Death and Trigger timing

[Zebo]

Today we had a game in which we had a problem with trigger resolution. 

One War Pig charges a Winged Plague and declares Shove Aside. The WP dies with the damage flip, and when the pig must resolve the trigger, there's no more target to push (Shove Aside is after succeeding). 

Can the pig still push and attack another model? 

[Adran]

Short answer no.

If a trigger targets a model, and the model is no longer in play, then the trigger has no effect.

Electronic rules page 12

[solkan]

I was in the middle of writing a post concerning the related discussion "If a trigger just uses the word 'the target' does it have a target?' when I found a counter example.

The trigger Bloody Fate:

Quote

Bloody Fate:  Draw a card.  If the target was not killed, discard a card.

In comparison to that, most of the triggers that use the phrase 'the target' are triggers like Convulsions:

Quote

Convulsions.  Enemy only.  Move the target up to 3".  Then the target must either discard a card or this model may move it up to 3".

(I found it on Joss's Electric Discharge attack.)  Note that it's a trigger with the targeting restriction "Enemy only", and only uses the phrase "the target".  So it's a trigger with a targeting restriction that can only reference the target of the action.  (End result:  The trigger Convulsions can only be declared if the target of the action is an enemy model.)  Which goes back to things like Shove Aside, Execute, Heave, and the other triggers that reference "the target".

Looking at other triggers, it doesn't appear to matter whether the trigger starts off with 'Target ...' or 'The target ...'.  If a trigger contains the words 'target' or 'the target', the only thing it can refer to is the action's target.  The choice between 'target' and 'the target' would presumably be due to grammatical or stylistic reasons.

In other words, on the Guild Lawyer's Sharp Wit action, the two triggers:

Quote

Under Pressure:  Push the target 2" away from this model.

Mental Trauma:  Target must either discard a card or suffer 3 damage.

are both After Succeeding triggers that reference the target of the action and don't resolve at all if the target of the action is removed from play.

But I can't come up with an explanation for Bloody Fate's wording other than the trigger getting written, then the 'If you kill the target, you lose your trigger' mechanic getting added and no one noticing that Blood Fate broke.  While writing up end of this post, I double checked who all else that trigger was on:  11 models, including Paul Crocket, Stitched Together, several of Vicktoria's Mercenary friends, and Sidir Alchibal.

So is Shove Aside a trigger like Bloody Fate, which pretty clearly isn't supposed to be subject to the 'you killed it, go home' rule, or is it a trigger like Execute which is supposed to be subject to that rule?

🤷‍♀️

 

[Adran]

Good spot on bloody fate. I hadn't ever realised it was mis-worded. I assume that the second sentence should say" if a model was  not killed by the action, discard a card". 

( I'm assuming shove aside does follow the rules, bloody fate does mention a target, but it's effect doesn't target in the way that all the other triggers listed do. )

[Mycellanious]

There is this section from the FAQ, but it specifies Actions. Triggers are considered part of the Action tho, so its possible this applies:

"4. Some Actions have listed effects that are two distinct impacts on a model, such as “Target suffers 2/3/4 damage and is Pushed up 
to 3" in any direction.” Are these two distinct impacts considered separate effects?
a) Yes. In the above instance, these are separate effects that resolve independently. These effects are always resolved one at a time in the order presented in the text. If a model is killed (and removed) from the first of these effects, any following effects (such as 
being Pushed, discarding cards, etc.) are ignored."

[Adran]

4 hours ago, Mycellanious said:

There is this section from the FAQ, but it specifies Actions. Triggers are considered part of the Action tho, so its possible this applies:

"4. Some Actions have listed effects that are two distinct impacts on a model, such as “Target suffers 2/3/4 damage and is Pushed up 
to 3" in any direction.” Are these two distinct impacts considered separate effects?
a) Yes. In the above instance, these are separate effects that resolve independently. These effects are always resolved one at a time in the order presented in the text. If a model is killed (and removed) from the first of these effects, any following effects (such as 
being Pushed, discarding cards, etc.) are ignored."

I don't think this applies if the model is killed before you start to resolve the trigger because the rules say:

After succeeding: These Triggers happen after the Action is complete, but only if the model declaring the Trigger was successful in the duel and is still in play. If the Trigger has a target and that target is no longer in play, the Trigger has no effect.

[Zebo]

It sais IF the trigger has a target. Bloody fate doesn't have target. 

[solkan]

8 hours ago, Zebo said:

It sais IF the trigger has a target. Bloody fate doesn't have target. 

That’s the issue, though.

The way triggers (and actions) are written, an effect has a target if it uses the words “target” or “the target”.  There are triggers like:

Quote

Protect the Child:  Push this model 3” away from the target.

The trigger does nothing to the target, but it clearly needs the target to exist to be sensible and thus you’d want to say it has a target.  Right?  

Because it should be easy to imagine something like

Quote

Nerfed Bloody Fate:  Enemy only.  Draw a card.  If the target was not killed, discard a card.

where the fact that it has a targeting restriction clearly marks that it does have a target, and you’d end up with a horribly convoluted way of specifying:

* If you kill the target, nothing happens.(The trigger won’t resolve because the target is killed)

* If you don’t kill the target, draw a card and discard a card.

That’s the absurdity that’s the reason why I look at Bloody Fate and say that it references the target, but it’s nonsense to apply the targeting side effect to it.

In contrast to those murky examples, Shove Aside does something to the target: it pushes it using “push the target”.  So it qualifies as targeting under that clear criteria.

Note that because of things like the strategy marker rules, the bar for “Does this effect do anything to X?” is very, very low.  Even “choosing” on its own qualifies as doing something to X.

And that leaves the conclusion:  Bloody Fate doesn’t have a target because just asking a question like “Was the target killed?” about “the target” doesn’t qualify on its own.  But doing anything relative to “the target”’s position, doing anything to “the target”, or causing “the target” to do anything, any of the previous with “target”, or having a targeting restriction means that the trigger has a target.