Priority of "First damage" vs "HP were reduced"

Other Games SotM Game Engine
101

Foote what you are saying is equivalent to:

Let's move past the first argument, and on the the first argument after that one, and then we'll have the first argument after that argument.

 

You are reapplying the effect.

Once "Next" is used, the timing starts, for Next to carry on past the first instance after next is used, it has to be used again.

If you miss the Bus, you can say "I'll get the next one." because you are applying the effect when you say it.

 

If I say:

"I'll catch the next bus."

And a bus stops and leaves and I don't get on, I missed the Next bus.

If I say:

"That's Okay, I'll catch the next one."

I can do that, because I just reapplied the effect.

It doesn't undo the truth that the first statement "I'll catch the next bus" didn't happen.  It failed.

Only the second statement of next ended up happening.

 

I understand we need an official ruling, and that people might look at this thread and say it has gone on long enough.

But it is staying civil, and we are clarifying the question so we understand what to ask so we get an official answer that resolves the situation.

102

With respect, I don't think you are clarifying. I'm just seeing the same stuff about buses over and over again.

103

Time for official ruling accroding to the app! (sort of, I don't thnk it covers a situation with 2 "first time" which makes no sense to me, but it does clarify things, and 'slightly' changes my stance):

Situation:

Ambuscade has Charged attacks out, Legacy has Lead from the Front, and Ra has Flame Barrier (see where I am going with this...)

First device destroyed causes Amby to target Ra and redirects to Legacy, second device in the same turn targets Ra, activates Flame Barrier...and that's it.

104

Still doesn't change my stance. As Flame Barrier uses "is dealt damage", not "would be dealt damage". Sadly, I think the first "the first time x target would be dealt damage" that is in the game is Mixter Fixer's Driving Mantis. 

105

Good point. I didn’t think of that.

106

Is Mixter Fixer some new DJ?  :grin:

107

The newest Argent Adept alt.

 

Power: Activate a perform text. You and one other target take 2 sonic damage.

108

I figured he was more of a drummer.

109

Here's a question that might help get this answered:

 

Can the First time a target would be "Dealt Damage" also not be the first time a target "would be dealt damage"?

Example:

Guise has Wounding Buffer on him, Total Beefcake in play, and is copying KNYFE's Infiltrate and obfuscate.

An Environment target attempts to deal Guise damage, It is redirecte by either I&O or Beefcake.

A different Environment target attempts to deal Guise damage.

We have 2 options:

1.  It is not redirected, and deals damage, which triggers Wounding Buffer when Guise's HP is reduced, because it is the first time Guise is "Dealt Damage".

2.  It is Redirected by the card that did not redirect the other instance of damage, because it counts as the first time Guise "would be dealt damage".

 

If 1 is true, then we have a case where the first time Guise would be "Dealt Damage" is not the first time Guise "would be dealt damage".  That seems a bit nonsensical to me, and unnecessarily complex, but obviously others don't see it that way.

If 2 is true, then it must be that "Would be dealt damage" and would be "dealt damage" mean the same thing.

 

The interpretation I support would have an effect that triggers when Guise "would be dealt damage the first time" makes exactly 2 checks before activating or not:

1.  Is Guise the target of damage?

2.  Has Guise been dealt damage this turn?

If answer 1 is yes, and answer 2 is no then it is the first time Guise would be dealt damage this turn, no matter where you put the quotes.

Otherwise the list of checks is actually pretty complicated, because we are treating prevention and redirection and reduction and first and next all differently to create a very complicated equation to figure out if effects trigger or not.

Frankly I hope that isn't the case.

 

Does anyone see a problem with this example as a question to pose for a ruling?

110

Can the first time a target "would be dealt damage" also not be "dealt damage"?

111

We already know that answer is yes, that's the whole point of Would Be, it triggers before resolution.  There is no reason to ask Christopher that question.

112

I have created a short summary of this entire thread.

Well, I can't truthfully say I created it.  But you know what I mean!

113

There we have it folks! We can finally move on from this and never speak of buses again.

114

No, seriously Ronway, do you remember the order of operations and how many questions kept coming up because none of the questions we asked were sufficient?

Ha ha, you made a funny, but can we seriously come up with a question that will resolve this issue?

115

Hmm? I am failing to see where the issue still lies. We know "would be dealt damage" can have effects that prevent being "dealt damage". Thus we also know that "would be dealt damage" can occur more frequently than being "dealt damage". So the first time a target is "dealt damage" doesn't have to be the first time a target "would be dealt damage".

 

As for the crazy order of operations thing. I took no part in that, I don't need to think about what I am doing, I just do!

116

The order of operations is wrong.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9h1oqv21Vs

117

Do you see a way that Christopher could answer that question that won't resolve the issue?  Beccause I think it will answer the issue no matter what side you are on.

You don't need to agree with me on how it should resolve, just whether or not answering that question resolves the dispute.

118

That was great.

119

Semantic Satiation

120

Also, for that one last extra bit of mind screw that I don't think we've covered yet:  

If damage is directed at a target, redirected away, and then redirected back to the original target, would this be treated like it was still the first attack, or as if it was a second attack.

 

In other words:  should the following two cases have the same result (for Guise)

1)Guise has Total Beefcake out, and is attacked for 5 damage.  That damage is redirected to Iron Legacy, who redirects it back to Guise.  

2)Guise has Total Beefcake out, and is attacked for 5 damage.  He is then attacked for another 5 damage.