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?

 

[LeperColony]

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

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.

I have no clue what contradiction you think exists.  I've already spelled out, twice, how the text looks using "within 4" which is the literal rule meaning of "within range" in this circumstance, and you've identified no contradiction.

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

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. 

There's no indication that they do.  

It's not even clear if triggers can have types, since the types discussion is only in the Action section.

Now, I was the one who proposes it's possible types might follow triggers under the rule that triggers are governed by the game effects of the action.  But I hesitate to say all triggers are also the type of the action.  There a ton of models and a ton of triggers, and I haven't looked at what that would do.

[Ogid]

@LeperColony I think you are making some asumptions that doesn't match rules:

• Range+Icon only applies to action while Range only applies to the trigger. <- Could you quote what part of the rulebook allow that, as far as I know range is range.
• The fact that there is icons in some triggers means triggers ignore the range icon. Again, that's not in the rulebook and in fact there is  icons in the text of actions like Blasphemous ritual.

"Within range" is used in both actions and their triggers, I'm not sure why you think it means something different in both

Also to invoke the hivemind, these are how different people are answering about Chiaki split the soul before, you may check these threads where those were acepted:

On 12/11/2019 at 2:07 AM, Deathinabox said:

Chiaki can't hand out her own reliquary unless she dies. She has condition removal though.

On 9/24/2019 at 4:22 PM, Cursed25 said:

Also since you are a new Yan Lo player, remember that Chiaki can't split her own soul since she is not in range of the ability since it's a pulse! The only way to have her reliquary out is if she dies!

On 9/6/2019 at 5:12 PM, Cursed25 said:

Sadly Chiaki can't split her own soul because the ability is a pulse and not an aura! She will only give her reliquary when she dies.

Also take in count this would affect other abilities, like the mechanical rider getting the suit from the Innovation trigger (the same case of Chiaki trying to target himself with split the soul); check this bit of a pinned thread from July in the Archanist forum:

On 7/29/2019 at 6:13 AM, Kaiser Senpai said:

The first trigger (and arguably the best) is Innovation which costs 3 Tomes. She discards a card, and every friendly in range (Six. INCHES. FROM A 50mm BASE) get the suit of the discarded card on all of their duels till the end of their turn. All. Duels. This really opens up your tactics to just crush your opponent under the oppressive weight of debilitating triggers. Now because the range is marked as a pulse, the rider will not be able to give themselves tomes for card draw and damage reduction. It's an instantaneous effect so every model in 6 keeps the suit even if they move out, and models that move into 6" of the rider after the fact don't get the suit.

[LeperColony]

35 minutes ago, Ogid said:

@LeperColony I think you are making some asumptions that doesn't match rules:

• Range+Icon only applies to action while Range only applies to the trigger. <- Could you quote what part of the rulebook allow that, as far as I know range is range.
• The fact that there is icons in some triggers means triggers ignore the range icon. Again, that's not in the rulebook and in fact there is  icons in the text of actions like Blasphemous ritual.

I'm not making any assumptions, because I'm the one illustrating both cases.

At this point it's easy to get confused, so I'm going step by step here, and defining some terms.

1.  Range in the rulebook is used in two different ways.  The exact same word.  It can either mean the RG section of the action heading, which might include a type and/or numerical value.  Now, the game calls this numerical value Range also.

Whether you believe the type is part of RG is going to be similar to whether you believe suits/fate modifiers are part of STAT, because it uses similar wording.  

2.  "Within range" is a term with a specific definition in the rules on page 13.  It means essentially being within the numerical value of RG, or less.

Because the terminology uses the same word in different ways (range), then a very similar phrase (within range), all of which can have different meanings, it can be confusing.  

Now, to your bullet points:

#1 is nothing I've ever said.  In fact, I'm the one who has repeated said it's possible type does pass to triggers, under the rules that an action's effects pass to the trigger.  I'm literally the first, and thus far possibly the only one that laid out the possibility of that process.

Now, every time I've brought this up, I've also asked as a corollary what kind of impact passing the type to triggers has on the game, because it's not something I've considered generally.  I also don't know if triggers, as a rule, have types.  I think in most cases this is moot, because where it would come up, the trigger instead tells you to take a certain type of action.

#2 is also nothing I've ever said.  But actually, triggers can ignore the range icon.  And for most triggers, the range icon is irrelevant.  

The reason you may be confused here is that I'm saying if the  does not pass to the trigger by rule, then the trigger doesn't have a  and the only other range indicated in the trigger is the "within range" language.

If, by rule, the  does pass to the trigger, then all restrictions apply.  

I must have said this at least three times already.

The Mechanical Rider you mentioned would be identical.  If an action's type always passes to its trigger, then on the action would apply to the trigger and so you could pick any model, other than the Mech Rider, within LoS and "within range," which would mean "within 6." 

If types do not pass, then the trigger, which lacks  in the text, would use the only other distance indication, "within range" which would mean "within 6."

35 minutes ago, Ogid said:

"Within range" is used in both actions and their triggers, I'm not sure why you think it means something different in both

I've never said it means something different.  In fact, in order to demonstrate how it is the same every single time, I actually wrote out the full text of the Action and the trigger, replacing "within range" with its game effect, within 4.  And you can see it was used the same way every time.

I'm truly baffled by this claim, so maybe you can quote actual text where I say "within range" acts differently?

35 minutes ago, Ogid said:

Also to invoke the hivemind, these are how different people are answering about Chiaki split the soul before, you may check these threads where those were acepted:

Unfortunately, the other threads you've quoted are using the same assumption that type passes to triggers.  

In fact, two of the answers (that are the same) mistakenly talk about the "ability [Split the Soul] being a  and not an ."  But the trigger isn't an ability and it isn't a .

Unless, again, by rule it's a  because the action was a .

But if you believe that type always passes to triggers, then you need to remember that can have potentially wide-ranging rules implications.

For instance, does the Arcane Emissary's Rampage trigger become a ? 

[Ogid]

Ok, I'm going to give you my pow that adress your points 1 and 2 and my bullet points:

• "Action triggers are tied to specific Actions and can only be used with that action" (pg 12). Acions and triggers are related.
• Range and its icon are related. "Range comes next, which may have an icon denoting its type..." (pg 22)
  • Stat, Fate Modifier and Suit are not related; those 3 are listed separately. "An action that requires a duel will have an stat... It may also have a fate modifier... and/or a Suit..." (pg 22). This 2 cases are not really comparable.
• "Within range" is a wording used in both actions and triggers while range is listed above both. If in one it excludes the icon, the other also have to exclude it because there is no rule that makes a difference between how the "within range" wording is applied in each case. Also within range in the trigger can't be applied without a range, so the only logic conclusion is it has to use the action's range.
• Everyone play it the other way, both in Chiaki case and in other like the Rider's one (and in others not covered here). Being something that affects different abilities in different facions and in models widely used like riders, it's something that would had been clarified before if it were as you are describing.

4 hours ago, LeperColony said:

I'm truly baffled by this claim, so maybe you can quote actual text where I say "within range" acts differently?

This is the part:

21 hours ago, LeperColony said:

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 .

If in one case you take in count  and in the other don't, then it's acting differently in both cases.

 

Reading your above post, you seems to express some level of uncertainty about it, which is good. I can see your point of view, but I think it would need aditional rules or a different wording to work as you are describing. Also if that were true, it'd be a case of "everyone is playing the game in the wrong way but me"; which is highly unlikely at this stage.

[LeperColony]

2 hours ago, Ogid said:

If in one case you take in count  and in the other don't, then it's acting differently in both cases.

In one case the is actually printed on the action, and in the other there is no  actually printed on the trigger.

I am fundamentally baffled by the fact that there are people who think there is no difference between appearing in game text and  not appearing.

---

Because no appears in the trigger then, as I've said like 12 times now, either:

1-   doesn't apply to the trigger

or

2- Some other rule has to pass  to the trigger.

Can someone please tell me what's confusing about this to them?  Because it really seems confusing to them.

Quote

Ok, I'm going to give you my pow that adress your points 1 and 2 and my bullet points:

• "Action triggers are tied to specific Actions and can only be used with that action" (pg 12). Acions and triggers are related.
• Range and its icon are related. "Range comes next, which may have an icon denoting its type..." (pg 22)
  • Stat, Fate Modifier and Suit are not related; those 3 are listed separately. "An action that requires a duel will have an stat... It may also have a fate modifier... and/or a Suit..." (pg 22). This 2 cases are not really comparable.
• "Within range" is a wording used in both actions and triggers while range is listed above both. If in one it excludes the icon, the other also have to exclude it because there is no rule that makes a difference between how the "within range" wording is applied in each case. Also within range in the trigger can't be applied without a range, so the only logic conclusion is it has to use the action's range.
• Everyone play it the other way, both in Chiaki case and in other like the Rider's one (and in others not covered here). Being something that affects different abilities in different facions and in models widely used like riders, it's something that would had been clarified before if it were as you are describing.

1:  Nobody has ever said they aren't related.  And as I've mentioned about 17 times now, I've indicated the rule that says actions pass game effects to triggers could be used to say the type passes.

I'm just asking if that means everyone plays their triggers as sharing the type of the action.  Which is something none of you want to commit to, for obvious reasons.  There's tons of triggers and always passing type could be horrendous. 

2:  Obviously range and type are related, they're in the same column on the action heading.  Again, not sure what this is supposed to show.  I've demonstrated their relationship like 5 different times.  Also, this completely glosses over the fact that "range," the exact word, is used to mean both the RG and the numerical value alone in RG.  This makes talking about "range" at times more difficult, because which "range" is being referred to could be easily lost. 

3:  "within range" never "excludes" anything, no matter whether it appears in an action, ability, trigger, game commentary, juice box, etc.  "within range," as far as Malifaux is concerned, always refers to the distance (in inches) between two objects.  Specifically whether or not the two objects are X or closer, where X is a value derived from the game text.

This is why I wrote out the action and trigger, replacing "within range" with its game-equivalent "within 4" and demonstrated that the bizarre claims you and others are making about "within range" make no sense.

4:  "Everyone" (which is like three people currently, just to be clear) can still be wrong.  

HOWEVER, as I indicated in my original post, previously I didn't think other models could get Chiaki's Reliquary, and the exact same reasoning should prevent her from getting others.  

This was based on believing the trigger was a  or functioned like one.  I've always just sort of assumed it was a .  It's only this discussion, and your failure to identify how the  applies, that has raised any doubt to me.

None of you have been able to show that the action's  applies to the trigger, which again has no printed  in it anywhere, and the only framework for doing so under the rules, that type as a game state passes to triggers, is one that you're all squeamishly avoiding endorsing.

---

Chiaki's trigger is unique enough that a specific ruling could fix it.  But absent a ruling, there needs to be a rule you can point to to prevent her from being a model within 4.

The rules would be sufficient.  If the  FROM THE ACTION, BECAUSE THERE IS NO  IN THE TRIGGER, applies.

---

So then, is it your contention that type always passes to triggers?

Or, as it seems, do you really just want this trigger to have .  It doesn't.  But we're going to pretend it does so that it works how we think it should?

[Mycellanious]

30 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

In one case the is actually printed on the action, and in the other there is no  actually printed on the trigger.

I am fundamentally baffled by the fact that there are people who think there is no difference between appearing in game text and  not appearing.

---

Because no appears in the trigger then, as I've said like 12 times now, either:

1-   doesn't apply to the trigger

or

2- Some other rule has to pass  to the trigger.

Can someone please tell me what's confusing about this to them?  Because it really seems confusing to them.

1:  Nobody has ever said they aren't related.  And as I've mentioned about 17 times now, I've indicated the rule that says actions pass game effects to triggers could be used to say the type passes.

I'm just asking if that means everyone plays their triggers as sharing the type of the action.  Which is something none of you want to commit to, for obvious reasons.  There's tons of triggers and always passing type could be horrendous. 

2:  Obviously range and type are related, they're in the same column on the action heading.  Again, not sure what this is supposed to show.  I've demonstrated their relationship like 5 different times.  Also, this completely glosses over the fact that "range," the exact word, is used to mean both the RG and the numerical value alone in RG.  This makes talking about "range" at times more difficult, because which "range" is being referred to could be easily lost. 

3:  "within range" never "excludes" anything, no matter whether it appears in an action, ability, trigger, game commentary, juice box, etc.  "within range," as far as Malifaux is concerned, always refers to the distance (in inches) between two objects.  

This is why I wrote out the action and trigger, replacing "within range" with its game-equivalent "within 4" and demonstrated that the bizarre claims you and others are making about "within range" make no sense.

4:  "Everyone" (which is like three people currently, just to be clear) can still be wrong.  

HOWEVER, as I indicated in my original post, previously I didn't think other models could get Chiaki's Reliquary, and the exact same reasoning should prevent her from getting others.  

This was based on believing the trigger was a  or functioned like one.  I've always just sort of assumed it was a .  It's only this discussion, and your failure to identify how the  applies, that has raised any doubt to me.

None of you have been able to show that the action's  applies to the trigger, which again has no printed  in it anywhere, and the only framework for doing so under the rules, that type as a game state passes to triggers, is one that you're all squeamishly avoiding endorsing.

---

Chiaki's trigger is unique enough that a specific ruling could fix it.  But absent a ruling, there needs to be a rule you can point to to prevent her from being a model within 4.

The rules would be sufficient.  If the  FROM THE ACTION, BECAUSE THERE IS NO  IN THE TRIGGER, applies.

---

So then, is it your contention that type always passes to triggers?

Or, as it seems, do you really just want this trigger to have .  It doesn't.  But we're going to pretend it does so that it works how we think it should?

Maybe it is because the Trigger does not have a range specified? Richochet for example specifies that it has a range of 3" from the target. Split the Soul however does not specify its own range, but references "within range." Therefore, I think this must refer to the same range as the Action, otherwise I dont think the Trigger could work. Within range of what?

"This is why I wrote out the action and trigger, replacing "within range" with its game-equivalent "within 4""

Where did you get 4" from? 4 is not printed in any part of the Trigger. What happened is that you, like us, defaulted to the range of the Soul Flute Action, because that is the only Range that "within range" could possibly refer to. It MUST refer to the SAME range as the Action, because otherwise the requirement for the Trigger cant be met because there is no Range specified in the Trigger, and the Range of the Action is  Pulse 4"

[LeperColony]

29 minutes ago, Mycellanious said:

Where did you get 4" from? 4 is not printed in any part of the Trigger. What happened is that you, like us, defaulted to the range of the Soul Flute Action, because that is the only Range that "within range" could possibly refer to. It MUST refer to the SAME range as the Action, because otherwise the requirement for the Trigger cant be met because there is no Range specified in the Trigger, and the Range of the Action is  Pulse 4"

"within range" from the rulebook, page 13 (emphasis mine):

An object is within range if any portion of that object's base is at that distance or closer.  Any effect that references an object being "within" a distance is talking about range.

---

So that's telling us within range is going to be within a distance.  Okay, clear enough.  Now, if only some part of the rulebook told us how to find distances.

Page 22:

"[Ranges have types and they have a]...range in inches, which is the maximum distance the Action can affect."  (summary mine)

Now, as I've said multiple times already, talking about range can get confusing because the rules use the word range to mean distance alone, but it also uses it to mean the type and the numerical value of inches.

So then which use of "range" do we use for "within range?"

Well, since "within range" is concerned with distance alone, we use the "range" (distance).

---

I'm going to ask this every time you dodge it:

Because no appears in the trigger, either:

1-   doesn't apply to the trigger

or

2- Some other rule has to pass  to the trigger.

So then, is it your contention that type always passes to triggers?

Or, as it seems, do you really just want this trigger to have .  It doesn't.  But we're going to pretend it does so that it works how we think it should?

--- 

I should note that other triggers do use "within X" in its text.  Chiaki could easily have been written to say "within 4".

She could even have been written to say "model affected by the " or "by the action."

This is almost the only wording, other than saying "also including Chiaki" that would use the same range (distance) as the action but include her.  Does that mean they meant to?  Not necessarily.  But it is interesting.

[Ogid]

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

In one case the is actually printed on the action, and in the other there is no  actually printed on the trigger.

I am fundamentally baffled by the fact that there are people who think there is no difference between appearing in game text and  not appearing.

---

Because no appears in the trigger then, as I've said like 12 times now, either:

1-   doesn't apply to the trigger

or

2- Some other rule has to pass  to the trigger.

Can someone please tell me what's confusing about this to them?  Because it really seems confusing to them.

The action cover both the action itself and its triggers. In fact you also acknowledge that when you use the range of the action in those triggers. Take also in count the range is NOT listed in the action text itself. It's as separated from the effect action text as it's from the trigger text.

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

I'm just asking if that means everyone plays their triggers as sharing the type of the action.  Which is something none of you want to commit to, for obvious reasons.  There's tons of triggers and always passing type could be horrendous. 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

So then, is it your contention that type always passes to triggers?

Yes, this is how it is played. if the trigger refers the range with "within range" the full range stat of the action is taken in count. Obviously this doesn't apply in triggers that have their own range or that doesn't need a range to work.

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

3 "within range" never "excludes" anything, no matter whether it appears in an action, ability, trigger, game commentary, juice box, etc.  "within range," as far as Malifaux is concerned, always refers to the distance (in inches) between two objects.  

This is why I wrote out the action and trigger, replacing "within range" with its game-equivalent "within 4" and demonstrated that the bizarre claims you and others are making about "within range" make no sense.

But range is modified by the type of range, in your case you would had to replace it by "within 4" in the trigger, not by "within 4''

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

4:  "Everyone" (which is like three people currently, just to be clear) can still be wrong.  

HOWEVER, as I indicated in my original post, previously I didn't think other models could get Chiaki's Reliquary, and the exact same reasoning should prevent her from getting others.  

This was based on believing the trigger was a  or functioned like one.  I've always just sort of assumed it was a .  It's only this discussion, and your failure to identify how the  applies, that has raised any doubt to me.

None of you have been able to show that the action's  applies to the trigger, which again has no printed  in it anywhere, and the only framework for doing so under the rules, that type as a game state passes to triggers, is one that you're all squeamishly avoiding endorsing.

Everyone is those 4 people, plus all the people who read that and agreed without questioning further, plus all the people who use the mechanical rider, pale rider and the other abilities not covered in this thread; that's a lot of people.

No, you have to point the rule where it says thatworks differently for actions and triggers, both triggers and actions are refering to the action's range with "within range" but you think that apply for the action but not for the trigger. Here you have a trigger and an action, both referering to the range. How are they different?

Quote

Innovation: Discard a card. Until the End Phase, each friendly model within range adds the suit of the discarded card to its final duel totals.

(primal roar) Friendly Beast and Chimera models within range may move up to 3''

 

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

Chiaki's trigger is unique enough that a specific ruling could fix it.  But absent a ruling, there needs to be a rule you can point to to prevent her from being a model within 4.

The rules would be sufficient.  If the  FROM THE ACTION, BECAUSE THERE IS NO  IN THE TRIGGER, applies.

It's not unique, any action with a "within range" trigger is the same case.

26 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

"within range" from the rulebook, page 13:

An object is within range if any portion of that object's base is at that distance or closer.  Any effect that references an object being "within" a distance is talking about range.

---

So that's telling us within range is going to be within a distance.  Okay, clear enough.  Now, if only some part of the rulebook told us how to find distances.

Page 22:

"...range in inches, which is the maximum distance the Action can affect."

Now, as I've said multiple times already, talking about range can get confusing because the rules use the word range to mean distance alone, but it also uses it to mean the type and the numerical value of inches.

So then which use of "range" do we use for "within range?"

Well, since "within range" is concerned with distance alone, we use the "range" (distance).

If you apply that without taking in count the icon, then things like coryphee duet healing himself happens.

It's not that confusing, "within range" rules tell us it's about distances and how to measure, then the icons add a few extra rules on top of that (being in this particular case that the thing generating the pulse is not in range of it the relevant one).

[Kadeton]

This seems like a pointless argument which is turning belligerent. I'm reminding everyone to play nice.

I don't normally make definitive statements on rules, but in this case it seems totally clear-cut:
When a Trigger states "within range", it is referring to the range of the Action, including the range icon.

[LeperColony]

3 hours ago, Kadeton said:

This seems like a pointless argument which is turning belligerent. I'm reminding everyone to play nice.

I don't normally make definitive statements on rules, but in this case it seems totally clear-cut:
When a Trigger states "within range", it is referring to the range of the Action, including the range icon.

If you want to make a ruling, that's fine.  It's even more than fine, it's good because this is how I want it to work too.  And the nice thing about rulings is that they don't have to accord with the text in the book, they can change, clarify or alter it.

But it's obviously not clear cut, because your assertion doesn't match what the text says.

The red circle is "range."  The red circle that is range includes two components.  These components, named on page 22 are:

Yellow Box (sorry, gun symbol got covered because I am not good at graphics):  Type

Blue Box (sorry, inch symbol got covered because I am not good at graphics):  range (which is then defined as "distance," so we know any other section of the rules talking about "distance," such as the "within range" definition on page 13 under "Measuring", cares about this).

There is no dispute that range (red circle) includes two different components, which can be independently variable (you can change, add, subtract, modify each one without having any impact on the other).  

By the actual text of the rules, "within range" only cares about blue square.  

If the ruling is that for actions, "within range" cares about the entire red circle, then presumably all the type's rules apply to the trigger.  

---

If there's other text I've missed, please point it out to me.  I prefer to understand the framework that makes the mechanics work, and nobody has managed anything other than "there is a ."

But if, as I suspect, this is a ruling, then obviously the text of the rules are superseded.

---

If type passes due to "within range," then does that mean we're saying types are not part of the game effects that pass from an action to a trigger automatically?  So that triggers without "within range" don't automatically get the action's type?

This would be much clearer and preferred to the alternative that types always just pass to triggers without other qualification.  None of us, of course, were qualified to make a ruling, so absent such a modification, the only mechanism under the rules was the "action pass to trigger" rule, and as I've said the implications of that seem significant (though in fact they may not be).

The nice thing about ruling that type passing is tied to "within range" rather than the triggers gain an action's effects concept is that, since the triggers are themselves very standardized, in most cases the fact that they type passes is going to be harmonious with what the trigger and action both do.

[Adran]

2 hours ago, LeperColony said:

If type passes due to "within range," then does that mean we're saying types are not part of the game effects that pass from an action to a trigger automatically?  So that triggers without "within range" don't automatically get the action's type?

Type is part of the action, so unless otherwise stated, it would carry across. If the action has the , then all parts will gain the effects of it being a unless they state otherwise. This includes any action triggers.

This means that a trigger such as Ricochet will still have its damage reduced by Bullet proof (as long as the initial action is a ).

 

[LeperColony]

39 minutes ago, Adran said:

Type is part of the action, so unless otherwise stated, it would carry across. If the action has the , then all parts will gain the effects of it being a unless they state otherwise. This includes any action triggers.

This means that a trigger such as Ricochet will still have its damage reduced by Bullet proof (as long as the initial action is a ).

 

So the Arcane Emissary's Rampage trigger is on a  action, so it is a  too.  So if Cassandra has Finesse up, she benefits from it in the TN 13 Mv duel (Emissary gets a )?  -- edit, the MV duel isn't opposed, so 🤣, but if there is anything similar that is opposed, would Finesse apply? --

Since all these defense techs say from/in/during "actions," if Bullet Proof applies to damage from  triggers (which is how I've always done it), does Serene Countenance give a  to duels on triggers of attack actions?  

Because I don't think I've ever done it that way, except when the trigger is itself an action (like Onslaught).  So previous to this, I would not have believed Serene Countenance works on the triggers.  But it does (assuming any attack action trigger causes an opposed duel.  I don't know if any does)?

Or Sonnia's Smothering Flame works to reduce the range of non-  triggers as well?

---

By the way, I appreciate your solution grounded in the actual rules.  I've mentioned this was a possible resolution a few times, but I indicated I didn't know if it would be problematic to pass types to triggers, since I've never thought about the triggers in those terms, and nobody until now has been willing to assert this as a solution.

[Adran]

44 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

So the Arcane Emissary's Rampage trigger is on a  action, so it is a  too.  So if Cassandra has Finesse up, she benefits from it in the TN 13 Mv duel (Emissary gets a )?  -- edit, the MV duel isn't opposed, so 🤣, but if there is anything similar that is opposed, would Finesse apply? --

Since all these defense techs say from/in/during "actions," if Bullet Proof applies to damage from  triggers (which is how I've always done it), does Serene Countenance give a  to duels on triggers of attack actions?  

Because I don't think I've ever done it that way, except when the trigger is itself an action (like Onslaught).  So previous to this, I would not have believed Serene Countenance works on the triggers.  But it does (assuming any attack action trigger causes an opposed duel.  I don't know if any does)?

Or Sonnia's Smothering Flame works to reduce the range of non-  triggers as well?

---

By the way, I appreciate your solution grounded in the actual rules.  I've mentioned this was a possible resolution a few times, but I indicated I didn't know if it would be problematic to pass types to triggers, since I've never thought about the triggers in those terms, and nobody until now has been willing to assert this as a solution.

I can't think of a trigger that causes an opposed duel, (Triggers that cause new actions will be different because that action has its own range and there are separate rules for actions caused by effects and triggers) but they would have been subject to Serene countenance (its an duel caused by an attack action).

 

I think others had tried to make the same assertion, but phrased it differently. (It is basically the assertion that the trigger is part of the action, and so the trigger is subject to the same things as the action that has been made before that you have previously argued with).

[LeperColony]

1 hour ago, Adran said:

I think others had tried to make the same assertion, but phrased it differently. (It is basically the assertion that the trigger is part of the action, and so the trigger is subject to the same things as the action that has been made before that you have previously argued with).

I think pretty much everyone resorted either to refusing to identify their logical/rules framework behind their belief, or asserted that "within range" passes .  And after I demonstrated textual evidence that indicates it doesn't, nobody provided any textual evidence that it does.

I mentioned the pass through method at least three times as a possible solution, and to the best of my knowledge, you're the only one to take it on explicitly.  However, I am sorry if I didn't notice someone else saying it, and I suppose it's entirely possible it's what someone meant, even if they didn't say it (or say it in that way).  In fact, I suppose it's even possible that someone saying the action's passes to the trigger meant the general rule that the action passes, without ever actually endorsing the general rule, which would have led me to believe they were limiting their opinion to the singular case.

Given my somewhat rudimentary model knowledge, I was worried about the implications of passing types to all triggers.

---

My interest in the mechanism may seem unnecessary, but the mechanism has real consequences.  If type always passes, it's relevant for other effects that reference or interact with the type.  In most cases, because of the ways actions and triggers are worded, this is going to be obvious.  But sometimes it won't be, and other times it may even be counter-intuitive.

If instead it's somehow based on some other theory, and type doesn't pass, that also has implications.  

[santaclaws01]

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

I think pretty much everyone resorted either to refusing to identify their logical/rules framework behind their belief, or asserted that "within range" passes . 

Every single one of us has done it which you've just ignored again and again. Why does the 4" from the range of Spirit Flute automatically get carried over to the trigger but not the type.

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

And after I demonstrated textual evidence that indicates it doesn't, nobody provided any textual evidence that it does.

You have demonstrated exactly 0 textual evidence that it does. All you do is keep repeating the within range means distance only, but then when you get told that reaserting that within range means distance only means that that restriction must also apply to the action you just dance around that fact and act like nobody knows what you're saying.

1 hour ago, LeperColony said:

I mentioned the pass through method at least three times as a possible solution, and to the best of my knowledge, you're the only one to take it on explicitly. 

What do you mean "take it on". Every single person has said exactly that, if a trigger has within range then it uses the range of the action. You're the only one in this thread who has assumed that every single other person has only talked about specific cases.

2 hours ago, LeperColony said:

Given my somewhat rudimentary model knowledge, I was worried about the implications of passing types to all triggers.

Which I already addressed long ago. You're lack of knowledge of models and fear that it might break something isn't a valid reason to argue against something. Either give an actual example of "within range" in triggers using the range of the action breaking something, or stop with this, what would essentially be, concern trolling argument if the topic was different.

[LeperColony]

32 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

Every single one of us has done it which you've just ignored again and again. Why does the 4" from the range of Spirit Flute automatically get carried over to the trigger but not the type.

This has been answered so many times, repeating it again would be pointless.

32 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

You have demonstrated exactly 0 textual evidence that it does. All you do is keep repeating the within range means distance only, but then when you get told that reaserting that within range means distance only means that that restriction must also apply to the action you just dance around that fact and act like nobody knows what you're saying.

I've quote the actual text of the definition of "within range."  You've quoted nothing.  Quoting the section again would be pointless since if it would have been understood, it would have been understood already.

33 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

What do you mean "take it on". Every single person has said exactly that, if a trigger has within range then it uses the range of the action. You're the only one in this thread who has assumed that every single other person has only talked about specific cases.

I've directly asked several times if you were using the pass through rule to apply types to all triggers.  We all know I can quote from other posts where I'm explicitly asking this.

I didn't ever see anyone assert that they were.  As I mentioned, it is possible I missed it, or that I didn't understand someone's qualified assertion of the single case to be based on the unqualified rule that the type always passes by default.  

36 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

Which I already addressed long ago. You're lack of knowledge of models and fear that it might break something isn't a valid reason to argue against something. Either give an actual example of "within range" in triggers using the range of the action breaking something, or stop with this, what would essentially be, concern trolling argument if the topic was different.

Your failure here to understand a reason from an argument is not really surprising.

As I've said several times, the reason I was concerned about importing all types to all triggers was I didn't know what the implications would be.  Nowhere is that an argument to disprove the notion. 

Now that the general consensus is that type always passes, further discussion seems fruitless.  

If you have any new textual citations that disprove "within range" that would be interesting, but let's be honest. If you had it, it would have come 20 posts ago.

Time to move on.

[Adran]

<MOD HAT>

This thread is causing more problems than it is helping. I'm going to end it here.