sequencing of before range effects

jamesatzephyr wrote:

ReverendRevolver wrote:

Honestly, and im not even remotely joking here, a "chart" for conmbat timing may be appropriate.

See: vekn.net/complete-rules-reference

If there are clarifications you'd like to suggest for any steps in it, suggesting them here/to Pascal may help.

Yea, think that, but as a mercury thermometer turned on its side. I may draft one and send it to Pascal. Optimally, it could have all cards played in eaxh part linked, but for now Ill work on the thing itsself.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

In the situation where both vampires have applied a damage dealing effect to each other, such as both of them playing Outside the Hourglass? No, we absolutely do not agree on that.

The damage has been applied. There are no existing rulings that cause it to vanish after being applied. The Alpha Glint precedent implies that if there is pending damage applied in combat - such as Outside the Hourglass, followed by Alpha Glint in the "prevent damage" step - you wrap up the resolution of that damage before combat is allowed to end. I see no reason, based on existing rulings, why mutual OtH play would cause damage to vanish.

Here's a (to me) more convincing/relevant precedent than Alpha Glint for when damage has been applied, but we haven't yet done damage resolution, but some effect is trying to terminate combat - such as your opponent not being ready.


Normal situation - just to clarify the baseline:

Two vampires: A lots of blood. B has Thaumaturgy, is on full blood. Doesn't matter which is acting, for our purposes.

Choose strike:
A strikes for hand damage.
B strikes with Theft of Vitae.
Strike resolution:
A and B's strikes resolve simultaneously, which means:
A applies 1 damage to B (which will be handled in damage resolution).
B steals 1 blood from A. So one counter moves from A to B. This happens before damage resolution. Because B is on full blood, this takes B over capacity, and it drains off.
Damage resolution:
B has 1 damage to handle, so B can play prevent. But nothing happens. So now B heals the damage, and ends up on one blood below capacity.



The situation closer to duelling OtH:
A has one blood on him and Anathema. B has Thaumaturgy and lots of blood. Doesn't matter who's acting.

Choose strike:
A strikes for hand damage.
B strikes with Theft of Vitae.
Strike resolution:
A and B's strikes apply simultaneously, which means:
A applies 1 damage to B.
B steals 1 blood from A, moving the counter from B to A. At this point, A is empty. Anathema's card text would trigger: "If the vampire with this card is reduced to zero blood in combat, he or she is burned,"
However, the damage that has been dealt to B is still handled, before combat ends. It doesn't just disappear.

[LSJ 200704009]

LSJ wrote:

> So both strikes resolve, Ulugh Beg goes up to 12 blood (but since his
> capacity is only 10 the excess spills off) and Hector Soza inflicts 4
> damage on Ulugh.

... so Hector, who had only two blood to begin with, is now empty, so he burns
(and pool is awarded). [because of Anathema - jamesatzephyr

But Ulugh still has damage to deal with.

So continue...

> Now we handle damage, Ulugh's strike didn't inflict any damage so
> Hector doesn't have to worry about going to torpor. Hector's strike
> on the other hand inflicted 4 damage which Ulugh must handle or he is
> going to go to torpor.
> The easiest way for most vampires to handle damage is to burn blood to
> heal it. So Ulugh Beg would burn 4 blood to heal 4 damage.

... so Ulugh burns 4 blood to heal the damage, leaving him at 6. As combat ends
(since Hector is no longer ready).

In my opinion, it all depends on if the damage is applied in series or parallel, and by whon/what.

James suggests in applying the damage in parallel, creating a de facto surrogate for strike resolution in pre-range. I don't believe the two steps are analogous and don't believe playing a second damage packet in pre-range creates an analog for strike resolution.

I believe that one of two other situations should be applied. Either 1) the damage must be addressed in the order created or 2) the damage must be addressed as it would be handled by transfer of the impulse.

If the damage is applied and addressed in the order played, the blocking vampire is obliged to prevent/heal damage first, since the acting vampire created it. He is free to play effects as desired before actually preventing/healing damage. But all damage created in the package must be handled at once and he must handle it before other damage would be handled.

Yes, it smacks of creating a stack, but I view it as simply resolving all parts of the OtH created by the acting vampire before allowing creation of a second damage handling process.

Assuming that damage does indeed send the blocker to torpor, I find it hard to believe his OtH (played before damage handling) can actually cause damage.

Remember OtH is minion-inflicted. Personally, I can't reconcile a vampire in torpor successfully inflicting damage on a ready minion. If OtH were not minion-inflicted, I could see the acting minions handling the damage - in the end of round step, after combat ended from the blocker going to torpor.

I guess that instead of comparing the situation to strike resolution, I compare it to trying to Govern with your last blood, but playing an Elder Impersontion during the action. The effect fizzles.

In each situation, the minion in question fails to meet requirements for the effect to occur despite the card being properly declared. For GtA, it effect fails from having no blood when the effect is to occur. For OtH the effect fails because the minion playing it can't inflict damage from torpor.

Regards.

TryDeflectingThisGrapple wrote:

Assuming that damage does indeed send the blocker to torpor, I find it hard to believe his OtH (played before damage handling) can actually cause damage.

Remember OtH is minion-inflicted. Personally, I can't reconcile a vampire in torpor successfully inflicting damage on a ready minion.

I think you're still applying your (wrong) interpretation about how the damage is not inflicted when it's inflicted - see also your previous statements about how you didn't believe there's a damage resolution in pre-range, and that there's some floating damage and you're not in damage resolution (when you actually are).

Outside the Hourglass deals damage when played (and not cancelled). The card has been successfully played? The damage is dealt. The vampire is not inflicting damage from torpor. They've already inflicted it to you. Then they were sent to torpor by your damage. But they've already dealt the damage to you. That damage does not disappear. Just like it doesn't disappear when the vampire is unreadied by Anathema.

TryDeflectingThisGrapple wrote:

I guess that instead of comparing the situation to strike resolution, I compare it to trying to Govern with your last blood, but playing an Elder Impersontion during the action. The effect fizzles.

Again, you're ignoring how OtH works. You play it, it resolves, applying damage to the opponent. The reason Govern the Unaligned works differently is because it has split play and resolution (like actions and strikes generally do). Other cards don't fizzle in the same way. (Strikes can fizzle due to no longer having a legal target, though you've already paid the cost.)

TryDeflectingThisGrapple wrote:

In each situation, the minion in question fails to meet requirements for the effect to occur despite the card being properly declared.

The effect has already occured. It dealt damage to you when played. Same as Pulled Fangs does. Same as Twisting the Knife does. Play the card, inflict the damage. Now handle the damage.

Neither of you are allowed to play Othg combat decks at the NAC, assuming you will both be there.

JUST IN CASE

Even better RevRev, just ban OtH... clearly it is broken. We'll just put it on a shelf and Ben Peal can get around to errataing the card, Pascal can rewrite the rules and in 5 years we can release it as a brand new card!!!