Within Range - Chiaki Spirit Flute

[LeperColony]

This question regards a specific interaction concerning Chiaki, but it also has a larger implication in terms of whether "within range" is just the number in inches, or if it is also subject to any of the range icon rules ().

Reference rules attached.

The specific situation:

In a game yesterday, I used the trigger on Chiaki's spirit flute to give her Izamu's Reliquary.  This was not discussed during the game, we both just accepted it without question.  

Later, when thinking about the game, I became concerned I may have inadvertently cheated because since Chiaki isn't affected by the  of the original action, I figured the same restriction would keep her from being involved in the trigger.  

But then I read the rules on range and "within range" and it became less clear to me, so I thought I'd ask the hive mind.

---

Obviously Chiaki isn't part of the since she generates it.  But the rules for "within range" only refers to the physical distance between the models.   While checking if one model is "within range" of another, do we still have to carry the range's icon type?

In another example, suppose I wanted to use the trigger on two models, one of whom is out of LoS (so wouldn't have been affected by the of the original action).  does require LoS, but "within range" may only be about the distance in inches.

---

I seem to recall previously, when discussing Stat, the consensus was that icons (fate modifiers, suits, etc) weren't part of the stat.  It was just the numerical value, so any ability that copied or referenced it meant the number.  

If that is true for stat (again, if), is it also true for range?

 

[solkan]

It’s a Pulse, so the Pulse rules apply to any notion of range for the action:  The generating model is not in range, and line of sight is required to the other objects.  Otherwise there would be no point in putting the Pulse symbol on the range.  Likewise (changing the details) for Aura ranges.

Seriously, open up the app or the online crew builder and start browsing the aura and pulse action.

 

[Mycellanious]

Follow up question, Split the Soul is an After Suceeding trigger. Do the models you choose need to end their moves within 3" of Chiyaki? I think so. So if Izamu and Yin both start within 3" of her, but either moves outside of 3" from the Action, they are no longer elegilble targets for the Trigger

[LeperColony]

3 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

Follow up question, Split the Soul is an After Suceeding trigger. Do the models you choose need to end their moves within 3" of Chiyaki? I think so. So if Izamu and Yin both start within 3" of her, but either moves outside of 3" from the Action, they are no longer elegilble targets for the Trigger

I think this is actually fairly clear.  Both models would have to be within range (it's 4") at the time of resolving the trigger.  But again, the rules for within range care only about physical distance, so unless the rules for carry over, which isn't clear, things like LoS may not matter.

[solkan]

18 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

I think this is actually fairly clear.  Both models would have to be within range (it's 4") at the time of resolving the trigger.  But again, the rules for within range care only about physical distance, so unless the rules for carry over, which isn't clear, things like LoS may not matter.

Once again, what your doubt is claiming is “It is entirely pointless to put or in the range of an action”.  Because the majority of aura and pulse effects say things like “models in range”.

 

[LeperColony]

33 minutes ago, solkan said:

Once again, what your doubt is claiming is “It is entirely pointless to put or in the range of an action”.  Because the majority of aura and pulse effects say things like “models in range”.

 

Repeating that require LoS misses the point of the question, and so isn't useful in the resolution analysis.

The trigger does not include any explicit indication that it itself is a .  The conditions given for the trigger are "Choose a model within range."  

If the trigger isn't a , then I don't think LoS matters and I think Chiaki is a valid choice (can't say target, because the action doesn't target.  Another potential implication for LoS).  

If the trigger is a , or resolved like one, that would be done under the rules that say game effects that effect the action effect the trigger.  But first, I don't know if that means the range, and even if it does, if the "range" refers to the distance in inches only, or also to the "type."

The reading I've always used previously (and reflexively) was that the type followed the trigger.  So for instance, Jack Daw's Denial trigger on Whispered Truths was also a pulse.  

But if the type always follows the range, then that means any trigger with a range that doesn't provide a type has the type of the action.  Does it matter that all triggers on a  that have range are also  ?  To be honest, I don't know.  I never thought that   were all the same category of effect.

Previous to this question, I had always thought of  and  as categories of actions and  and  as areas of effect.  I certainly never thought of  and  as being range effects.

I also didn't really think of  and  as being separate from the inches value in the ranged category.  But a fair reading of the Range rules could be that Range is only the inches value, in the same manner as many people believe Stat is only the numerical value and not suits, fate modifiers, etc.

 

[santaclaws01]

1 hour ago, Mycellanious said:

Follow up question, Split the Soul is an After Suceeding trigger. Do the models you choose need to end their moves within 3" of Chiyaki? I think so. So if Izamu and Yin both start within 3" of her, but either moves outside of 3" from the Action, they are no longer elegilble targets for the Trigger

The chosen model has to be in range when declaring the trigger(since it's italics, it's a cost of declaring the trigger). The other model has to be in range when resolving the action trigger So for example, Chiaki uses the action and Manos and a Komainu are both within range. She declares the trigger and chooses the Komainu. She then resolves the action, moving the Komainu outside of 4" from her. If Manos is also moved out of range, the Komainu can't get an upgrade. If Manos remains within range, then the Komainu can get Reliquary(Manos)

[LeperColony]

2 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

The chosen model has to be in range when declaring the trigger(since it's italics, it's a cost of declaring the trigger). The other model has to be in range when resolving the action.

That's a really good distinction.

[santaclaws01]

3 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

The trigger does not include any explicit indication that it itself is a .  The conditions given for the trigger are "Choose a model within range."  

What other range are you using if not the range of the action. You can't just choose to ignore the pulse in the action's range for arbitrary reasons, the trigger is part of the action and has to use the same range as the action, and if you're not keeping the pulse you're not using the action's range.

[LeperColony]

2 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

What other range are you using if not the range of the action.

I'm not referring to any other range, I'm asking if "range" means the type and the distance, or just the distance in triggers when no other type is provided.

It's clear that in the action itself, the pulse type governs.  But does the pulse (or any other type) automatically pass to the trigger?

Part of my confusion here is that it was my understanding that the consensus regarding STAT was that the stat was just the value, not any fate modifiers or suits.  But the language used in Range and Stat is very similar (both under Actions on page 22), and so if people felt that effects that reference a Stat don't cover the other icons, why range effects would cover the type.

 

[santaclaws01]

2 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

I'm not referring to any other range, I'm asking if "range" means the type and the distance, or just the distance in triggers when no other type is provided.

 

Here's what it says about range.

Quote

Range comes next, which may have an icon denoting its type (y is Melee, z is Projectile, p is Pulse, a is Aura) and the range in inches, which is the maximum distance the Action can affect.

This is saying that range is a type(if it has one) with a distance. There's no indication in that sentence that the type is somehow divorced from the distance.

 

10 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

Part of my confusion here is that it was my understanding that the consensus regarding STAT was that the stat was just the value, not any fate modifiers or suits.

You're assuming that that consensus is correct.

 

[LeperColony]

14 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

This is saying that range is a type(if it has one) with a distance. There's no indication in that sentence that the type is somehow divorced from the distance.

The very fact that the range includes distinct items (type and distance) indicates it may be possible to separate them.  Not that it's inevitable that they will be, but they could be.  In fact, we see this frequently in effects that increase or decrease the distance or remove/change types.

14 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

You're assuming that that consensus is correct.

I'm looking at it as analogous, yes.  If the consensus is correct on stat it's still possible that range works differently.  I'm just asking why.  

If the consensus isn't correct (or if my understanding of it is incorrect), then that means I've been doing stat wrong. 

Which is possible.

----

But if type always follows trigger range (unless another type is provided in the trigger), here are some curious questions:

Adze: Firefly (if the trigger should also beby default, why does it say 3  rather than "within range?")

Aeslin: Tangling Roots (if you ignore range, is it a  anymore)

There may be others, I just looked through the A's during the superbowl half-time show.

 

[santaclaws01]

1 minute ago, LeperColony said:

The very fact that the range includes distinct items (type and distance) indicates it may be possible to separate them.  Not that it's inevitable that they will be, but they could be.  In fact, we see this frequently in effects that increase or decrease the distance or remove/change types.

If something has two different components to it how else would you say what those components are than by differentiating them from each other? A range is a distance and a type. Anything referencing range is thus referencing everything that comprises range.(within the context of actions)

 

7 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

I'm just asking why.  

You'd have to ask the people who think there's a significant difference in the wording. One possibility is that that paragraph plays the pronoun game a bit(everyone's favorite game), where it says "It may also have a...", where the word "It" could be referring to either the Action or the Stat. I'm of the firm belief that if you mention two different nouns that have the same pronoun, and then use that pronoun to refer to one of them it should be referring to the most recent noun used. I also know this isn't always done.

[LeperColony]

12 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

A range is a distance and a type.

I don't necessarily disagree with your analysis that a value includes both numbers and modifiers (more on this on your second point).

However, a range is not always distance and a type.  The game's definition of range uses that same word in two different ways.  As a Value with two components, and then again specifically as the terminology governing distance. 

"Range...may have an icon denoting type (is melee,  is projectile,  is pulse and is aura) and the range in inches, which is the maximum distance the Action can effect."  

Thus, by the literal words of the game, the distance the action can effect is called range.  If you ignore range, it's possible that means you ignore both the type and the range (distance), or it's possible that means you only ignore the range (distance).

12 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

You'd have to ask the people who think there's a significant difference in the wording.

Although I haven't really analyzed it much, my gut feeling is that stat should cover value and modifiers too.  But that was before I really poured into this range stuff, and now I'm unsure what the most consistent reading is or should be.

But as I mentioned earlier, I never even considered all the range type icons as being the same (I thought of   and  as categories of actions, while were  area of effect indicators).

Just to be clear, since you believe range can only refer to both the type and distance, any time an effect ignores range, it loses the type?  So you believe that when Aeslin is in Severe terrain, her Tangling Roots action is not a ?   So she can't do it on a charge.  Cassandra doesn't affect it with her Finesse, etc).  And if a  can ignore range, then it can be used while engaged, doesn't suffer from friendly fire, etc. 

Obviously I can't know for sure how other people play, but I'd be willing to bet money at heavy odds that most people treat "ignore range" as dealing only with the distance ("range") and not any type icons.

[santaclaws01]

12 hours ago, LeperColony said:

Just to be clear, you believe that when Aeslin is in Severe terrain, her Tangling Roots action is not a .  So she can't do it on a charge.  Cassandra doesn't affect it with her Finesse, etc).  And if a  can ignore range, then it can be used while engaged, doesn't suffer from friendly fire, etc. 

No.

[LeperColony]

6 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

No.

Then I'm not sure what your position is anymore.

You had stated

19 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

This is saying that range is a type(if it has one) with a distance.

Since you reject the contention that "range" in card text can refer solely to distance, then under your theory, any time "range" is mentioned it must also include any types.  Thus, any "range" that is ignored also ignores any types.

Perhaps you can help me to understand your position more clearly?

---

So far as I can tell, there are four possibilities to Chiaki's trigger (and similar effects):

1.  Triggers always just carry the "type" over from the action, unless another type is provided.  I have no idea what the implications of this would be over the entire game, but I would not be surprised to learn it's significant.

It's also, by implication but not explicitly, contrasted by the wording of the trigger effects in the game.  Sometimes triggers of will themselves be explicitly defined as  (see Adze's Firefly action).  Why would that be necessary if it were always just a by default?

2.    The object generating a action is, by rule, never considered to be "within range" for the action's triggers.  This sounds like #1, but rather than a general assumption that all triggers share the action's type, it is a specific ruling regarding the way triggers work on a model generating a action.

Note that this is not what the rules to say, so this would be a ruling or errata.  I know it's tempting to think because the  does not affect the generating object that you can believe the action's triggers work the same way, but that's not a given at all, and it certainly doesn't say this in the rules despite @solkan's claim.

3.  The use of the word "range" in game text always refers to both the type and "range" (distance) together, such that it is impossible to divorce these unless the effect specifically replaces/alters/removes one or the other.  However, I've already demonstrated this leads to many potential issues.

4.  "within range" has the effect described in the rulebook on page 13:

Quote

Many times, a player will need to determine if an object is in range of another.  This is referring to the distance between the two objects.  An object is within range if any portion of that object's base is that distance or closer.  Any effect that references an object being "within" a distance is talking about range.

Any use of "within range" cares only about whether the distance between two objects in question is equal to or less than the numerical value supplied in the effect's RG value or any other value the effect may provide. 

I'll be honest here and say that I actually do not understand the purpose of "within range" text in action effects, where the action itself has a range listed.  4 would seem to me sufficient to declare it's area of effect.

Would a 4 action that said "enemy models take 1 damage" 

Be different than:

4 "enemy models within range take 1 damage"

I can't see any distinction myself.

 

[santaclaws01]

14 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

Since you reject the contention that "range" in card text can refer solely to distance, then under your theory, any time "range" is mentioned it must also include any types.  Thus, any "range" that is ignored also ignores any types.

Ignore isn't a game term, so something can be completely ignored, partially ignored, or only ignored for specific context.

 

 

17 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

It's also, by implication but not explicitly, contrasted by the wording of the trigger effects in the game.  Sometimes triggers of will themselves be explicitly defined as  (see Adze's Firefly action).  Why would that be necessary if it were always just a by default?

Remember that triggers have the same text on every model. Eternal Flame, Sanctioned Spellcasters, Adze and Sue all have that trigger on an action. Of those models, the only one that has it on an action that also has a range of  is the Adze.

 

20 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

2.    The object generating a action is, by rule, never considered to be "within range" for the action's triggers.  This sounds like #1, but rather than a general assumption that all triggers share the action's type, it is a specific ruling regarding the way triggers work on a model generating a action.

Note that this is not what the rules to say, so this would be a ruling or errata.  I know it's tempting to think because the  does not affect the generating object that you can believe the action's triggers work the same way, but that's not a given at all, and it certainly doesn't say this in the rules despite @solkan's claim.

It's more an extrapolation what the pulse rules text saying the generating model isn't affected by the pulse and how that interacts with if something is within range of the pulse.

 

22 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

3.  The use of the word "range" in game text always refers to both the type and "range" (distance) together, such that it is impossible to divorce these unless the effect specifically replaces/alters/removes one or the other.  However, I've already demonstrated this leads to many potential issues.

...you have?

 

24 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

Any use of "within range" cares only about whether the distance between two objects in question is equal to or less than the numerical value supplied in the effect's RG value or any other value the effect may provide. 

If any action effect that states "within range" didn't also care about the type of the range then that runs into a lot of issues where  and  actions are now affecting models outside of LoS, the generating model, etc...

 

28 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

I'll be honest here and say that I actually do not understand the purpose of "within range" text in action effects, where the action itself has a range listed.  4 would seem to me sufficient to declare it's area of effect.

Would a 4 action that said "enemy models take 1 damage" 

Be different than:

4 "enemy models within range take 1 damage"

I can't see any distinction myself.

For the normal effects of the action, yes it's unnecessary, but it looks better and feels intuitive to have it stated.

[LeperColony]

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

Ignore isn't a game term, so something can be completely ignored, partially ignored, or only ignored for specific context.

Yes, but you claimed that "range" as a concept is an icon and a value.  So however you're ignoring it, unless you now accept that in some circumstances type and range (distance, but the actual name is range) can be separated, type will always also get ignored.

However, if you do now accept that type and range (distance) are not always going to pass together, then "within range" doesn't automatically include the type (and really, the expectation is that it shouldn't include the type).

Additionally, your inability to define any standard means the rules are going to be what you say they are.  Which works for you, sure, but as an analytical concept doesn't provide us a means for resolving ambiguities.

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

Remember that triggers have the same text on every model. Eternal Flame, Sanctioned Spellcasters, Adze and Sue all have that trigger on an action. Of those models, the only one that has it on an action that also has a range of  is the Adze.

That's a fair point, that they would just use the same language for consistency.  But it underlines the fact that triggers that provide their own range rules do so specifically so that those rules, and not the action's govern.

If they wanted Chiaki's trigger to not impact her, they could have worded it using a .  Although, just to be clear, the failure to do so cannot be taken as proof that they meant to include her.  Merely pointing out that they have a mechanic that would have made it explicit.  And other triggers do reference the object creating the specifically.  The Fire Golem's Burnt to a Crisp, for instance.

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

It's more an extrapolation what the pulse rules text saying the generating model isn't affected by the pulse and how that interacts with if something is within range of the pulse.

But the trigger isn't a .  That's the issue.  If the trigger were a , there wouldn't need to be any discussion.

What you're trying to do is port the rules into the trigger.  Since I believe that very well may align with the intent, I'm not unsympathetic to the concept.  But I'm asking what rules framework makes that happen, as opposed to "it's how I want it."

RAW there's no reason to believe "within range" means anything other than what the rules have explicitly defined "within range" means.  If you're X or closer, where X is the numerical value, you are within range.  Period.

Now, just because you are within range doesn't mean you are affected.  That's why  matters.  The rules for specifically exclude models out of LoS, for instance.  But a model out of LoS but within X is "within range" by the definition of the game, they're just not within the "Pulse's area."  So even the rules for  have language to distinguish between models within range and those that would be affected by the .

In fact, with this "Pulse's area" language, it seems like it would have been trivially easy to exclude Chiaki if that's what they wanted.  It's almost like they used the only language under the rules of the game that would have included her except for explicitly saying "including Chiaki."

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

...you have?

Uh, yeah.  It's why you're backpeddling on "ignore."  

Remember, you're the one who asserts range is always type and range (distance).  And for you, it's analogous to stat, which you believe is always value and modifier.

I am agnostic as to whether "range" with no other qualifier includes type and range (distance), but I am saying that as the rules specifically define "within range," that definition excludes type.  This is a position you have been unwilling to accept. 

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

If any action effect that states "within range" didn't also care about the type of the range then that runs into a lot of issues where  and  actions are now affecting models outside of LoS, the generating model, etc...

The trigger is not the action.

Why do I have to keep saying this?

The action is a .  So of course it cares about the .

This is not an instance where I'm saying "within range" trumps the .  I'm saying that as there is no  on the trigger, 's rules do not apply.

The trigger is not a .  The only way it can be a , since it isn't by its own text, is if some other method passes the  along.  "within range" cannot be it RAW.  So then you would have to either believe that every action type follows to a trigger (unless otherwise provided), which is possible but sight-unseen I wouldn't be surprised if that causes other issues.

 

 

[Ogid]

A trigger is tied to the action. If something must be "within range", it refers to the action's range unless there is something in the trigger that overule that. It's true that in some triggers there is icons, but those are used when the action's range is overuled and a new range is defined for some effect.

For example:

• Mechanical rider: Revel in creation 6'' range. Innovation: "Within Range" (it uses the action's range 6''). Revelation: It doesn't care about range.
• Azde: Lure 12'' range. Quicksand: "The target and all enemy models within 2 of the target..." (new range with icon for the trigger's effect)
• Widow Weaver: Venomous Strike 1'' range. Spin Web: "Within 1'' of the target" (new range without icon for the trigger's effect)

This case isn't like the stat one where stat, fate modifier and suit are 3 different things listed together. In this case the icon is modifying how the range works ("...may have an icon denoting its type..."), so taking the range without the modifier is questionable (and it could lead to a player trying to argue for example that The Power Of Dance also heals the Coryphee Duet as says "within range" without specifying the type using the arguments used above).

For me it clearly points that the range incluye the type, but at the end of the day is your meta's call. However I don't think many Yan-Lo players are playing it like this, so I'd recommend being cautious and wait for a FAQ.

[santaclaws01]

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

Yes, but you claimed that "range" as a concept is an icon and a value.  So however you're ignoring it, unless you now accept that in some circumstances type and range (distance, but the actual name is range) can be separated, type will always also get ignored.

Range can be ignored for targeting restrictions, but not for effects that work based on the range. It can be ignored for performing the action but not for determining what type of action it is.

 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

Additionally, your inability to define any standard means the rules are going to be what you say they are. 

I have defined a standard. When something mentions range of an action it is defaulting to everything that comprises that range. It's impossible to define a standard within the rules for something that isn't defined within the rules however, and ignore needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. I err on the side of interpretations that don't breaks that I feel aren't intended, but I also know it's entirely subjective and either way my interpretation of how ignoring range works for things like that has absolutely no bearing on what an action range is and what action and trigger effects mean when they use that range.

 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

That's a fair point, that they would just use the same language for consistency.  But it underlines the fact that triggers that provide their own range rules do so specifically so that those rules, and not the action's govern.

Yes, triggers can define their own range. But Split The Soul does not do that, so how is that relevant? It gives no indication that it is using a range that is different from the range of the action.

 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

If they wanted Chiaki's trigger to not impact her, they could have worded it using a .  Although, just to be clear, the failure to do so cannot be taken as proof that they meant to include her.  Merely pointing out that they have a mechanic that would have made it explicit.

Yes, it could be more explicit and say "choose a model within . Or they could say "choose a model within range" and assume that people will actually use the range of the action. That doesn't really change the fact that the trigger gives no indication that it is using any range other than the already defined range of its action.

 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

The Fire Golem's Burnt to a Crisp, for instance.

Burnt To A Crisp isn't using Flame Tornado's range, it's basically just giving another effect to the shockwave but the base shockwave rules don't really work for affecting non-models.

 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

But the trigger isn't a .  That's the issue.  If the trigger were a , there wouldn't need to be any discussion.

The trigger is part of the action. If you are not using the actions range you have to be using some other range defined by the trigger itself. Split The Soul does not define a range that is different from the range defined by the action. You saying the range of the trigger isn't a pulse is equally as valid as me saying the range for the trigger is the entire table.

 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

What you're trying to do is port the rules into the trigger.  Since I believe that very well may align with the intent, I'm not unsympathetic to the concept.  But I'm asking what rules framework makes that happen, as opposed to "it's how I want it."

No, the pulse rules are being ported onto a pulse.

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

RAW there's no reason to believe "within range" means anything other than what the rules have explicitly defined "within range" means.  If you're X or closer, where X is the numerical value, you are within range.  Period.

Yes, the RAW on within range doesn't allow for aura or pulse actions to actually have any meaning to have those be range types, as I already addressed.

 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

Now, just because you are within range doesn't mean you are affected.  That's why  matters.  The rules for specifically exclude models out of LoS, for instance.  But a model out of LoS but within X is "within range" by the definition of the game, they're just not within the "Pulse's area."  So even the rules for  have language to distinguish between models within range and those that would be affected by the .

Because the pulse rules need to set up that distinction, and then anything using the pulse rules to determine was it or is not within range of the pulse need to use that distinction, because literally every pulse and aura action has the words "within range" somewhere in them and you're seriously arguing that they can now affect models outside of LoS. Spirit Flute literally uses the words "within range" as it's base action text, but you're trying to say that within range there means something different than within range in the trigger.

 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

Uh, yeah.  It's why you're backpeddling on "ignore."  

No, I didn't backpedal. You asked an entirely separate question that has a different answer.

 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

The trigger is not the action.

So, so now "within range" only means the numerical value when that text is in triggers, but not when it's in the action text. You're the one who is going so hard for saying that within range is only defined as the distance, but now you're backpedaling when I throw that logic back at you when that term is used in action text.

Also, not even the trigger rules agree with this. Action triggers are explicitly part of their action. Anything that applies to actions applies to their triggers as well.

 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

This is not an instance where I'm saying "within range" trumps the .

You are when you assert that within range only means distance and an action uses the phrase within range. Unless you would like explain why within range actually includes what type the range is when only it's convenient for you.

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

I wouldn't be surprised if that causes other issues.

"This might cause issues" isn't really a valid reason to doubt something, especially when the alternative is literally game breaking.

[LeperColony]

13 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

Range can be ignored for targeting restrictions, but not for effects that work based on the range. It can be ignored for performing the action but not for determining what type of action it is.

Okay.  No rule says this that I know of, and I'm guessing none that you do either.

Because the issue that underlines this whole part of the discussion is whether range is always type+range (distance) or if it is only range (distance).  Just like the stat thread, there isn't a clear answer in the rules.

Now, do I think you're assertion that an action keeps its type throughout is reasonable?  Sure, and that's almost certainly how I've always played it without even thinking about it.  And if you accept that you can change/ignore one component without doing so to all, then we're on the same page.

18 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

Yes, triggers can define their own range. But Split The Soul does not do that, so how is that relevant? It gives no indication that it is using a range that is different from the range of the action.

It does do that.  "within range" is a phrase explicitly defined in the rules and tied only to physical distance.  That's it.  

You have never once addressed the fact that "within range" has a very specific meaning in the rules.

This is why the fact that her trigger isn't a matters.   (and  and  and ) carry with it additional qualifiers.

"Place in base contact to a model within X" and "Place in base contact to a model within X" do not mean the same thing.  

The only process by which Chiaki's trigger can be a  is one of two:

1)  Under the rules, all triggers are by default (unless otherwise provided) the same type as their action.  

I've been saying since the start that this is reasonable on its face, I just don't know what other implications exist if all triggers with ranges are automatically the same type as the action.

I also don't know how, if this is the case, you would word a trigger like Chiaki's that could choose her without something awkward like "this is not a " which we never see anything similar.

2)  the word "range" is always taken to mean type and range (distance), so that somehow by a torturous reading, even though "within range" is explicitly defined as being within the physical distance, we import the  rules.

This is highly doubtful to me.

25 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

So, so now "within range" only means the numerical value when that text is in triggers, but not when it's in the action text.

No, "within range" always means whatever it means.  But, again (since I've said this like three times by now), the action explicitly has .  So the  rules also apply, meaning the  object is excluded and LoS matters.

The difference is the trigger does not have the .  So unless somehow it is counted as having it, the  rules do not apply.

I can understand not agreeing that the trigger doesn't or shouldn't have .  But I genuinely can't understand why you don't see the difference between "within range" in an effect and "within range" in an effect with a .

27 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

"This might cause issues" isn't really a valid reason to doubt something, especially when the alternative is literally game breaking.

There is nothing breaking about not adding  that aren't there.  

[santaclaws01]

Just now, LeperColony said:

Okay.  No rule says this that I know of, and I'm guessing none that you do either.

Was the not covered by me saying that ignore isn't a defined game term? Anyone attributing any specific definition to any instance of ignore is doing so using their own subjective interpretation with the context. For example, do you think Incorporeal models can climb climbable terrain?

4 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

Because the issue that underlines this whole part of the discussion is whether range is always type+range (distance) or if it is only range (distance).

And I'm saying that ignore in those instances can be used so that range is still type+distance, but doesn't actually modify what type the action is, which is what is used to interact with those abilities.

5 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

You have never once addressed the fact that "within range" has a very specific meaning in the rules.

I have, you just choosing the brush of my addressing of it by trying to narrow your interpretation of "within range" to not also apply to when it comes up in action text and asserting that you aren't saying that within range only means distance then.

8 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

I also don't know how, if this is the case, you would word a trigger like Chiaki's that could choose her without something awkward like "this is not a " which we never see anything similar.

Pretty easily. You would just say "choose a model within 4"".

9 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

2)  the word "range" is always taken to mean type and range (distance), so that somehow by a torturous reading, even though "within range" is explicitly defined as being within the physical distance, we import the  rules.

This is highly doubtful to me

And yet you want to import the pulse and aura rules when action text says within range.

12 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

No, "within range" always means whatever it means.  

What an entirely meaningless sentence. You're saying within range means only distance in the text of Split The Soul, but within range doesn't mean only distance in the text of Spirit Flute.

26 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

But, again (since I've said this like three times by now), the action explicitly has .  So the  rules also apply, meaning the  object is excluded and LoS matters.

Yes, you keep saying that. What you haven't said is why "within range" means one thing in one place, another thing in another place, and yet you keep asserting that it only means one thing.

To make myself abundantly clear to you. You are saying that within range only ever means the distance. You have not once said that the rules allow for anything other than distance to be part of the definition of within range. Because within range means only distance, you're saying that in Split The Soul it's only looking for a model within 4" of Chiaki. That also means, by your assertion that it only means distance, that Sprit Flute will also affect Chiaki and any other model within 4" of her regardless of LoS.

So which is it. Within range only means distance, or it can mean distance and the type of the range(which is against RAW by what you're saying). And if it can also mean the type of the range, what possible reason is there for a trigger saying within range to not mean the range defined in the action. And if you are saying that within range can also mean the type of range it is, then spot bringing up that the RAW definition of within range means only distance to defend that Split The Soul only cares about distance because you're just blatantly contradicting yourself every time you do and then wondering why I keep pointing it out.

 

 

[LeperColony]

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

I have, you just choosing the brush of my addressing of it by trying to narrow your interpretation of "within range" to not also apply to when it comes up in action text and asserting that you aren't saying that within range only means distance then.

This seems to be really confusing you, so let's snip everything else just to make it easier to talk about one thing.

Also, since "within range" is something that has seemingly been difficult to convey, let's replace it with the actual numerical value of the action, which is 4.  We'll type out the action, but instead we'll use the number 4 wherever it would say "within range."  (Though actually, for grammatical purposes, we'll just replace "range")

Here is the actual text of the action thus converted:

 Spirit Flute 4"   6  -  10

Friendly Retainer models within 4" may move up to 3".

 

So what do we know from the action?  We know it's a , because it explicitly says .  So we know all the  rules apply.

 

Here is the actual text of the trigger, thus converted:

Split the Soul:  Choose a friendly model within 4".  The chosen model may Attach the Reliquary (X) Upgrade, where X is the name of any one other friendly model within 4".

 

That's it.  There's no in it.  Within 4 is still within 4.  If within 4 were the only condition that applied to the effect, then distance is all we'd care about.

When it comes to the action, within 4 is not the only condition.   also applies.

When it comes to the trigger, within 4 is the only listed condition.  

 

I'm honestly confused as to why you think there's any conflict between them.

[santaclaws01]

32 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

This seems to be really confusing you, so let's snip everything else just to make it easier to talk about one thing.

Because you simultaneously say this

Quote

It does do that.  "within range" is a phrase explicitly defined in the rules and tied only to physical distance.

And this

6 hours ago, LeperColony said:

Any use of "within range" cares only about whether the distance between two objects in question is equal to or less than the numerical value supplied in the effect's RG value or any other value the effect may provide. 

But then you also say this:

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

the action explicitly has .  So the  rules also apply,

This is literally contradictory. Either "within range" is only distance or it's not.

[LeperColony]

7 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

This is literally contradictory. Either "within range" is only distance or it's not.

I already demonstrated how "within range" works.  At this point, I can only conclude you're trolling.

For anyone else, can you demonstrate where the   is in the trigger?  Here's the text, with "within range" replaced with "within 4" since apparently that's not clear to some people:

 Spirit Flute 4"   6  -  10

Friendly Retainer models within 4" may move up to 3".

 

So what do we know from the action?  We know it's a , because it explicitly says .  So we know all the  rules apply.

 

Here is the actual text of the trigger, thus converted:

Split the Soul:  Choose a friendly model within 4".  The chosen model may Attach the Reliquary (X) Upgrade, where X is the name of any one other friendly model within 4".

----

It's been suggested that we can pass the type of an action along to a trigger?  The rules don't specifically say this, but it may be possible under the rule about passing game effects of an action to triggers.  

But can triggers have types?  And is there an issue making every trigger have the type of the action?

[santaclaws01]

2 hours ago, LeperColony said:

I already demonstrated how "within range" works.  At this point, I can only conclude you're trolling.

Right, I'm the one trolling for not just ignoring you contradicting yourself and using that contradiction support your position that within range means either distance or distance and type as it's convenient.

 

 

 

To actually address your question, you have never once actually demonstrated that triggers are seperate enough from their actions that the type of range an action has doesn't apply to their triggers by default.