I like the insertion of "non-hero" into Jack Handle. It does nerf it a little in a number of cases (Infection, Kismet), but I think it's thematically good and fixes this infinite loop. I'm not sure why you specify "exactly 1", though.
So you want every Tool/Style in Mr Fixer's arsenal to work on him except Jack Handle?
Why do you hate him/consistancy so much? 
I don't think Jack Handle is the problem, I think it's working as intended on 'self inflicted' damage, it just needs better wording on cards which could create an infinite loop.
It's 'cause if we're fixing Jack Handle, we might as well fix it so it doesn't infinitely loop itself, which in it's current state you could argue it does. (mostly it doesn't come up, because Jack Handle is obviously not supposed to create an infinite damage loop with itself, but in theory it could be argued that it would)
Exactly. Just preventing exploitation of possible infinite loops.
how about on friendly fire you add: "damage dealt this way can not trigger friendly fire."
I think that would work, and would prevent any other redirection effects from creating infinite loops as well.
You'll lose a few interactions that would let you get a few points of damage in without going infinite, but I don't think they're common enough to be much of a loss. (e.g. Smoke Bombs to a Riveting Crane Fixer or Nightmist w/ her redirection out.)
What about : "Whenever a Hero Target deals a non-Hero Target damage, this card may also deal Setback 2 damage of the same type and with the same damage modifiers."
This! It's exactly what I was going to suggest while reading this thread.
It feels slightly less elegant to me than changing Friendly Fire to work like Dual Crowbars, but I can't figure out how to word that change, so this may be the best solution.
Yeah, I guess that would work. Hooray for not changing my wording!
I'm new to the forums, and so I apologize if my suggestion goes against an unwritten rule (or a rule I didn't see), but here goes:
What if, instead of errataing specific cards, you were to simply add a rule somewhere along the lines of "If a card interaction would create an infinite loop of repeated actions, each action can occur only once per turn."
i suggest this because a certain other card game with far more complex rules has a similar ruling, involving choosing an arbitrary number of times to repeat the loop. Of course, rewarding the loop isn't the goal here, thus the different wording.
I think the >G crew would rather it never even got that far, but if it was absolutely necessary, I suspect they'd go for a meta-rule like that rather than allow infinite combos.
It's less thematic, but maybe setback should deal himself the damage for FF instead of the other heros? Or just have fixer deal the 2 damage to setback regardless of what jack handle says.
one thing is for sure, infinite loops are not intended.
... that works too. Having Setback deal the damage himself. Actually, I like that better. No errata required.
"Whenever a Hero target deals damage to a non-hero target, Setback may deal himself 2 damage of the same type. If he takes damage this way, add 2 tokens to his unlucky pool."
It does seem like the best solution in terms of any possible future issues that might arise, without nerfing either character.
yeah, and he doesn't have any self-damage buffs, now that they fixed High-Risk...
That is my final decision on it.
I HAVE SPOKEN
Having Setback deal the damage would be mechanically different, though. Self-buffs on the damaging player like the Staff of Ra or Bloodly Knuckles wouldn't apply, which would cause him to take less damage.
Ok. Buffs like Galvanize and Imbued Fire still would, though. The intent of the card isn't for him to take a BUNCH of damage. In fact, 2 was the smallest number that wouldn't get blocked out by having any DR at all. It is thoroughly in line with my intent for the card.
It isn't a type, but it is a modifier that DOES carry through redirection. "Jack-Handled" could likewise.
I LOVE this and actually thought they would do this a long time ago.
Actually I do have him use Crowbars on himself if he has Mantis out and wants to hit the same taget twice, but I don't see him Pipe Wrenching himself too often. Although I'm pretty sure thats why the smiley face.
I do think Jackhandle is the problem. It sounds like interactions with infection may not have been intended, and even if they were it has already caused some unitended interactions (such as this one). Its wording makes it a constant issue to watch for in new cards. Do you really want to have to look at the "Pocket Jack Handle Case" any time you create a card that invovles heroes doing each other damage? Do you want to have to change any future cards that would invovle heroes hitting heroes when you could change one card and not have to worry about it in the future.
When the ruling came out on Crowbars that said that you recalculate bonuses rather then doing the exact same amount regardless of of armor or immunity I thought a Jack Handle fix wasn't far behind.