If a unit w/ Sadistic Mutation attacks and fails to deal any damage due to cancelation effects such as Toughness or contested stronghold will the mutation still trigger or would it react the same way as if the mutation were attached to a unit with power 0.

TheGreenKnight0 said:

I think it would needs to get at least 1 dmg through for SM to kick in. "Deal damage" includes both assign and apply damage steps, so for example Toughness will kick in.

If it is that way, how can know the source if damage is taken out of a damage pool which is builded when I interpret this rule right: "each player counts the number of power icons in the the units he controls that are participating in the battle: this is the amount of damage he will be inflicting upon his oppenents."

In that case as long as a single damage is recorded then sadistic mutation would kick in.

Harliquine said:

Unless, of course, you have a way to reduce that particular unit's power to 0 in which case its obvious it did not deal any damage.

After damage has been assigned it doesn't matter even if all the damage are cancelled in the assign/apply phase, SM still works imo. The unit which it has been assigned to just has to contribute to the damage pool atleast 1 damage, doesn't matter if it actually does any damage. There is no tracing back who contributed what damage token if for example two units with different (or just 2 SM units) contribute 1 damage each and one of the damages is resisted (for example with thoughness); they both work. But if Demoralize (-2 power) is played in the declare attackers / defenders phase to a <2 power unit without any buffs except SM it won't proc, it's like he's not fighting at all (too demoralized to fight ).

This is not an official note, just a matter of logic which I think is right. The wording is just weird so I just think "dealing" damage in this case as like dealing cards in a poker game, doesn't matter if you threw the cards away or burn them or whatever; cards have still been dealt.

No, damage must be applied to be dealt, and damage assigned but canceled was never even placed on a unit. SM cannot trigger if it's unit did no damage. Just because you are totalling up the damage to figure out how you want to assign it does not mean it becomes generic damage. The fact that we have cards that specifically check to see if a card did or did not do damage indicates that we must keep track of it. It doesn't particularly weaken SM because most of the time since when you have a choice you would put SM on a unit with 2 or more power and spread that power among as many defenders as possible to ensure that at least one point sees its way through.

Someone is going to have to show precisely where the rules state that damage that fails to be applied equals damage being dealt for SM to be able trigger. There is nothing in the ruels to support that definition of damage, but we only have to look at the explanation of Toughness and canceling damage to see that damage assigned is not placed on any unit, and that canceled damage is removed before it every reaches the unit.

dormouse

I think you are wrong in this one. We don't take note that which unit is deals damage where... it's against the rules as written. (see example of play on page 13)

So if even one damage is dealt (in apply damage step) the SM effect kicks in, if the unit contributed one or more power. Which gaves as another question : what if there are multiple SM in play ?

I think it's very simple:

1. Damage is assigned

2. Damage is applied

Damage can be canceled between steps 1 and 2. Sadistic mutation only works if the unit deals damage. This means that, at least, 1 damage must remain "uncancelled" when damage is applied.

From the rulebook page 16

"When a unit is gaining Toughness from multiple sources, the numerical effects stack on top of each other."

If we did keep track of damage inflicted by individual units during combat, wouldnt a unit with toughness trigger from each unit that produces damage in combat, since toughness stacks as it cancels damage from different sources? For example, if 10 different units defended against the Dwarf king and each assigned all of its damage to the king, wouldnt the Dwarf king's toughness trigger 10 times (for -3 damage canceling) for each SOURCE of damage?

Wouldnt 10 different units inflicting damage in combat be considered multiple sources? Well, clearly this is not the case, so it is NOT unreasonable to consider that all of the damage inflicted by the 10 units in combat are pooled into a "generic damage pool" in order to make sense of the situation

what happens if 2 units attack a unit with 1 toughness, and one of those attacking units has SM?

can the defender CHOOSE to cancel the SM point of damage with the toughness ability, and apply the NON SM damage point?

this is a very critical ruling, since it does effect Sadistic mutation so much, and I think that the rulebook does not allow a definitive interpretation, requiring a FAQ clarification.

Whats the Nate/Eric ruling on this?

I don't see anything critical, since Toughness is not optional and clearly triggers at any time a Unit with toughness is assigned damage (before it applies).

Rulebook, pag. 16

" Whenever a unit with the Toughness keyword is assigned
damage, the Toughness keyword cancels its numeric
value of that damage before the damage is applied."

Damage done during combat is assigned ALL AT ONCE (attackers does it first). It's not a matter of "sources", but a matter of timing.

10 Units inflicting 10 damage (1 each) trigger toughness just ONCE. So, i.e.:

- ATTACK: 10 units with 1 power

- DEFEND: 1 Unit with TOUGHNESS 1

- RESULT: Defender Unit "cancels" 1 damage, remaining 9 apply.

Sadistic Mutation is a SEPARATE effect, which occurs SEPARATELY from the normal ASSIGN damage step. It's a FORCED, thus a card effect, THUS another "trigger" for Toughness.

Again, it's a matter of timing.

He is more talking about toughness preventing the damage that would trigger sadistic mutation, than the damage that would be dealt from sadistic mutation.

If the player with toughness would be able to choose the damage, that is prevented and if we have damage from single units to on or multiply targets, one could targetly prevent the sm damage.

Just because damage is counted up and then applied doesn't mean that each damage can't remember where it came from. I don't see anything that implies this, on P13 or otherwise.

It obviously matters for cards like this. And once we know it matters, I don't see any reason why Toughness wouldn't get to choose which damage gets canceled. There are no restrictions to it (such as there seem to be with Contested Fortress), so I'd assume the owner of the ability gets to choose.

Nope.

I quoted the rules to be read.

"Whenever a unit with the Toughness keyword is assigned
damage, the Toughness keyword cancels its numeric
value of that damage before the damage is applied."

There's no "MAY CHOOSE", "CAN" or something implying a choice for the owner. It just says "CANCELS" that's pretty obvious.

Anyway...Another specific, pretty clear Quote...

"[...] At this point, effects like Toughness (see Toughness, page 16) kick
in and cancel damage before it reaches the target.
Any damage tokens thus cancelled are returned to
the pool in the centre of the play area."

Again, no signs of choices.

And then...When the rules talk about assigned damage, it says that you can "over-assign" damage to a Unit with Toughness...

That's because, while assigning damage, you have a POOL of damage to be assigned among defenders (before assignin' it to the capital)...You don't have (guessing numbers) 2 + 2 + 3 damage to assign...You have a total amount of 7 damage to assign.

Otherwise, that statement would have been a non sense.

Get X damage, divide it among defenders/capital, over-assign it for Toughness if you wish...THEN, Toughnes kicks in, cancellin' the assigned damage before it applies.

After that, if OTHER effects assign other damage, Toughness is there to kick in once per source...But EVEN if, for game/triggers purposes, X Units are dealing damage "separately" (for triggered effects or the like), COMBAT damage is a POOL of damage.

But if that's the case, then Sadistic Mutation simply doesn't work - there would be no way to tell if a given unit dealt damage or not. There must be some way to differentiate what damage comes from what source. Again, just because it goes into one common pool doesn't mean it all becomes genericized at that point. If I put two red Skittles and a green Skittle into my hand, they don't stop being red and green just because I have 3 Skittles.

Assuming that we have to tell that damage is identifiable and different, then whether it uses the word or not Toughness HAS to be able to choose which damage is selected, somehow. Or, I suppose it must automatically work against the initial damage applied, in which case your opponent would get to decide which flavor of damage gets through.

I have hard time believing that the damage tokens are still tied to units after they've been counted up and are ready to to be assigned. It would overly complicate the game without giving anything necessary. I think SM works after combat as long as the unit it was attached to contributed to the damage pool. I love this game but damnit how bad has the descriptions in cards been written, was this game rushed out or what?

To be more precise, if the damages were tied to units wouldn't there been a mention in the rulebook? I mean it would be a big part of combat and people would have to always say what unit does damage to which units etc.

Buhallin said:

If you had read ALL my previous thread, you'd have noticed I said that FOR GAME PURPOSES/TRIGGERS source distinction DOES matter...I don't say that every unit disappears and become a BIG monster...I just said that you COUNT ALL DAMAGE as a Whole, than threat each Unit as a separate entity for other game purposes.

YOU DON'T choose what damage you "cancel" with Toughness...you simply CANCEL DAMAGE EQUAL TO THE TOUGHNESS NUMBER (from rules).

From Nate:

"Damage has been dealt once it has been added to the damage pool.

The damage dealt by the Sadistic Mutation is applied before proceeding to the player action window that occurs between assigning combat damage (which triggers the Forced on Sadistic Mutation) and applying combat damage."

----------------------

So after a unit with SM contributes to the damage pool the 1 damage from SM is then assigned and applied separately from combat.

Thanks for the answer... totally different than the way damage is handled by Stubborn refusal. I'm thoroughly surprised by that clarification/ruling, but the important thing is that we have it.

Dunno, stubborn refusal has a good and clear description and is in no way comparable with SM imo.

sounds like SM is not at all affected by toughness? please correct me if Im wrong.

that ruling simplifies things a lot.

so we have a definition for "dealt damage"

thanks all

Actually, reading the rules, I noticed (too late, my fault) that the DEAL verb is used to describe the damage even before it's actually inflicted (you find it several times, especially in the Battlefield section...It talks about "DEAL" during Assign step)...

SO, with this new point of view and ruling, all this make more sense, finally...

About TOUGHNESS...Toughness WORKS any time befor the unit is applied damage...So:

- Assign damage;

- SM kicks in and you deal 1 damage, let's say to the Unit with toughness (cause you're crazy at the moment );

- Now, BY RULES, each time damage is dealt, it's ASSIGNED/APPLY in the same manner it happens during Combat...So: ASSIGN the SM damage...take actions...APPLY SM damage (Toughness kicks in and cancels it)...

- Then, the play proceeds with the opportunity to take actions...

- Damage is applied (Toughness, if any, kicks in as usual).

Hope I explained it well...

Anyway, ruling's pretty clear now.

Hrm, I thought it had been established that damage was considered dealt when it was applied, not when it was assigned. That could change the effectiveness of quite a few abilities.

Lafi said:

No, the question about Stubborn Refusal was whether you could move damage before it had been applied. The answer had been no. You can only move damage after it has been applied to a character. The reasoning sounded like Nate was saying assigned damage was potential damage which would contradict, at least by implication, that damage is dealt during the assign phase, since if the damage had been dealt logically it should be able to be moved.

I should probably not be three or four beers in when I'm trying to talk to Nate about rules clarifications. LOL.