Regeneration and Poison

[Cornelious1424]

So I had a game tonight where a model with Regeneration received Poison. Which effect would happen first?

Ex. LCB attacks Sybelle with his toothy maw of doom, damages and gives her Poison 2. At this point she has 2 wounds left, so when she activates she will either heal with Regen or die from Poison before she can heal with Regen. Both me and my friend didn't know the timing on this so we "flipped off" in the interest of fairness. Fortunately I won the flip which saved Sybells beautiful face (for that turn).

[FearLord]

action modifiers stack.

So when p.34 says "Action modifiers with the same name do not stack" what do you think that means?

Just because a model can gain Slow multiple times, does not mean that multiple instances of it stack (defined on p.20 as "apply their effects cumulatively"), because they clearly don't...

[Mr_Smigs]

How are you not applying it first with the way option 2 is written? You specifically say that you reduce to 0 before applying the regeneration.

Let me color code:

There are 3 things tracked in Option 2:

• Poison Damage
  
• Current Health
  
• Health Gained By Regeneration
  

The Operation is:

2 -2 +2

At the end of the operation, the net result is 2.

But, if all the effects are supposed to exist at the same time,

that means the model is at multiple states of wounds at the same time

• 2 -2 = 0
  
• 2 +2 = 4
  
• 2 -2 +2 = 2
  

and anything else you can think of...

the problem here is we're used to thinking along a time line that's linear:

A leads to B leads to C leads to D.... and so forth...

and trying to identify everything as happening at once, makes people apply their own timing logic to justify the state of the Wd stat before/during resolution... opening it up to more questioning and argument.

that aside, it still doesn't answer the question of the difference with slow to die and this. If they happen simultaneously, then why should the effects of one(killed) resolve before the other one?

?

I'm not understanding this statement.

though it does beg another question of

"If the model is poisoned, has Slow to Die, and Regen...." Does it get a Slow to Die action at the beginning of its activation (IMO, by current "Poison goes first" logic, Yes...)

Edited October 7, 2011 by Mr_Smigs

[Mr_Smigs]

So when p.34 says "Action modifiers with the same name do not stack" what do you think that means?

Just because a model can gain Slow multiple times, does not mean that multiple instances of it stack (defined on p.20 as "apply their effects cumulatively"), because they clearly don't...

dude. seriously.

dead horse. leave it alone or take it to another thread. it's already got four or five similar threads.

[FearLord]

first up:

Poison is not an Effect. it's a Counter. which makes this discussion even more difficult because it is an Effect caused by a Counter.

which we could argue makes it Immediate.

Actually, technically they're tokens which "represent ongoing effects" as per p.19.

@Lucidicide - the Wds from Poison differ from the Wds from Emotional Stress, because the ongoing effect is applied to the Sorrow, not the model suffering the wound - therefore the model takes a wound from each Sorrow in 3" because the immediate effect of Emotional Stress stacks with itself.

However many time a model is poisoned, it will only suffer the poison wounds once, therefore the effects do not stack, therefore the wounds are not inflicted immediately...

Therefore, Regen first, then Poison...

Edited October 7, 2011 by FearLord

[Buhallin]

Actually, I don't think either are immediate.

Some effects actually say immediately, and these ones jump to the head of the line. For instance, when Sub Zero triggers it overrides other effects that might be waiting, such as a followup attack from Onslaught.

I think that when the book mentions immediate effects, this is what it means. Given that there are effects that use 'immediately' I don't think there's really any room for considering others as immediate if they don't.

Poison and regen both go at the start of the activation. "Active player chooses" is a holdover description from pre-RM. I can't find it in the RM, but I'm relatively certain the rule still exists, by intent at least.

[FearLord]

dude. seriously.

dead horse. leave it alone or take it to another thread. it's already got four or five similar threads.

Hey, you brought it up... link me to a Rules Marshal quote that overrides what I've stated and I'll leave it alone...

[FearLord]

. Given that there are effects that use 'immediately' I don't think there's really any room for considering others as immediate if they don't.

Or it means the way its defined in the Rules Manual...

[Mr_Smigs]

Or it means the way its defined in the Rules Manual...

lets not go there. the rules manual definitions for effects are already all fouled up.

I'll PM you one of the many, and you can search from there.

and thank you for the pointer, I was using the wrong term (much like Shrug off usually does) ... Token, not counter... I'll go back and fix that.

[Lucidicide]

Lucidicide, seriously, to recant the previous request: WHERE DOES IT SAY ACTIVE PLAYER CHOOSES?

First, all caps is like yelling, as I'm sure you're aware. So let's tone it down.

Second, I saw the request and responded to it. So "seriously" read what I've already said.

Pg 6 doesn't say that exactly, I think that's just something that's come up on the forum before.

"Players should resolve effects occuring simultaneously in the following order:

-Effects that must occur (before those that may)

-Immediate effects, then acting player, then by activation order of models"

That's not actually a quote, by the way, it's a paraphrase.

Neither is a may (both are a must). Both are immediate. So it goes to the next criteria: acting player.

So... Pg 6 is where it says acting player effects go first. So not active player chooses, but it's close enough (as most active players will choose their own effects first).

Since both are immediate (or not), none of the prior things (must or immediate) can take precedent, and therefore... acting player effect (aka Regen) goes first.

[Buhallin]

Or it means the way its defined in the Rules Manual...

And where in the RM does it define what an immediate effect is? Unless there's something under the blacked-out section on pg 20 (no RM handy so I'm using the PDF) it tells you what to do with an immediate effect, but nowhere is there a definition of what actually qualifies as an immediate effect.

So, it seems to make pretty decent sense that an immediate effect is one where the effect description says it should be resolved immediately.

[Mr_Smigs]

So... Pg 6 is where it says acting player effects go first. So not active player chooses, but it's close enough (as most active players will choose their own effects first).

close enough?

really, it's not.

there's a definite difference between what you can choose, and what you must resolve.

you can chose what order to use AP and special AP.

you can chose what order to cast spells,

but there are a number of abilities you cannot chose to ignore.

if Player abilities go first, a Dumb model will force a discard before suffering WP checks from Alps, or Poison token effects...

Since both are immediate (or not), none of the prior things (must or immediate) can take precedent, and therefore... acting player effect (aka Regen) goes first.

again, you fall back on an assumption not supported by the statement.

And where in the RM does it define what an immediate effect is?

awesome point. Pg 20 starts with the title "stacking effects"...

it's not defining Ongoing/Immediate, but explaining the result of repeat instances of said effects...

hmm.

this opens a whole new avenue of discussion. thanks.

Edited October 7, 2011 by Mr_Smigs

[Dracomax]

okay, I'll try to explain what I'm asking better, but I am really tired, and not sure how coherent I am.

As I understand it, in the normal course of events, the timing goes something like this:

damage-->Reduced to 0 WD-->state check-->model removed from board

When triggers or interrupting actions occur, it goes like this:

Damage--> triggers on damage--> Reduced to 0 wounds-->killed-->triggers on death(such as slow to die{which can be used by some models to heal})-->state check-->model is dead, removed from board, or model is not dead, all effects resolved.

The issue here is that, if both effects happen simultaneously, then why should the state check occur before both have gone off?

(like I said, I don't really think it works this way, I'm just trying to understand the logic that says poison reduces to 0 wds, model is killed, regeneration brings model to 2 wounds, model still killed)

[FearLord]

And where in the RM does it define what an immediate effect is? Unless there's something under the blacked-out section on pg 20 (no RM handy so I'm using the PDF) it tells you what to do with an immediate effect, but nowhere is there a definition of what actually qualifies as an immediate effect.

So, it seems to make pretty decent sense that an immediate effect is one where the effect description says it should be resolved immediately.

??? Where it says that immediate game effects:

- Occur and apply immediately

- always stack with one another and ongoing effects.

Therefore, an immediate effect is one that is resolved as soon as it occurs AND can stack with itself and ongoing effects...

[Dracomax]

??? Where it says that immediate game effects:

- Occur and apply immediately

- always stack with one another and ongoing effects.

Therefore, an immediate effect is one that is resolved as soon as it occurs AND can stack with itself and ongoing effects...

By that definition, neither damage from poison nor regeneration would be immediate--they don't happen until the activation, so by definition, they can't happen immediately. Neither do they stack with themselves, unless I am missing something.

[Mr_Smigs]

Damage--> triggers on damage--> Reduced to 0 wounds-->killed-->triggers on death(such as slow to die{which can be used by some models to heal})-->state check-->model is dead, removed from board, or model is not dead, all effects resolved.

The issue here is that, if both effects happen simultaneously, then why should the state check occur before both have gone off?

(like I said, I don't really think it works this way, I'm just trying to understand the logic that says poison reduces to 0 wds, model is killed, regeneration brings model to 2 wounds, model still killed)

good explaination.

alas, I cannot draw a tree diagram in ascii.

I do get what you're saying tho, and it makes sense.

that would fit an Option 5. (Resolve All Wd modifiers Before checking to see if the model died)

I like that, it avoids the Slow to Die question rather elegantly, and has notable forward-design thinking.

you've convinced me.

but. if all this stuff happens at once,

where does Dumb fit in? does a model that will Die from poison still have to discard for Dumb? (don't answer here, it'll take us off topic, I'll new-thread it)

[FearLord]

By that definition, neither damage from poison nor regeneration would be immediate--they don't happen until the activation, so by definition, they can't happen immediately. Neither do they stack with themselves, unless I am missing something.

No, regen occurs at the start of the activation and is applied immediately...

Nothing is stopping a model with Regen 1 gaining another instance of Regen and stacking...

[FearLord]

okay, I'll try to explain what I'm asking better, but I am really tired, and not sure how coherent I am.

As I understand it, in the normal course of events, the timing goes something like this:

damage-->Reduced to 0 WD-->state check-->model removed from board

When triggers or interrupting actions occur, it goes like this:

Damage--> triggers on damage--> Reduced to 0 wounds-->killed-->triggers on death(such as slow to die{which can be used by some models to heal})-->state check-->model is dead, removed from board, or model is not dead, all effects resolved.

The issue here is that, if both effects happen simultaneously, then why should the state check occur before both have gone off?

(like I said, I don't really think it works this way, I'm just trying to understand the logic that says poison reduces to 0 wds, model is killed, regeneration brings model to 2 wounds, model still killed)

I'm not getting into this one - for the record I can see the justification for it working this way - however, I've already explained in my last post on p.3 of this thread why Regen happens before Poison...

[Buhallin]

??? Where it says that immediate game effects:

- Occur and apply immediately

- always stack with one another and ongoing effects.

Therefore, an immediate effect is one that is resolved as soon as it occurs AND can stack with itself and ongoing effects...

Err, I think we're reading that section differently. You're looking at it as a checklist for what makes an immediate effect. I'm looking at it as directions for how immediate effects are handled. I can't think of any other cases in the rules which present qualifiers the way you're describing, without at least some sort of description (e.g. "An X is a Y if:").

So, again, given that we have effects that make use of the word "immediately" to define them, I think it's far more reasonable to read that as a description of what to do with those effects, rather than a description of them.

[FearLord]

Err, I think we're reading that section differently. You're looking at it as a checklist for what makes an immediate effect. I'm looking at it as directions for how immediate effects are handled. I can't think of any other cases in the rules which present qualifiers the way you're describing, without at least some sort of description (e.g. "An X is a Y if:").

So, again, given that we have effects that make use of the word "immediately" to define them, I think it's far more reasonable to read that as a description of what to do with those effects, rather than a description of them.

That section then goes on to give an example of an immediate effect (the wounds caused by Emotional Stress) - Emotional Stress does not state that the wound is applied "immediately" - which I think pretty much rebuts your argument...

[LoboStele]

Good lord guys, you are getting SO wrapped in semantics it's not even funny. This is a GAME. It's supposed to be FUN. Not an argument over silly words.

That said.....NEITHER Regen or Poison use the word immediately....therefore, they are NOT immediate effects. End of story. You're all trying to read into it WAY too much, IMO.

The player activating the model chooses the order, and would likely choose Regen first, then Poison. Bam, done.

[Buhallin]

That section then goes on to give an example of an immediate effect (the wounds caused by Emotional Stress) - Emotional Stress does not state that the wound is applied "immediately" - which I think pretty much rebuts your argument...

Ah, perhaps. Like I said, I couldn't see the examples, so it may very well be.

<shrug> I'll leave this one to the RMs. These things are rarely resolved by us once they get to this point.

[FearLord]

That said.....NEITHER Regen or Poison use the word immediately....therefore, they are NOT immediate effects. End of story. You're all trying to read into it WAY too much, IMO.

You aren't reading enough into it - this is not the definition of an immediate effect - the example on p.20 proves this...

I have explained exactly why Regen happens first, using the rules - unless someone has a rules based example as for why this:

Actually, technically they're tokens which "represent ongoing effects" as per p.19.

@Lucidicide - the Wds from Poison differ from the Wds from Emotional Stress, because the ongoing effect is applied to the Sorrow, not the model suffering the wound - therefore the model takes a wound from each Sorrow in 3" because the immediate effect of Emotional Stress stacks with itself.

However many time a model is poisoned, it will only suffer the poison wounds once, therefore the effects do not stack, therefore the wounds are not inflicted immediately...

Therefore, Regen first, then Poison...

isn't correct, I suggest they don't complicate the issue further by distracting from the core question...

Regen is an immediate effect - poison is an ongoing effect - I have proved both of these by the rules, therefore, Regen first, then Poison as per the timing rules...

[Mr_Smigs]

Regen is an immediate effect - poison is an ongoing effect - I have proved both of these by the rules, therefore, Regen first, then Poison as per the timing rules...

ok, I get your point that tokens are "ongoing effects"

what was the support that Regen is immediate? I seemed to have missed it.

[FearLord]

what was the support that Regen is immediate? I seemed to have missed it.

No, regen occurs at the start of the activation and is applied immediately...

Nothing is stopping a model with Regen 1 gaining another instance of Regen and stacking...

Regen fits the criteria for being an Immediate effect - it occurs and is applied immediately and nothing stops it from stacking with other effects.

[Lucidicide]

As far as I'm concerned, there are two things going on here:

1. Effect Resolution. (The question of whether player chooses)

1A. Pg 6 says that it goes in the this order:

- Must precedes May

- Immediate effects precede acting player effects precedes activation order

-Effects not controlled by either player

1C. There is little to dispute here. From what I see, there is nothing in the Rules Manual that states that active player chooses. I concede that point. However, active player effects go before non-active player effects.

2. Are Poison and/or Regeneration immediate effects?

2A. I don't know. What I do know is that they are both Must effects, and one will be the active players and one won't. Therefore, as long as they share the same status, the first 'location' you can distinguish which applies first is by active player.

My conclusion is that if they have the same effect type (immediate OR not) then Regeneration will happen first. If they have different types (one is immediate and one is not), then the solution is simple.

In my mind, the only question is whether or not they're immediate effects... not what to do if they ARE immediate effects.