Immediate Revenge Interactions

[spydr261]

Does The Hanged take damage from Immediate Revenge if it uses Whisper from Beyond which reduces the target's wounds by half?

When does Immediate Revenge happen? If Seamus uses Live for Pain to fully heal himself will he take a wound from Immediate Revenge or will he stay at full health (i.e. does the damage happen before or after Seamus heals)?

[CRC]

Immediate Revenge requires that damage (not Dg) be inflicted with a ranged attack.

Whisper from Beyond will do damage (unless the Wd are prevented by a SS flip or something), thus meets the first part; and it is an attack (due to having a resist flip); but it is not a ranged () attack.

The damage is inflicted in Step 6 of the Damage Resolution(scroll down) sequence. That is, the "after resolving damage" part.

Live For Pain heals as the second part of the spell, which is after the Damage Sequence. Seamus will not heal in time to survive (assuming that was an issue).

[Alex]

Immediate Revenge requires that damage (not Dg) be inflicted with a ranged attack.

Whisper from Beyond will do damage (unless the Wd are prevented by a SS flip or something), thus meets the first part; and it is an attack (due to having a resist flip); but it is not a ranged () attack

This is incorrect. Whisper from Beyond does not do damage; it merely causes the target to lose wounds. If Immediate Revenge keys off of damage being dealt, it won't see this at all.

[CRC]

So, are you saying that only attacks that pass through step 1 of Damage Resolution count as "inflicting damage", and that those that start at step 3 are only "inflicting wounds"?

I thought I read that Damage is what happens at the end, while Dg is the thing that you do at the start. On the other hand, I much prefer any reasonably interpretation that allows me to think of Dg and Damage as essentially the same thing.

[Ausplosions]

Dg and Damage are two different things.

[CRC]

Dg and Damage are two different things.

Please explain the difference.

[Kadeton]

It's essentially as stated above: Dg is part of an attack's profile, and damage is the amount of Wounds inflicted on a model once the attack is fully resolved.

However, I'm not convinced that Whispers from Beyond does damage. I don't have the books with me, but I thought the wording was that it reduced the target's Wounds to half. I feel this is an important distinction - there's no damage resolution, and I don't think it could be reduced by a damage prevention flip, for example. Please correct me if I'm wrong (preferably with the actual wording of Whispers).

In the Seamus example, both effects (the healing from Live for Pain and the damage from Immediate Revenge) occur after damage resolution, so I don't think there's a clear sequence. My instinct would be that the Immediate Revenge damage occurs first - if Seamus was four Wd down, and used Live for Pain for 5 damage, he would still be at full health after Immediate Revenge. If Seamus was on 1 Wd and did the same, he would take 1 damage, technically die, but then get healed for 5 before the action was fully resolved and be fine.

I might have to check up on these when I get home.

[CRC]

Note:

DR = Damage Resolution

IR = Immediate Revenge

WfB = Whispers from Beyond

It's essentially as stated above: Dg is part of an attack's profile, and damage is the amount of Wounds inflicted on a model once the attack is fully resolved.

Alex was saying (and the rules might support) that Damage is what is calculated in step 2 of the DR sequence, and that since WfB skips to step 3, that it doesn't inflict Damage, only Wounds. Therefore, IR doesn't trigger.

If, as you say, Damage is what is inflicted once the attack is fully resolved, then IR would trigger.

However, I'm not convinced that Whispers from Beyond does damage. I don't have the books with me, but I thought the wording was that it reduced the target's Wounds to half. I feel this is an important distinction - there's no damage resolution, and I don't think it could be reduced by a damage prevention flip, for example. Please correct me if I'm wrong (preferably with the actual wording of Whispers).

Whispers from Beyond (CC...) Target loses half its remaining Wd and cannot be healed for the remainder of the game.

It's not actually substantially different from "lose 3 Wds." Yes, there's a calculation to determine how many wounds it does, but that's not a big deal. Also, everything goes through the Damage Resolution sequence. Find me any case in the rules where a model's remaining Wounds decreases and they don't have an opportunity to Use Soulstone (assuming they can) to prevent it.

In the Seamus example, both effects (the healing from Live for Pain and the damage from Immediate Revenge) occur after damage resolution, so I don't think there's a clear sequence. My instinct would be that the Immediate Revenge damage occurs first - if Seamus was four Wd down, and used Live for Pain for 5 damage, he would still be at full health after Immediate Revenge. If Seamus was on 1 Wd and did the same, he would take 1 damage, technically die, but then get healed for 5 before the action was fully resolved and be fine.

There's a perfectly clear sequence. Immediate Revenge says "suffer 2 Wd after resolving the damage".

Step 6 of the Damage Sequence is "6. Any Triggers which occur after resolving damage/wounds occur now."

So that's when IR triggers. (yes, it's not a trigger, it's an ability, but the timing is the same.)

Live for Pain, on the other hand, is a multi-part spell. First you completely resolve sentence 1, then you completely resolve sentence 2. IR triggers during sentence 1, Seamud heals during sentence 2.

[Kadeton]

It's not actually substantially different from "lose 3 Wds." Yes, there's a calculation to determine how many wounds it does, but that's not a big deal. Also, everything goes through the Damage Resolution sequence. Find me any case in the rules where a model's remaining Wounds decreases and they don't have an opportunity to Use Soulstone (assuming they can) to prevent it.

Again, not sure I agree... I'd say "lose half your remaining Wd" is substantially different to "suffer X Wd" - at least partly because "lose" is not "suffer", though I do hate those sort of semantic arguments, so I won't pursue it much further. I would be happy to play it that a Damage Prevention flip could save you from some of that Wd loss (not that it's ever come up, because the Hanged are pretty awful and nobody plays them around here that I've seen). It would be good to get something official, though.

There's a perfectly clear sequence. Immediate Revenge says "suffer 2 Wd after resolving the damage".

Step 6 of the Damage Sequence is "6. Any Triggers which occur after resolving damage/wounds occur now."

So that's when IR triggers. (yes, it's not a trigger, it's an ability, but the timing is the same.)

Live for Pain, on the other hand, is a multi-part spell. First you completely resolve sentence 1, then you completely resolve sentence 2. IR triggers during sentence 1, Seamud heals during sentence 2.

Agreed. That was one of the things I had to check when I got home.

[The Godlyness]

It's a wound prevention flip not damage. When Damage is converted into Wounds is where you make a prevention.

[Kadeton]

It's a wound prevention flip not damage. When Damage is converted into Wounds is where you make a prevention.

No, it's after Dg is converted to Wd. Dg and damage are completely different. You're right that it's technically called a wound prevention flip (or just a prevention flip) in the manual, though. I'm pretty sure everyone is clear on how it works.

[The Godlyness]

All Damage is converted into wounds before it is applied to a model. If it was a damage prevention flip things that dealt straight wounds could not be prevented.

[Kadeton]

All Damage is converted into wounds before it is applied to a model. If it was a damage prevention flip things that dealt straight wounds could not be prevented.

You understand that damage is not the same as Dg, right? I'm only saying it again because you seem to have missed it the first time.

[CRC]

There is a clearly laid out in the Damage Resolution Sequence.

Dg is converted into Damage in step 1.a.

Damage is converted into Wounds in step 3.

The wound prevention flip is done in step 4.c.

Kadeton, you like repeating that "Dg is not Damage", but I think everyone knows that. The question here is, what exactly is Damage.

Specifically, if I cast a spell that inflicts Wd, does the spell inflict Damage? It clearly inflicts Wounds, but I'm not sure if it actually inflicts Damage.

If you are sure, please provide references.

[The Godlyness]

Dg is a Stat on a card. Dg causes Damage to a model. which is then is converted into Wounds which is then Applied to the model. Pretty sure i Got that.

If it Does Straight Wounds it Skips to apply wounds Step in the resolution process. Wounds are not Damage.

[Kadeton]

Okay! Looks like the terms have changed again since I've been away. Here's the way it worked the last time I checked:

A weapon inflicts Dg. Dg is modified by stuff (Armor, etc). Dg is converted to Wd. Wd are modified by stuff (Prevention flips, etc). The final amount of Wd that are applied to the target is the Damage done by the attack.

However, this now seems to be different, according to the linked resolution sequence... I feel this has huge implications for a lot of stuff. Just off the top of my head, for an example, McMourning heals the amount of Damage inflicted by an attack, right? Not the amount of Wounds it inflicts?

That's a massive change from how it used to work. I guess I have to revise a lot of my understanding of the game.

Anyway, mea culpa, the terms changed on me and I didn't bother to keep up. Thanks for the update.

[Headcase2]

However, this now seems to be different, according to the linked resolution sequence... I feel this has huge implications for a lot of stuff. Just off the top of my head, for an example, McMourning heals the amount of Damage inflicted by an attack, right? Not the amount of Wounds it inflicts?

No, I believe Ratty said he only healed the amount of actual wounds inflicted. No time to go digging for that post now though, and I think the ruling might be based on intent and contradict the card.

[Ausplosions]

I feel this has huge implications for a lot of stuff. Just off the top of my head, for an example, McMourning heals the amount of Damage inflicted by an attack, right? Not the amount of Wounds it inflicts?

)

Nope.

McMourning's card specfically states Dg not Damage.

And it is not in the Model Clarifications, so it still works the same.

If Ratty has rules otherwise it would be in that Clarifications Document.

[Kadeton]

No, I believe Ratty said he only healed the amount of actual wounds inflicted. No time to go digging for that post now though, and I think the ruling might be based on intent and contradict the card.

That would make sense. To be honest, I expect almost everything which references Damage as a number that then affects something else (like the amount of Wds that McM heals) will eventually be changed to simply reflect the number of Wds the attack inflicted - anything else is pretty much stupid and makes no sense, which was why "Damage" was initially clarified to have the meaning I outlined above. I'm surprised they changed it, really.

---------- Post added at 07:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:49 PM ----------

Nope.

McMourning's card specfically states Dg not Damage.

And it is not in the Model Clarifications, so it still works the same.

If Ratty has rules otherwise it would be in that Clarifications Document.

Yeah, see this is the thing that gets me... Dg and Damage are sort of the same thing now - Dg is part of the weapon profile, and Damage is whichever level of Dg you flip. If you insist that it's Dg, then does McMourning heal 2/3/6?

[Ausplosions]

If you insist that it's Dg, then does McMourning heal 2/3/6?

that is how we play it.

[Paddywhack]

While I don't know for sure what the intention is here (and the semantics arguements are starting to hurt :Paralyzed_Puppet:) and to throw more fire on the bbq - It does say when he inflicts Dg with a melee attack he heals that many Wds. Now why didn't they just say inflict Wd? I would think because barring a special rule, a weapon only deals Dg. As written, and as weird as it sounds, it does appear in that case he would heal whatever the Dg amount he flipped before any modifications.

I have a feeling that it might have been intended to be after Damage is modified by armor, etc., but that is just my instinct. They didn't change it on the updated card, but maybe they missed it (was that put out after the clarification of Dg and Damage?). They would need to change it to 'Damage' in order for it to work the way I think it was supposed to work (what do I know though?). Just my 2 cents.

----------------

Wow - kinda rambling. Sorry. That is basically my limited understanding of this rules interaction. Someone correct me if I am off somewhere in my analysis.

Edited September 30, 2012 by Paddywhack

[Kadeton]

While I don't know for sure what the intention is here (and the semantics arguements are starting to hurt :Paralyzed_Puppet:) and to throw more fire on the bbq - It does say when he inflicts Dg with a melee attack he heals that many Wds. Now why didn't they just say inflict Wd? I would think because barring a special rule, a weapon only deals Dg. As written, and as weird as it sounds, it does appear in that case he would heal whatever the Dg amount he flipped before any modifications.

It's because his rules were written before anyone considered this sort of stuff, and they weren't too careful about it.

I have a feeling that it might have been intended to be after Damage is modified by armor, etc., but that is just my instinct. They didn't change it on the updated card, but maybe they missed it (was that put out after the clarification of Dg and Damage?). They would need to change it to 'Damage' in order for it to work the way I think it was supposed to work (what do I know though?). Just my 2 cents.

Yes... and indeed, it used to work that way. Now it seems to be before any of that happens. They didn't change it on his updated card, because that was aaaaages ago, before any of these clarifications and counter-clarifications were made. Now, they would need to change it from "Dg" to "Wd" to make it work the way you (and I) suggest, because "Damage" would simply mean whatever was flipped on the Damage Flip, prior to modification.

---------- Post added at 10:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 PM ----------

that is how we play it.

Hmm... what I meant was, how do you heal for 2/3/6? If you flip Weak on the Damage Flip, that's 2 Damage, not 2 Dg - the Dg is still 2/3/6 because it's a weapon quality. The use of Dg as a single number doesn't make any sense any more.