Does this card:

1: check to see if any units are corupted and then deal 2 damage to them and 1 to everything else simultaneously.

or

2: deal 1 damage to everything. and then check if anything is corupted and deal 1 damage to those corupted units.

i always assumed 1: but now we have a player saying it works like 2: because of the period between the two sentences on the card. And yes he is trying to trigger the shrine to nurgle inbetween the two sentences timing.

chaosvt said:

Nonsense. Effect must be read as a whole.

Well actually the card does neither 1 or 2, it checks all cards for state of corruption and then assigns damage of the appropriate amount to each card simultaneously. The effect on a card must happen in full, these are not too separate abilities, but one ability with two slightly different effects.

now im not trying to be difficult, but i need a clear explanation to some points.

1: The card never says corupted units take 2 damage, it says everything gets deal 1 and corupted get dealt an additional 1. This "additional" wording seems poor as my player insists that means 1 and then another 1, not 2 at once.

2: Why do the effects on a card have to happen in full before anything else can react? Is this in the rules or this just a logical assumption?

Hi,

These are two different effetcs on a single card, which happens after each other... it's obvibius from the card text.

1. Each unit in play takes 1 damage.

2. Corrupted units take an additional damage.

It's different than "deal 1 damage to uncorrupted units and 2 to corrupted units" because :

1. Even one point Toughness completly negates it's effect, even if the unit is already corrupted

2. Nurgle's Shrine

It's also the same for Nurgle's Sorceror ability. (hey, these cards are meant to be used together...) By the way, if it would happen otherwise the card would be nearly worthless... what would be strange in this well balanced game.

I hope we get some kind of FAQ soon, because these questions reappear in every week.

Don't agree.

The fact that we have 2 separate statements doesn't mean necessarily we have 2 different effects.

The "second" part is an "added" effect, yes, but not separate, cause it only refers to a game status.

1- 1 Damage to each Unit.

2- 2 Damage if the Unit is corrupted.

Your interpretation is correct for cards where the second part is conditional (where you have, i.e., the example of the Word THEN and so on)...But even in that case, the card has to be resolved as a whole before other effects can kick in...

Even if the rules don't say anything about it, I'm TOTALLY sure that you can't play ANYTHING "during" an effect's resolution. You can "interrupt" it playing an action in response, as usual...But you CAN'T put ANY effect in between the 2 statements of an effect.

It would be a non-sense from a logical point of view and even MORE absurd in a LIFO prespective.

Think about "Brigh Wizard".

"Quest. Action: Spend 2 resources to target the effects of an Action just triggered by another unit or support card. Cancel the effects of that Action (limit once per turn).

Do you think you can play something in between the "target part" and the "cancel part"?

I think the intention is clear (do 1 damage to uncorrupted, and 2 damage to corrupted) but the wording is UNINTENTIONALLY AMBIGUOUS.

A simple FAQ will clarify this, but both arguments are legit, based on the limitations of the wording of the card.

both sides can continue to debate, but only a FAQ or other Nate/Eric ruling will resolve the problem, so resist the urge to continue repeating the same points.

Hey, mate, we're repeating what we think AS WELL AS you're repeating what you think.

There's no urge, man.

I guess I've the same right to say you're wrong as you do...or not?

I post what i think is right, as you do.

And...

There's one simple thing to do, if you don't like people tryin' to explain their pov (maybe repeating, sometimes): write to Nate.

Anyway, I don't find ANY repeating process in this thread.

Cain_hu said:

So, "Infiltrate!" first effect include two different effects, right?

1. At the beginning of your turn, discard the top X cards from each opponent's deck.

Now, how can you perform this "effect"? Please tell me. It is obvious for you, right?

2. X is the number of resource tokens on this quest.

Now, this "effect" is kinda weird.

My bad, I should have been more specific rather than using short hand. No card can truly interrupt another card in this game. A card effect is triggered. Before the card effect resolves another card effect can be used in response, and so on and so forth. Card effects are then resolved in a Last In First Out manner. When a cards effect resolves the entire effect resolves. Since the first opportunity for a Forced effect or Constant effect to resolve is following the resolution of an effect, Nurgle's Pestilence in effect, assigns 1 damage twice to a corrupted unit before any other damaging cancel effect or keyword has an opportunity to resolve. Since both damage are assigned in the same step Toughness can only cancel one of them, just like when multiple units are contributing 1 damage to a single unit with toughness in combat. The same is true for any card that looks for damage to be dealt, like Shrine to Nurgle. Shrine to Nurgle cannot corrupt a character that has been hit with Nurgle's Pestilence and then cause NP to now hit it for a second point of damage.

DB_Cooper said:

My post came out too bossy. My apologies

What I meant to say was

sometimes both arguements have a point, and the text on the cards and rulebook doesnt provide a definitive answer (like, can damage be applied to a burning area). In those situations, there is no "correct" answer, and so both sides can argue till the end of time, but a final answer will not be found until provided by the powers that be (eric and nate).

I have just noticed the same debates reoccuring again and again, and they go through the same thought process and points and counterpoints, and still find no conclusion until eric or nate finally say this is the way it is. But by all means, post your opinions or read the old posts.

mateooo said:

I'm happy to discuss...It's a good reason to check the forums

Anyway, I accept the apologies.

Now, I CAN'T understand designer's intention, nor see beyond the rules...But I insisted because I think that (ignoring BAD wording issues I agree with) an effect has to resolve completely, even if it contains different statements...Otherwise, it would be pretty "un-predictable" and out of control from a "TIMING" prespective, don't you think?

Nate has answered two questions in a row today, maybe he is working on the fact. Send it to him and see if you get a response.

my bet... 2 damage to corrupted, one damage to noncorrupted. No interupting in the middle of a card. no double toughness cancelation for a corrupted unit.

just makes sense

I'm positive you are correct there, but anyone who doubts it should pass it on to Nate.