Terrifying and Take the Hit

[Axelst]

If a model with both terrifying and take the hit uses take the hit, does the attacking model have to pass the wp duel or is the attack considered to be past that point?

Also if a model with terrifying is attacked, does another model take the hit before or after the attacker  performs the wp duel?

[emiba]

Take the hit and Terrifying both trigger after being targeted. Once a model declares Take the Hit, it is targeted and triggers 'after being targeted' on itself causing the attacking model to have to perform the WP duel.

The second scenario is a little less clear cut but, seeing as again both effects trigger at the same timing step, I'd say it's up to the controlling player to decide the order. It's quite possible I'm missing something and is wrong though. 

[le_wahou]

Fast answer : opponent must take the terrifying. If he targets a terrifying model and another models with terrifying takes the hit or is choosed as a new target with protected, the attacker must pass both duels.

Long answer

terrifying : After an ennemy models targets this model with an attack action...
Take the hit : After an ennemy models targets a friendly model within 2 with an attack action...

Both happen at the same step. Usually, they should happen when you are the passive player (ie not taking the action). When you have multiple models with effects happening at the same time, you choose a model and resolve his effects in the order you want. Then you pass to your next model.
In this case, you choose to resolve the effects on the first target. Opponent takes the terrifying, you can also choose to use intimdating authority or any ability with this timing. Then you choose to resolve the effects of the model with take the hit. You resolve take the hit, he becomes the target and you resolve any other effects, for example a terrifying.

[Adran]

This one is tricky. I think you can choose the order of take the hit/Terrifying as they generated in the same time window

If the Take the hit model also has Terrifying, I'm not so sure. (Partially because I don't think you should have to take 2 terrifying tests).

There might be a difference between an enemy model targeting you, and you becoming the target of an enemy models attack.  So Model A will declare it is targeting Model B, and create a window where things that happen after Model A targets Model B can happen. If Model C uses take the hit, then Model C is now the target, but Model A never declared Model C as the target., so It might not create that timing window again. (Otherwise you get a potential loop where you could use multiple models to take the hit, potentially even the original model again, causing you to have to take terrifying tests again if you have 2 models both with take the hit and terrifying).

[LeperColony]

RAW I think it's hard to escape the conclusion that you have to take two tests.  Do I think that's good for the game?  No.

[Paddywhack]

4 hours ago, LeperColony said:

RAW I think it's hard to escape the conclusion that you have to take two tests.  Do I think that's good for the game?  No.

Agreed, sadly. Just add a line to the timing chart that says that any effects that may change the Target are resolved first. No need to change any cards or abilities. Pretty easy fix if, as I suspect, that was not the intent. 

[Maniacal_cackle]

One thing to note is the start of an activation is a 'snapshot' of abilities, and no further start of activation abilities can be generated (even if their conditions are met).

Applying similar reasoning to the targeting stage, you could conclude it is too late for the Take The Hit model to generate a terrifying effect.

But ultimately we don't know until an official answer is given.

[LeperColony]

4 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Applying similar reasoning to the targeting stage, you could conclude it is too late for the Take The Hit model to generate a terrifying effect.

Well, that's actually the problem because I don't think it does.  This got detailed a bit last time this got asked.  Basically, since the timing window is after the model is targeted, changing the target opens the window again.

"Start of Activation" is a point in time, it can only ever be one.  But after targeting is a condition that relies on when something is targeted.  Normally, each action will only have one target selection, but abilities can change/move the target, making it so that multiple models have been targeted.

Take the Hit / Protected should be given timing to preempt Terrifying, rather than being based on after the model is targeted.  

Or, alternatively, Terrifying could be ruled to be a "targeting restriction" (even though it isn't) so that Take the Hit / Protected would ignore it.

[Maniacal_cackle]

41 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

Well, that's actually the problem because I don't think it does.  This got detailed a bit last time this got asked.  Basically, since the timing window is after the model is targeted, changing the target opens the window again.

My point was more that there may not be an opportunity to open the window again, but let me pose a more detailed scenario then.

Can you use Take the Hit repeatedly under the way people are interpreting the rules? For example, does this work:

• You attack model A.
• I use an Ashigaru 1 to take the hit to move into base contact with Model A.
• Ashigaru 2 is within 2" of Ashigaru 1's position, and uses take the hit to move into base contact with Ashigaru 1, becoming the new target.
• Ashigaru 3 is within 2" of Ashigaru 2's position, and uses take the hit to move into base contact with Ashigaru 2, becoming the new target.

Molly for instance might want to use this strategy for draining her hand, as she often wants to jump through hoops to drain her hand.

If you can repeatedly re-open the window, is there any reason you can't chain Take The Hit over and over (and then are people saying you would have to take a terrifying check for each Ashigaru in the chain that has Terrifying?)

Alternative suggestion: Take the hit changes the target, but it doesn't cause you to 'target' anything (it simply swaps who the target is). So anything that generates when targeting something (like terrifying or take the hit) can't be generated by Taking the Hit (as it just changes the target, it doesn't cause the model to 'be targeted' or anything).

[solkan]

Let's see here...

• "After this model is targeted with an Attack Action" is phrasing in Intimidating Authority, and the various Protected (X) abilities.
• "After an enemy model targets this model with an Attack Action" is the phrasing in Terrifying.
• "After an enemy model targets a friendly model within ..." is the phrasing in Take the Hit.

I think it was a common expectation that the sequence:

• *Declare attack against non-Terrifying model
• Attack gets redirected to Terrifying model
• Terror check ensues

is a proper and good thing during M2E, and should still be a proper a good thing in M3E.

I think there's a fair expectation that Take The Hit and Protected(X) should happen at the same time.  And I think the presumption was that the card discard to use those two abilities was sufficient deterrent against an attack getting 'hopped' across several models.  (You can do it if you really want, but you get to kiss your hand goodbye if you do...)  But there's nothing to prevent going in circles (You've got two Ashigaru standing near each other, a full hand of cards, and the Ashigaru just got targeted.  How far do you want to go?  But it's card discard in an edition with capped hand sizes, so ...).

But, there's an important point in how the simultaneous effects rules are written:  When you select a model with unresolved effects, you resolve all of those effects before choosing the next model.  That means that if a model has both Protected(X) and Terrifying, you have to resolve both of those effects before, and that Take The Hit and Protected don't work quite the same.

I think bringing up Intimidating Authority is important because both Intimidating Authority and Terrifying appear to be written under the assumption that the attack is still targeting the model with that ability when the effect of that ability gets resolved.  In other words, the assumption is that Terrifying works as "the Attack against this model fails" and Intimidating Authority works as "suffers a to the duel against this model".

Now, what's really annoying is that the rulebook has an example of a Terrifying duel in it, but while it demonstrates that the terrifying duel happens before the attack's normal duel, it doesn't quite say what part of the action resolution that Terrifying duel happens during.  So if you've got Archie standing next to a friendly Ashigaru and someone attacks Archie (set up so that Ashigaru can move the attack off Archie), can that go:

• Resolve Terrifying on Archie.  Attacking model does the Wp duel now.
• When the attacking model succeeds, resolve Take the Hit on the Ashigaru to make it the target.

or are you supposed to wait until the Duels step of the action to resolve Terrifying?

 

[Maniacal_cackle]

9 minutes ago, solkan said:

or are you supposed to wait until the Duels step of the action to resolve Terrifying?

That would be in line with what I was saying about snapshots.

Could be that there's only one point where you figure out what all the 'after targeting' stuff is, generate all those effects, then when you start resolving them the window is already closed (so no new 'after targeting' effects).

[solkan]

20 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

That would be in line with what I was saying about snapshots.

Could be that there's only one point where you figure out what all the 'after targeting' stuff is, generate all those effects, then when you start resolving them the window is already closed (so no new 'after targeting' effects).

But that 'snapshots' idea says that the following sequence results in the end model not getting any 'after targeting benefits:

• Target harmless model
• Redirect attack onto model with Terrifying, Intimidating Authority, or some other 'after targeting' effect.

and redirecting onto a Terrifying model (or a model with targeting based defenses) has historically been expected to work.  So you need to have at least two sets 'steps' of allowed 'after targeting' effects and "Only the first and second set of 'after targeting' effects counts" isn't really something that can be defended as intuitive or understood from context.

And I think having Protected turn off the defensive abilities of models around the Protected model doesn't lead to good game play.  Not in a game where you can move the other player's models around.

[Maniacal_cackle]

2 minutes ago, solkan said:

But that 'snapshots' idea says that the following sequence results in the end model not getting any 'after targeting benefits:

• Target harmless model
• Redirect attack onto model with Terrifying, Intimidating Authority, or some other 'after targeting' effect.

and redirecting onto a Terrifying model (or a model with targeting based defenses) has historically been expected to work.  So you need to have at least two sets 'steps' of allowed 'after targeting' effects and "Only the first and second set of 'after targeting' effects counts" isn't really something that can be defended as intuitive or understood from context.

And I think having Protected turn off the defensive abilities of models around the Protected model doesn't lead to good game play.  Not in a game where you can move the other player's models around.

Yes, that is a bit wonky. The only way that I've been able to work straight is you have to take the test for the model you targeted but isn't actually attacked, which feels un-intuitive. Intuitively you would expect that if you redirect to another model, their defenses apply (and not the original model).

EDIT: Although sorry, why is it relevant as to whether you can move the enemy models around? It is the owner's choice to use protected, etc.

[LeperColony]

Terrifying and Take the Hit proc off the same event, a model being targeted.  This is an event that can occur multiple times, as Take the Hit makes a model become targeted.  The window for "after an enemy model targets this model" is after the model is targeted.  

There's no conflict with the "Start of Activation."  In fact, both rely on the same concepts.  When an ability specifies an inciting event, that event defines the timing.  Start of Activation is a defined event that can only occur once per activation, so it'll never happen twice and subsequent effects aren't relevant.   

But "after an enemy model targets this model" is an event that can happen multiple times in an action, because the target can be changed through an effect like Take the Hit or Protected.  

In order to avoid two terrifying checks, the timing on Terrifying either needs to be changed so it isn't simultaneous with TtH/Protected, or else Terrifying needs to be rules as a targeting restriction.  In which case it would be ignored.

 

[Adran]

11 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

But "after an enemy model targets this model" is an event that can happen multiple times in an action, because the target can be changed through an effect like Take the Hit or Protected.  

In order to avoid two terrifying checks, the timing on Terrifying either needs to be changed so it isn't simultaneous with TtH/Protected, or else Terrifying needs to be rules as a targeting restriction.  In which case it would be ignored.

 

Or you can rule that someone else changing the target isn't the same as the initial model targeting. Take the hit makes this model become the target. That is not automatically the same as the enemy model targeting this model.  Its not unreasonable to read them as the same, because they cause the same result but an entry into the FAQ would be enough to clarify that they are different.

I will admit its a bit of a linguistic trickery, but I think it works. (at least from the point of view that you shouldn't have to take multiple terror tests in 1 action.)

[LeperColony]

1 minute ago, Adran said:

I will admit its a bit of a linguistic trickery, but I think it works. (at least from the point of view that you shouldn't have to take multiple terror tests in 1 action.)

I mean, this is really the heart of the matter.  There's no world in which stacking terrifying tests is something Wyrd should allow, even if achieving multiple tests is a bit of work. 

[santaclaws01]

There just needs to be a section added to the targeting step. "Abilities which can change the target of the action must be completely resolved before any other abilities may be resolved"

So now your model with protected+terrifying needs to resolve protected first, and once protected is completely resolved terrifying on that model can't be resolved(since it's no longer being targeted). Likewise your terrifying model and take the hit+terrifying model need to completely resolve Take The Hit before either terrifying can be resolved.

[santaclaws01]

Also, if we want to add onto the changing target issues:

Combat Finesse: When this model is targeted with a  action, the Attacking model's duel may not be cheated.

What happens when you target a combat finesse model with a  action and then another model uses Take The Hit to change it to themselves.

[Adran]

3 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

There just needs to be a section added to the targeting step. "Abilities which can change the target of the action must be completely resolved before any other abilities may be resolved"

So now your model with protected+terrifying needs to resolve protected first, and once protected is completely resolved terrifying on that model can't be resolved(since it's no longer being targeted). Likewise your terrifying model and take the hit+terrifying model need to completely resolve Take The Hit before either terrifying can be resolved.

From a "realism" point of view I would rather have the terrifying test before the target movement. If I'm psyhcing myself up to shoot a hanged then the fact an Ashiguru skeleton jumps in the way doesn't really make it easier for me to make that shot.

(Plus I think things are less complicated when the attacking model gets the choices of what its actually going to deal with)

[Sagrit]

Quick question about simmilar situation
Kirai have Protected (Urami) and does not have Terrifying.
Datsue Ba is Urami and have Terrifying 12.
You want to hit my Kirai. I discard a card and use Protected to switch attack on Datsue Ba. Will you get Terrifying check?

My reading of the wording - yes, you must do the check, because now you are targeting a model with Terrifying and Terrifying wording says "After an enemy model target this model with an Attack Action..."

[santaclaws01]

1 minute ago, Adran said:

From a "realism" point of view I would rather have the terrifying test before the target movement. If I'm psyhcing myself up to shoot a hanged then the fact an Ashiguru skeleton jumps in the way doesn't really make it easier for me to make that shot.

(Plus I think things are less complicated when the attacking model gets the choices of what its actually going to deal with)

The realism argument could also be made that you point your gun/raise your sword/ whatever at the target, then the terrifying model jumps in the way before you've even started to psych yourself up and now there's some eldritch horror standing in front of you saying "Do it, I dare you".

Whichever side of the fence Wyrd falls on with that, it definitely needs to be changed from how it currently works.

[Adran]

11 minutes ago, Sagrit said:

Quick question about simmilar situation
Kirai have Protected (Urami) and does not have Terrifying.
Datsue Ba is Urami and have Terrifying 12.
You want to hit my Kirai. I discard a card and use Protected to switch attack on Datsue Ba. Will you get Terrifying check?

My reading of the wording - yes, you must do the check, because now you are targeting a model with Terrifying and Terrifying wording says "After an enemy model target this model with an Attack Action..."

That's basically what we're discussing.

Generally the view seems to be yes, as its written you do, but on the whole you probably shouldn't be made to make multiple terrifying tests, so something about what is written should be changed.

[Maniacal_cackle]

8 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

Also, if we want to add onto the changing target issues:

Combat Finesse: When this model is targeted with a  action, the Attacking model's duel may not be cheated.

What happens when you target a combat finesse model with a  action and then another model uses Take The Hit to change it to themselves.

Combat finesse is different from terrifying.

Combat finesse is a static ability (when), while terrifying is a generated ability with specific timing (after).

For combat finesse, if you are targeting the model with combat finesse at the time of cheating, you may not cheat.

At least, that's how I read it.

[santaclaws01]

59 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said:

Combat finesse is a static ability (when), while terrifying is a generated ability with specific timing (after).

"When" is a specific timing just like "after" is. A static ability would be "while this model is targeted"

[Maniacal_cackle]

8 minutes ago, santaclaws01 said:

"When" is a specific timing just like "after" is. A static ability would be "while this model is targeted"

According to page 34:

Quote

Ability Timing

Most Abilities are passive and always in effect, but some occur as a result of another game effect. In these cases, the Ability will use the word “After.” These Abilities happen after the effect in question is resolved.

Stuff with the word "after" will occur as a result of something else.

Anything else on the front of a card will just be a static ability (though many static abilities are only relevant at very specific times).

For a comparable example, consider auras. If you use Take the Hit to leave an aura that gives you concealment, the aura is static and still there. But it isn't applicable to your situation.

[Maniacal_cackle]

For the main question, I think Adran highlights the smoothest interpretation.

If Take the Hit causes the target (noun) to change, but doesn't cause targeting (verb) to happen, then Ashigaru's terrifying won't go off.

I think it isn't my favourite outcome, but it is the smoothest rules interpretation.