Epic Dreamer Finish

Scholar: down

Team Leader Tachyon: down

Fixer: down

Omni-X: down

Nightmist (me): 3 HP

Team: We're done for, might as well call this one a loss and reset.

Me: Let's play it out.

Slammed Mist Form.  All artifacts in play.  Dreamer has already flipped, starts laying nightmares like crazy.  The toy makers come out, and every villain turn I redirect one of their damage (using Amulet of the Elder Gods) to another projection.  Team feeds me cards, I discard at the end of my turn to gain health off Starshield Necklace, and the cycle repeats.  Projection after projection goes under Dreamer, and blammo we win with Nightmist almost back at max health.

 

Cool - sounds like you didn't have any trouble with the whole "can Nightmist still redirect stuff even when she's immune" issue :D.

It didn't occur to me that I should.  Seems to me the damage isn't affected by immunity until it's actually applied to Nightmist, and redirection prevents that application.  

Cue official ruling to ruin my awesome story in 3... 2... 1...

Since immune targets are still valid targets, and redirection bypasses all damage bonuses/reductions of the original target (of which damage immunity is one) in favor of those that apply to the new target, I’d say this is totally cheeseball legit. Not an official ruling by any stretch but it seems pretty reasonable.

The main argument against this though is that most if not all cards which allow redirection state that if a target would be dealt damage, and that a person immune to damage can’t be dealt damage, thus the trigger for the redirection will never occur.

Hypothetical question: If a hit of two damage was directed at Fixer, who was immune to it and had Driving Mantis in play, could he redirect it? Because the prevailing opinion seems to be that unconditional redirection can act regardless of immunity, but I believe it's been established elsewhere that damage reduction bringing damage into the range of Driving Mantis still applies. I can see it going both ways, and am curious to what people think.

I don't understand your question. Fixers redirection is conditional. If its 2 damage or less he can redirect it. Immunity only gets checked right before you reach for fixers HP tokens.  

Damage reduction is checked before immunity

 

 

And this is the situation the BS ruling on the meaning of "dealt" has put us in.  Now we need rulings for the present tense, conditional present tense, and past tense meanings of verbs (particularly "deal") in game terms instead of simply following the rules of English and accepting that the word means the same thing with regard to action regardless of time reference:  

Baron Blade deals 2 damage to Scholar.

Scholar would be dealt 2 damage by Baron Blade.

Scholar was dealt 2 damage by Baron Blade, but Flesh to Iron reduced it to 0.

In all cases above, the action (deal) and object (2 damage) are the same, regardless of other effects, leaving no contradictions.  

Now we need resolution phases with accompanying state checks a la Magic the Gathering's stack mechanism:

Baron Blade deals 2 damage to Scholar.

Scholar would be dealt 2 damage by Baron Blade.  "Would be dealt damage" effects are triggered.

Flesh to Iron reduces the damage by 2.

Scholar was dealt 0 damage by Baron Blade.  "Is/was dealt damage" effects are not triggered.  

Now, as referenced above by Foote, we need to find places in this stack for "check immunity" and plug the various redirection effects into the flowchart as appropriate.  It also creates a contradiction in states (Baron Blade deals 2 damage but no damage was dealt) that flies in the face of the basic linguistic constructs of cause and effect (I built a house, but a tornado knocked it down, so no house was built).  

Yes, I've belabored this point already in another thread, but it drives me nuts and IMO severely damages the elegance and simplicity of the game and its rules.  I was happy to have a cool game that I could explain to someone in the time it takes to shuffle a deck.  Now I have to go over how the meaning of common English words changes with tense with regard to game events in ways that are counter-intuitive and anti-fun.

I realize I can just house-rule this stuff away and quit fussing over it, and I'd like to, but I also want to play the game the "official" way.  If I don't, my contributions to the statistics project skew the data and I don't want that to happen.  So I'll just complain a bit, and if everyone ignores me, no complaints were made.

From rulebook, Immune: If a target is immune to damage, its current HP cannot be reduced by damage. However, it may still be targeted by damage. Also, it can still be destroyed by cards that destroy targets without dealing damage.

Immunity only gets checked right before you reach for fixers HP tokens.

This is a rule of thumb that I proposed. So far, it hasn't been endorsed by the designers yet. But it does help deal with the "would be dealt"/immunity situation.

Yeah, that makes a ton of sense.  It's essentially how I played it.