an Attack so there is an Attacker.  No one managed to write an exception to that...)

Effectively, if an ability references "Attacking model" or "Attacker", it can only apply to Attack Actions, even if part of the ability says "Action".  But that relies on the informal non-definition that the model performing an Attack is an "Attacking model".

Anyway, it seems that there's less harm to the game (and to the keyword) if Vengeance only goes off in response to Attack Actions.

--

Disclaimer:  There does appear to be a term that is supposed to reference the model performing the action, but that term only exists in three places (a reference to "acting model" in the rules for duels describing how to relent; a reference to "Acting model" in Activation that's suspect; and Som'er Teeth Jones' Pig-Eating Grin references "Acting model".) possibly as two different terms.  🤯

If Som'er's supposed to be able to shoot the activating model (rather than the model performing the action, when Obey is involved), I suppose that "Acting model" would be answer to "What should Corrupted Idols S0 say in a better written world?"...  🤷‍♀️

[Zayneth]

I'm a new Kirai player and I figured this thread was perfect for my question, how does the vengeance ability work exactly? what is "damage +1" exactly? what are we adding the +1 to?

[Adran]

5 hours ago, Zayneth said:

I'm a new Kirai player and I figured this thread was perfect for my question, how does the vengeance ability work exactly? what is "damage +1" exactly? what are we adding the +1 to?

In a rough and ready translation, when you target and damage a model with vengeance, at the end of the action you take 1 damage. (Should you already be taking damage somehow, it would add to that damage, but if you aren't already taking damage its just 1 damage)

The +1 in the text show that the damage taken is equivalent to the Vengence level you have. At the moment there is no way to get Vengence +2, but if you did then you would read it that the attacking model takes +2 damage (If you look at shielding as a condition, the amount of damage reduced does not change based on your shielding level, so the number in the text is just 1, if it did change based on the shielding level it would be +1).

 

On ‎10‎/‎31‎/‎2019 at 6:37 PM, sigasana44 said:

Hi, need a bit clarification about vengeance. does it happen when model with vengeance killed or not? I went to one LGS said yes the other said no, so it's getting confusing.

Its often worth getting people to explain why they do it one way.

I think the answer is yes,

but as said, if it was an after resolving trigger it would be a no. Its easy enough for people to read the thread on Entropic decay which is a trigger that deals 1 damage after resolving, and see that it doesn't apply when the model is killed, and think the same should apply to vengeance (And when I first read the question that is exactly what I did but I looked y at the rule book before I answered and saw it wasn't that easy)

[Bachelor in Transmortis]

thanks guys for the response. I think I can see why people think it's not active if the model died, because the trigger page said so while there's not much explanation for abilities. so it should be still active even though it's died (unless a faq say anything about that) because it's not stated in the rulebook rite?

[Paddywhack]

2 hours ago, sigasana44 said:

thanks guys for the response. I think I can see why people think it's not active if the model died, because the trigger page said so while there's not much explanation for abilities. so it should be still active even though it's died (unless a faq say anything about that) because it's not stated in the rulebook rite?

That's how I read it right now. Its an Ability so, as far as we know right now, does not follow Trigger timings. That may change with a FAQ, but that's how I read it.