Avatar Seamus: Mark of Dread

[snord]

Avatar Seamus has:

Mark of Dread: While this model is in play, other friendly models with Terrifying Ability increase their Terrifying by +1, while friendly models without the Terrifying Ability gain Terrifying -> 12.

Watcher has:

Cb(:rams) Light Target: Defender loses Terrifying when hit by this Weapon.

Imagine Avatar Seamus has a model in his crew with terrifying, for instance, Jack Daw is Terrifying -> 13. So, because of Mark of Dread, it is effectively Terrifying -> 14.

What happens if the Watcher hits Jack Daw with the Light Target trigger?

a) Jack Daw loses Terrifying until the end close phase.

Jack Daw loses Terrifying->14 until the end close phase, but because of Mark of Dread, it immediately regains Terrifying->12.

[Tograth]

a). Jack daw loses terrifying.

[Sholto]

( doesn't sound impossible. In fact, it sounds entirely plausible.

[Kadeton]

I would expect (a). "Target loses Terrifying" would be an effect - it's not removing the Terrifying boost effect and then allowing other Terrifying effects to be placed on the model, it's simply suppressing the model's existing Terrifying (including boosts) for as long as it lasts (i.e. until the end of the turn).

[Soundwave]

Initially, I thought a), but after contemplating a bit, doesn't seem that far off either...

The key words here, as far as I can see is the wording on Mark of dread - "While this model is in play", as opposed to "When this model manifests" or whathaveyou.

Jack gets hit, and on hit he loses his Terrifying - end of trigger. While Avatar of Dread is in play though, he gains Terrifying 12.

I guess I can see both sides of the argument.

[snord]

I can also see the 2 arguments and during the game I accepted my opponents argument and played as (, but it is a tricky question. Please note that although the wording on the Light Target induces people to think that it is a one shot point in time effect, it is actually an ongoing effect. Reasoning is modes like Jack Daw have a "continuous Terrifying -> X" talent, and Light Target will remain on Jack Daw cancelling Terrifying until the end of the turn. A subsequent Dispel Magic on Light Target would bring Terrifying back.

So we have 2 continuous effects canceling each other (terrifying and light target). Would the addition of another continuous Terrifying (from Mark of Dread in this case) restore the Terrifying->12 to the model?

Another way of thinking: the fact that the model has Terrifying printed on the card qualifies the model for the +1 Terrifying. When Light Target cancels the Terrifying until the end of the turn, will this immediately "re-qualify" the model for the second effect of Mark of Dread giving back Terrifying->12?

As I mentioned, I can see both sides of the argument and I am fine with whatever one. Just would like to play it correctly...

[Kadeton]

The interaction between the effects "Gain Terrifying" and "Lose Terrifying" is something of a grey area in the rules, AFAICT. My instinct says that "lose" takes precedence over "gain", but I can;t find a reference in the RM to support that.

[Mydnight]

The interaction between the effects "Gain Terrifying" and "Lose Terrifying" is something of a grey area in the rules, AFAICT. My instinct says that "lose" takes precedence over "gain", but I can;t find a reference in the RM to support that.

Actually, I think there is precedent. In the case of fast vs slow, if you have one and gain the other then they both cancel each other out and both effects are removed (as per RM page 34 under Action Modifiers). So you could look at it like this

~ Watcher hits Daw and uses his trigger to take away Daw's current terrifying 14

~ aSeamus checks to see if Daw has terrifying and finds that he doesn't

~ aSeamus gives Daw terrifying 12

The key here is that both Daw's original Terrifying and Light Target are removed until the start closing phase, and since the Light Target isn't there then it could not prevent aSeamus from handing out free terrifying.

At least...that's how I see it.

Edited to reference rules manual.

[Kadeton]

Yeah... Action Modifiers really have their own little section of the rules that doesn't apply to anything else, though. There's nothing about general effects.

[snord]

Actually, I think there is precedent. In the case of fast vs slow, if you have one and gain the other then they both cancel each other out and both effects are removed (as per RM page 34 under Action Modifiers). So you could look at it like this

~ Watcher hits Daw and uses his trigger to take away Daw's current terrifying 14

~ aSeamus checks to see if Daw has terrifying and finds that he doesn't

~ aSeamus gives Daw terrifying 12

The key here is that both Daw's original Terrifying and Light Target are removed until the start closing phase, and since the Light Target isn't there then it could not prevent aSeamus from handing out free terrifying.

At least...that's how I see it.

Edited to reference rules manual.

@Mydnight: your explanation is plausible, but what would happen if the watcher hits Daw again with the Trigger? It would lose Terrifying->12, I think that is clear, but would it immediately gain it again or not?

[Mydnight]

@Mydnight: your explanation is plausible, but what would happen if the watcher hits Daw again with the Trigger? It would lose Terrifying->12, I think that is clear, but would it immediately gain it again or not?

Since the trigger is directed at Daw's ability and not aSeamus the trigger would cancel out the current terrifying, but aSeamus would just give it to Daw again since the trigger & terrifying would (as I'm reading it) just cancel each other out again.

@Kadeton: I'm more applying the wording/concept since as you've said there isn't much else to look at in regards to gaining/losing abilities with the only exception being stacking and effects, which doesn't seem to apply as much in this case.

[Requirement]

The way I see it it's a continuing battle between Terrifying and Light Target.

-Hit Jack Daw triggering Light Target

-Jack Daw loses Terrifying

-Jack Daw gains Terrifying->12

-Light Target takes away Terrifying->12

-Jack Daw gains Terrifying->12

-Light Target takes away Terrifying->12

-So on and so on ad infinitum until Close Phase

I feel RaI might be that the Watcher is shining his light down Jack Daw for the rest of the turn, preventing any terrifying.

However I certainly see the other side of the argument on this one.

[Mydnight]

The way I see it it's a continuing battle between Terrifying and Light Target.

-Hit Jack Daw triggering Light Target

-Jack Daw loses Terrifying

-Jack Daw gains Terrifying->12

-Light Target takes away Terrifying->12

-Jack Daw gains Terrifying->12

-Light Target takes away Terrifying->12

-So on and so on ad infinitum until Close Phase

I feel RaI might be that the Watcher is shining his light down Jack Daw for the rest of the turn, preventing any terrifying.

However I certainly see the other side of the argument on this one.

It certainly is a tricky situation, and my perspective comes from the wording saying that other abilities (like fast/slow, Paralyzed/Reactivate) cancel each other out and both are removed. Since it (Light Target) would, hypothetically, whisk the Terrifying ability off to some different realm it wouldn't be there for when aSeamus just hands out another like it's candy. He likes handing out candy.

Regardless though, I'm making a bit of a leap with my argument and in the end I'd say flip a card until we hear otherwise from those on High. :-)

[Shank Seamus!]

Is the op quote for light target exact, or does it have a 'til end if turn on' the end of the description?

[Kadeton]

Is the op quote for light target exact, or does it have a 'til end if turn on' the end of the description?

All effects last until the Resolve Effects step (i.e. the end of the turn) unless otherwise specified.

[Shank Seamus!]

I know this, but some do specify, which would solve the issue.

[snord]

I know this, but some do specify, which would solve the issue.

I copied the quote from the book, but I think it is the same as printed on the card. I can check tomorrow, when I get home.

[Q'iq'el]

There are not that many abilities in the game, which affect the Talents directly, rather than just cancel their effects.

One that comes to mind is Hex. Now do you think Hex places an ongoing effect suppressing the removed talent until Zoraida is removed from play (note that you can cancel Hex if you Bury her *devil* ), or is it simply an instant effect which removes the Talent, but clearly states when the talent will come back?

Note, that if Hex does place an ongoing effect on the model, then clearly Hex can be Shrugged off or Dispeled, right? Have you ever played it as such?

The Watcher's spell may be more specific as to what it removes, but it clearly is the same mechanic at play, isn't it?

[Requirement]

There are not that many abilities in the game, which affect the Talents directly, rather than just cancel their effects.

One that comes to mind is Hex. Now do you think Hex places an ongoing effect suppressing the removed talent until Zoraida is removed from play (note that you can cancel Hex if you Bury her *devil* ), or is it simply an instant effect which removes the Talent, but clearly states when the talent will come back?

Note, that if Hex does place an ongoing effect on the model, then clearly Hex can be Shrugged off or Dispeled, right? Have you ever played it as such?

The Watcher's spell may be more specific as to what it removes, but it clearly is the same mechanic at play, isn't it?

I love this line of thinking. I don't see why you wouldn't be able to shrug off or dispel it...

[Shank Seamus!]

I see the line of thinking, but hex removes the talent untill zoraida is removed.. states on the card. So tour not adding a 'blocking' talent. Your removing it entirely, until as the card states, zoraida is removed from play..

[Q'iq'el]

I see the line of thinking, but hex removes the talent untill zoraida is removed.. states on the card. So tour not adding a 'blocking' talent. Your removing it entirely, until as the card states, zoraida is removed from play..

For something to last in such a way it must be an ongoing effect, you see. It may be an ongoing effect on Zoraida, rather than the target, sure, but then you can dispel it from Zoraida, if you have such an ability. Or just bury her.

The point is that the Watcher's ability is more or less the same. The duration is defined differently and the effect is more narrow, but they do the same thing to the other models' talents. So is the effect on the Watcher or on the target? Play it the same way you play Hex, IMO. Official ruling is always nice, of course.

[Keeblerpowell]

I may be very incorrect here but; isnt this just a case of two effects on a model at the same time? The controller of the medel can just say the removal of terrifing happens first then the addition of terrifing happens after.

But again I stress I am wrong lots and lots.

[Q'iq'el]

I may be very incorrect here but; isnt this just a case of two effects on a model at the same time? The controller of the medel can just say the removal of terrifing happens first then the addition of terrifing happens after.

But again I stress I am wrong lots and lots.

The reason why it doesn't work like that is that things with the same name don't stack.

So if you have Terryfying, some instant effect removes it, then you can get Terryfying again (as you have no Terryfying on your card).

But if you have Terryfying, some ongoing effect keeps it suppressed and you try to apply another instance of Terryfying, you end up with just one Terryfying and it is still suppressed. The only way to deal with it is to dispel the suppressing effect.

The unresolved question is not how it works, because this is relatively simple choice between one of the two Malifaux' mechanics, but which kind of effect are we dealing here with (instant removal or ongoing suppression)?

At least that is my understanding of the problem.