When X=0, are modifiers still applied? I wasn't sure.
For example, Drawn to the Flame with 0 villain ongoings in play, but Ra still has say, the Staff of Ra and Imbue Fire.
I am curious about this too, but that would mean the Pterodactyl Attack could deal damage before it steals any Equipment with an Obsidian Field or three in play.
(However, it would also make Drawn to the Flame actually DO something against The Ennead!)
I would say it does, and it can. But I'm not in any way shape or form official.
You do 0 damage. but if your damage is increased by 1, then you do 0+1 which is 1.
I would say that zero is a modifiable damage amount. Damage is only ignored when the end result is zero or less, not at the point at which it would become zero or less (which is required given the "static" nature of damage modification). Thus, with the newer "simplified" X based damage mechanics, where X can equal zero, damage modifiers can put them above zero, as opposed to the original (and I believe still active in some Rook City cards) "for each" based attacks, where if the for each count is zero, then there is nothing to happen.
Good news! You are all correct!
In general, proper algebra is correct in SotM.
Oh, so Drawn to the Fire + imbued fire is actually useful? Neat! I'd been playing it the other way; if it started as 1 and then was reduced to 0, then it could be brought back up, but if it STARTED at 0, then it was none. That's good to know I was wrong, in this case.
Yup! Heck, Drawn to the Flame plus Imbued Fire plus a Galvanize and an Inspiring Presence and an Obsidian Field or two is pretty ridiculous!
…I really need to go beat the tar out of The Ennead now!
This would also mean when the villain has a card that destroys environment cards and there are none to destroy, they would still do damage if they had some modifiers.
True. I've always played that if you got a vat explosion in Pike but there aren't any vats in play, that maths out to be 0 + 3 = 3 damage.
And that is correct!
hm.. lets push this one a little further. So does this logic hold for other things as well?
Suppose you are playing a card out of turn, maybe from:
1. Atlantean Font of Power
2. Set's Incapacitated ability.
3. Alacritous Subdominant / Inventive Preperation
There are probably more of these... other hero incap powers..
Anyway, suppose the card that is played is Flame Spike or Smite the Transgressor. May that hero then immidiately use a power?
Number of powers you can use this turn= 0+1=1?
Yep! This situation comes up a lot with Argent Adept, who will let other heroes play cards and powers on his turn.
In fact, we had a situation in which Argent Adept had Mr. Fixer play a card during Argent Adept's turn. He played Overdrive, which allowed MF to use his Strike power twice on this turn - AA's turn. Because of the wording, he actually got to play it twice - it doesn't say "one additional time", it says "twice"! 
It's important to note the wording on the cards though. Since they do say "this turn" it looks like you could use a power the turn the card is played, but powers are also supposed to be used during your power phase. Argent Adept's card that allows others to use a power says "use a power now".
Not sure if it's been answered elsewhere but since it's come up, it would be nice to get an official ruling on this here.
It seems that the consensus has been that when a card says that you can use an extra power this turn, if it is currently that player's turn, then their power phase has +1 power, and if it is not currently that player's turn, then that player gets to use a power once all effects of that card are resolved (not counting any future triggers). It would be a more consistant ruling that, in the latter case, you don't get the benifet of the additional power use, but I believe it would be a very unpopular ruling, and maybe even against the original intents of the game designer (though, I believe he later finds that the letter of the cards sometimes doesn't match his original intent, but then "changes" his original intent to better support the letter of the cards, because who can say that wasn't his intention to begin with?).
Actually, I think the player gets to use a power during the current player's power phase. This is a subtle difference and usually doesn't matter (e.g., it matters if the current player is playing multiple cards), but it's consistent: powers are played during the power phase and cards are played during the play phase (unless something says something different, such as Argent Adept's performances that allow others to play cards "now").
And that's fine for the Argent Adept's turn. How would you rule differently if Fixer pulled Overdrive for Atlantean Font of Power or Incapacitated Set?
Great question!
Overdrive says "this turn" - it doesn't say when in the turn. So I suppose in those situations, it's just sometime before the end of that turn.
It’s not especially elegant, but it’s clean. The rules say (on page 1, under Game Overview) “Whenever a card says that you can do something that isn’t provided for in the basic rules, the card is correct. Always follow the wording of the cards fully…” I think this is one of those situations where we just read the card and do what it says.
Same thing! Boom - two strikes!
I made a specific thread about Overdrive out-of-turn and was directed here (thanks Rabit!). I still have some questions about the way that timing works on Overdrive, but it might be better to keep the discussion of it out of this thread, since it doesn't really have anything to do with x=0.