My camp is "weakened first, then cunning". I put out the math situation previously, but I will posit a new argument:

"Conflicts", RRG Page 9:

While attacking, mission rules are resolved first, followed by effects from the attacker (including figures friendly to him), then effects from the defender (including figures friendly to him).

Weakened would never be applied by a friendly figure, and while it may affect the defender, is a harmful effect, and thus would be considered as an attacker effect. Thus, Weakened would resolve first, cancelling Cunning.

I fail to see why Weaken is an attacker effect .

Even without considering that the defending figure do not cause Weaken to itself, Weaken is a condition present on the defender figure (and most probably not even played on the defender figure by this attacker).

So, for me, the rule you mention imply that the defender has two effects ( Cunning and Weaken ) and has to decide the order they are resolved.

And based on this I can see now, as Norgrath mentioned, that Lock on is an attacker effect and thus, by this same rule, would be applied first, negating Cunning .

Confirmation received from Paul (he didn't elaborate on the why):

"The effect from “Weakened” triggers first, so “Cunning" would not be able to add the block before the evade was cancelled."

Weakened would never be applied by a friendly figure, and while it may affect the defender, is a harmful effect, and thus would be considered as an attacker effect. Thus, Weakened would resolve first, cancelling Cunning.

Status effects would always be applied by the affected figure. They are effects that are attached to that figure. The ability that inflicted the status may have been controlled by the attacker but once the token is assigned it no longer has any connection to the attacker. There is nothing in the game that tracks the source of harmful effects and there are plenty of things that currently cause stun or bleeding on a figure owned by the player that controls the effect. Just because there isn't currently anything similar that inflicts weakened doesn't mean that there couldn't be.

Confirmation received from Paul (he didn't elaborate on the why):

"The effect from “Weakened” triggers first, so “Cunning" would not be able to add the block before the evade was cancelled."

I had received the same response and I send a follow up question asking for a more detail explanation.

I've just receive a response:

Hi Daniel,

Sorry for my delay here. The reason that Weaken triggers first is that conditions are considered mission rules, not effects from the attacker or defender.

Thanks!

Paul Winchester

Creative Content Developer

Fantasy Flight Games

[email protected]

So, to my surprise and shock, conditions are considered mission rules .

Interesting...

Confirmation received from Paul (he didn't elaborate on the why):

"The effect from “Weakened” triggers first, so “Cunning" would not be able to add the block before the evade was cancelled."

I had received the same response and I send a follow up question asking for a more detail explanation.

I've just receive a response:

Hi Daniel,

Sorry for my delay here. The reason that Weaken triggers first is that conditions are considered mission rules, not effects from the attacker or defender.

Thanks!

Paul Winchester

Creative Content Developer

Fantasy Flight Games

[email protected]

So, to my surprise and shock, conditions are considered mission rules .

That is fascinating.