Ambuscade and Akash'bhuta introduce targets with effects which trigger "When this card is destroyed". In the case of Akash'bhuta you want to make sure the effect goes off, in the case of Ambuscade you would rather it didn't.
1) If Haka destroys one of those targets and places it under Savage Mana (and Savage Mana was in play first), does it prevent the effect from going off? What about when he destroys it the second time?
2) For the limb which also reduces damage to Akash'bhuta, is that still in effect when the limb is destroyed?
3) While resolving these effects, is the destroyed card still a target which can take damage? (currently, I think this only matters for a strange corner case with two sonic mines and damage redirection)
1) Destroyed is destroyed is destroyed, it doesn't matter where it goes after it is destroyed it still triggers any effects that would trigger on its destruction, whether from itself or another card in play.
Destroying it a second time? Given that Bunker benefits from the destruction of Enemy cards twice for the Ammo Drop/Savage Mana combo I can't see a reason why the villains wouldn't benefit twice also.
2) No. If it was a triggered/voluntary effect that lasted e.g. "until the beginning of the villain turn" then the effect would linger until the relevant time even if the card were destroyed. If it has an ongoing effect then it only lasts so long as the card is in play.
3) When you destroy a card don't you move it to the discard pile/under Savage Mana/wherever before moving on to the next instance of damage inflicted? Even with multiple selection in a single line don't you pick the targets first and then resolved the damage to each target individually? If so then it's not even on the table anymore and couldn't be targeted, if not then I have no clue.
Speaking of edge cases....one of the fun things you can do with Sonic Mines and Haka is to use Rampage, choose the order such that you damage the Sonic Mine last, and then it prevents you from damaging your allies :)
Well true, normally I would say a destroyed card is gone and can't be dealt damage. But normally I would also say you can't be dealt damage by a destroyed card (for example omnitron's oneshots and components after he is destroyed). However Sonic Mine clearly does deal damage after being destroyed, which is what made me wonder if there was some gap between 'destroyed' and 'leaves play' that these effects were acting in.
Well, one thing is that this card does say that cards that have been dealt damage by Sonic Mine cannot themselves deal damage until the next villain turn, so it would not be possible for, say, a Combat Stance to attempt to deal damage in response because either the damage was reduced to zero or redirected, in which case Combat Stance wouldn't trigger, or damage was dealt but Combat Stance has no effect as The Wraith can no longer deal damage. You are correct though, given that when all other cards are destroyed, damage stops (except in this case for some reason) does mess up my sense of logic with the game.
Based on some previous rulings with Throat Jab and Backlash field, I would assume that sonic mine first deals all its damage, with all the responses to each damage after each one, then you resolve the next line and the targets which were dealt damage cannot deal damage until the start of the villain turn.
However, combat stance doing additional damage to an already destroyed target is rather pointless anyway. The edge case I was getting at is if you have two sonic mines, redirect damage from the first to destroy the second, then redirect damage from the second to the first. The second should fully resolve rendering the first unable to deal further damage when we get back to it trying to hit the other hero targets. It is a bizaar case to set up, and it really only saves you the damage of one mine since the second still goes on to attack the other hero targets. If the damage from the mine immediately renders a target unable to deal damage though, then just redirecting damage from one mine to itself would do the trick (if that is allowed).
Yes, damage can be redirected back to the source of that damage. I believe that at the point the damage has been dealt to a target, that target is now unable to deal damage. The question still is if the "destroyed" sonic mine is allowed to take damage. I'll go with the idea that this event triggers prior to the act of destruction rather than after. Can a card that has 0 or fewer HP take more damage? and would it result in it's immediate destruction? Based on my previous argument of what 5 or more damage in a single turn means, I'll say that a card can only be a candidate for destruction at the first point it's HP becoems 0. Can a target with 0 HP actually take damage? This becomes interesting with The Matriarch advanced. Personaly, I would like to believe that a target can actually take more damage than it has HP, and if it becomes less than 0, then becomes 0, and, if allowed, becomes a candidate for destruction.
That would give credit to idea that the target has the option to deal damage before the target is no longer allowed to deal damage. The difference (which may not matter) is that Stun Bolt specifically says the target cannot deal damage, whereas Sonic Mine says targets that have been dealt damage cannot deal damage. Whether that statement is interactive or reactive is whether or not the target dealt damage can still deal reactive damage.