On damage triggers and wound prevention

[Cunning]

Until today I thought I had the rules regarding damage and wounds completely straight in my head but a ruling regarding poison has knocked this out of joint so some help would be appreciated.

When someone takes damage (say from a strike) this is affected by various factors (armour, halved on spirits if non magical). Once the total has been worked out this total is applied as wounds on the target. At this point any triggers that take effect on damage are applied.

Afterwards if the target has use soulstones they can prevent the wounds done with a flip. However even if the flip means no wounds are caused damage was still applied so the on damage trigger is not affected.

However it was today ruled that poison (an on damage effect) would not be applied if all the wounds were prevented.

I can't see why this would be the case as wounds and damage are clearly differentiated in the rules manual. Could an RM step through this for me and point out where I've made a mistake in the above?

Thanks.

[Kadeton]

They really need to switch poison back to being on hit rather than on damage so they can put this whole messy business behind them.

Or change the Wound Prevention flip back to a Damage Prevention flip. Although personally I think both of those "solutions" are seriously flawed.

[Lucidicide]

OK, so I think switching things "back" implies it was the other way, and I'm not so sure it was.

Besides which, I don't think this IS a messy business. This seems to work just fine, and I'm not sure what people's issue is. Why is it such a problem that if you literally fail to scratch the skin (No Damage) that you can't apply poison? Makes perfect sense to me.

[i_was_like_you]

OK, so I think switching things "back" implies it was the other way, and I'm not so sure it was.

Besides which, I don't think this IS a messy business. This seems to work just fine, and I'm not sure what people's issue is. Why is it such a problem that if you literally fail to scratch the skin (No Damage) that you can't apply poison? Makes perfect sense to me.

There's the problem, though, we don't really know if it was one way or the other because the rules were vague.

As far as not scratching = no poison, that part makes sense. It's just the prevention of wounds somehow = prevention of damage, let's rewind a few steps part that seems more than a bit off.

[Kadeton]

It's just the prevention of wounds somehow = prevention of damage, let's rewind a few steps part that seems more than a bit off.

This would be easily fixed by changing all the instances of "after damaging target" (or similar) to "after wounding target". With this ruling, there seems to be no distinction, it's just the use of the word "damage" that's confusing.

[aka_hazard]

The 0 damage vs no damage is not just about poison but also about a whole slew of damage related triggers - flay, drag, etc.

Example:

A terror tot does 1 damage but triggers flay causing a total of 3 damage.

The target then does a healing flip and negates 2 wounds.

Does the target end with 1 wound or 0 wounds because flay triggers on damage being done and if the healing flip causes no wounds in the first place then flay does not trigger.

As an aside some poisons do not require an open wound to penetrate the skin so suffering no actual wound but having poison inflicted is perfectly possible in the 'real' world

[Kadeton]

The 0 damage vs no damage is not just about poison but also about a whole slew of damage related triggers - flay, drag, etc.

Flay isn't a problem, it takes effect "when damaging". This ruling only applies to triggers that take effect "after damaging".

[Cunning]

The 0 damage vs no damage is not just about poison but also about a whole slew of damage related triggers - flay, drag, etc.

Yes but it was only introduced after poison was ruled to be on damage then someone asked about how that works with the performer's ring. Which led to a difference between 0 and no damage which didn't exist previously.

[aka_hazard]

Flay isn't a problem, it takes effect "when damaging". This ruling only applies to triggers that take effect "after damaging".

But this is where I am getting confused...

...If a Black Joker is flipped for damage, "No Damage" is Caused and therefore Damage Resolution never happens and effects that work on Damaging therefore do nothing.

When you lower damage with Prevention, IE. by spending a Soulstone, if there are no Wounds left after Prevention you also count as having caused "No Damage" and the Damage Resolution is interupted and effects that work on Damaging do nothing.

The way I'm reading the ruling is that if the healing flip means there are no wounds left then the Damage Resolution is interrupted and the Flay would not have been applied as no damage was caused.

It's the moving back up the process tree that is causing me problems.

This is the way it now reads to me on this example...

Hit target for 1 damage and the Flay trigger.

After applying modifiers (Armour, etc.) there is still 1 damage to be applied.

Damage converted to Wounds and Target does healing flip negating 2 Wounds

Damage/Wounds is reduced to 0 and, by the ruling becomes 'No Damage', therefore Damage Resolution is interrupted and the Flay +2 Damage/Wounds is not applied.

Not trying to flog a dead horse or be a rules lawyer, just trying to understand

[Lucidicide]

You hit target for 1Dg. Flay is then applied (as all things that increase or decrease Dg as part of the attack apply first). You're now sending 3Dg.

You apply any "defensive" modifiers such as armor.

Remaining Dg converts to Wds.

You apply any modifiers that apply to Wds (such as Object).

Something with Use Soulstone can choose to make a damage prevention flip.

--IF damage prevention flip was taken and reduced Dg to 0, then treat attack as having caused No Damage.

----If No Damage result, exit damage resolution.

Apply Wd to target, check if target is alive, etc.

[aka_hazard]

So what I understand from your explanation is that trigger effects that are activated if damage is caused:

- are applied if their effect impacts the current damage total regardless of a healing flip (e.g. Flay).

- are not applied if their effect does not impact the current damage total if a healing flip reduces the current damage total to 0 (e.g. Poison).

Let me try explaining my confusion this way...

1. If a Terror Tot hits and flips the Black Joker for damage then No Damage is caused and Flay does not trigger - I understand that.

2. If a Terror Tot hits and flips low (1 dg) for damage, and a Healing Flip is not made, Flay triggers for +2Dg - I understand that.

3. If a Terror Tot hits and flips low (1 dg) for damage and a Healing Flip prevents the wound then the ruling states No Damage is caused (just like the Black Joker) and Flay does not trigger - Correct?

[Lucidicide]

1. If a Terror Tot hits and flips the Black Joker for damage then No Damage is caused and Flay does not trigger - I understand that.

While this is correct in terms of outcome, I think that in reality Flay does trigger, it's just that you can't add something to "No Damage." If the Black Joker made you do 0 damage, I would imagine Flay would work. But it doesn't, and therefore Flay cannot affect it even though it goes off.

2. If a Terror Tot hits and flips low (1 dg) for damage, and a Healing Flip is not made, Flay triggers for +2Dg - I understand that.

You're correct, but I'd encourage you to stop calling it a Healing Flip. It is not a Healing Flip. A Healing Flip is a (1) action that can be taken on your own activation. A Damage Prevention flip is a different thing.

3. If a Terror Tot hits and flips low (1 dg) for damage and a Healing Flip prevents the wound then the ruling states No Damage is caused (just like the Black Joker) and Flay does not trigger - Correct?

I would argue that this is just like #1. You hit for 1Dg + 2Dg from Flay. This is then taken through all the steps, ending up with 3Wd to a model. That model uses a soulstone to prevent that, and flips severe. All those Wds are now prevented, which converts the result to "No Damage."

Flay still triggered. It matters because of how much was needed in order to prevent it.

So what I understand from your explanation is that trigger effects that are activated if damage is caused:

- are applied if their effect impacts the current damage total regardless of a healing flip (e.g. Flay).

- are not applied if their effect does not impact the current damage total if a healing flip reduces the current damage total to 0 (e.g. Poison).

I think your second point is off. Trigger effects that activate if damage is caused go off after damage is caused. Trigger effects that affect damage amounts go off at the time of causing damage.

Poison is after damaging, so it only matters if you do damage. Flay alters the damage amount, so it happens regardless.

[Kadeton]

3. If a Terror Tot hits and flips low (1 dg) for damage and a Healing Flip prevents the wound then the ruling states No Damage is caused (just like the Black Joker) and Flay does not trigger - Correct?

No. This is the difference between triggers that apply "when damaging" and triggers that apply "after damaging".

The Tot flips a 1 for damage and adds +2 from Flay because it is applied "when damaging". That 3 damage can then be reduced by the damage prevention flip.

[aka_hazard]

Eureka! and the light bulb goes on

The difference being Flay is 'When damaging...' and Poison, amongst others, is 'After damaging...'.

Thank you very much everyone for bearing with me until I got it!

:You_Rock_

[fritz the cat]

I think this can only be solved with a official ruling. Different wording in different rulings. and in a game of this complexity, how things are worded make all the difference.

[i_was_like_you]

Maybe make a Comprehensive Rules document, in a searchable pdf format, separate from the Rules Manual, that states, in legalese, how each rule works. It's so much easier to reference rule 701.3b in conjunction with 209.1 than it is to send players to page 29, the section that talks about blah in conjunction with page 48 where there is a diagram for x, y, z.

Or, also, having each stat card posted in a searchable database with official rulings and interactions displayed directly below it, with a date of when the ruling was put into effect.

Neither one is something that players would have to buy. They're just there for clarification sake. Comprehensive Rules documents are far from fun reading, but they clarify the rules so very well, which makes playing the game more fun.

[Wolfgar]

But who would want to write it?

[Oshova]

This whole situation would be much easier if either Poison read "When Wounding an opponent . . . " or if references to Damage and Wounds were looked at more closely, so that specific game terms aren't used incorrectly when used as their normal English counterpart. Having both Damage and Damage meaning 2 different things, is confusing for everyone.

If you have a severe nut allergy and you are offered Cake or Cake (one of which has nuts in, but you don't know which) then what do you choose? If you are offered Chocolate Cake, or Fruit and Nut Cake, you now know which one to pick.

As an aside . . . I want cake! =p

[i_was_like_you]

But who would want to write it?

It shouldn't be about wanting to write it. I'm sure that no one so much as wanted to write them for other games, but that they had to in order to avoid further confusion down the line. Once the initial Comprehensive Rules document is written, it merely needs to be added to from time to time, as in, with each new book.

This whole situation would be much easier if either Poison read "When Wounding an opponent . . . " or if references to Damage and Wounds were looked at more closely, so that specific game terms aren't used incorrectly when used as their normal English counterpart. Having both Damage and Damage meaning 2 different things, is confusing for everyone.

If you have a severe nut allergy and you are offered Cake or Cake (one of which has nuts in, but you don't know which) then what do you choose? If you are offered Chocolate Cake, or Fruit and Nut Cake, you now know which one to pick.

As an aside . . . I want cake! =p

That sounds like a great start. While we're at it, can we change them to Poison Counters, Blight Counters, Burning Counters, etc., while changing the current counters over to Corpse Tokens, Scrap Tokens, Blood Tokens, etc.? A counter is something that modifies an existing item or character. A token is something that can exist on its own, representing some item, even items that can be picked up or otherwise manipulated.

And by the way, cake sounds great.

Am I referring to the food, with or without nuts, or the band, though?

Edited December 31, 2011 by i_was_like_you

[Keltheos]

Poison errata up:

http://www.wyrd-games.net/forum/showthread.php?p=355620#post355620

Wanted to be sure you lot saw it. Still working up the case on simultaneous triggers in general, however, so stay tuned if that's still of issue for you.

[i_was_like_you]

So, now it's as long as it hits, regardless of damage, damage reduction, damage / wound prevention, wound reduction (through object and the like)?