Poison. According to the read on the card. It appears poison only causes damage upon initial infection (if the lore symbol is rolled). However... what is the point of ever removing the poison marker? At least for the tutorial setup of the game, I didn't see any need for the poison marker or even spending lore to remove it since damage can only happen when lore is rolled at the moment of being poisoned.

For knowing the pros&cons of the poison maker I suggest to read this thread:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/226226-unit-combat-roll-statistics-work-in-progress/

In longer games it's pretty useful - the last time I played against an Uthuk archer-based army I nearly lost. I just made a win because I draw the right lore card in the last moment gave me the chance to win with much since I killed his three most dangerous units with one archer unit and the roc. But without the lore card my army was to damaged to survive another attack.

damage can only happen when lore is rolled at the moment of being poisoned.

I think you're misunderstanding it. You can commit Lore to deal 1 damage AS LONG AS a unit stays Poisoned, not when you've just rolled it.

And it could be pretty handy for tougher units, such as Ironbound, Golems, and Legends.

damage can only happen when lore is rolled at the moment of being poisoned.

I think you're misunderstanding it. You can commit Lore to deal 1 damage AS LONG AS a unit stays Poisoned, not when you've just rolled it.

And it could be pretty handy for tougher units, such as Ironbound, Golems, and Legends.

Nah, he is alright - look at the Reference Book, Poison:

• If a unit becomes poisoned during a combat [lore] results produced during that roll may be committed to cause one damage each.

If you don't believe me - take a look here (p.7):

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/56/4a/564af135-a274-4e43-8ccf-9db70d41f02b/bt01_reference_book_web.pdf

Now you're misunderstanding me
My point is that you can commit the Lore to inflict damage BOTH in the same combat roll AND later on as long as the unit stays poisoned

The quote you are citing just confirms the first part of that statement

True

I think you guys are starting to see why I'm confused

If a unit becomes poisoned during a combat roll, <lore> results produced during that roll may be committed to cause one damage each.

Now, according to proper English (which by no means am I an expert, but I do have a college education). When you use terms like "that" or "it", you are usually referring to the preceding subject reference. In this case, the subject reference is the "combat roll", of which the qualifying term is "if a unit becomes poisoned during [a combat roll]".

This is where my confusion came in. Logically, it makes sense to allow future lore to count as damage [if a unit is carrying the token], but the way the card reads... it sounds like it can only happen during the combat roll the unit is poisoned on.

I think the sentence should have been rewritten.

If a unit is poisoned then during a combat roll, <lore> results produced during that roll may be committed to cause one damage each.

It is not what the card reads - it is what reference rule sheet reads. The card reads that you can commit a Lore result to cause one damage to a Poisoned unit.

Your logical pitfall is that you think that the clause you cite describes ALL use cases. It is not.

In fact you have to read ALL OF THE PARAGRAPH completely. Thus, the first sentence states:

"When a unit is resolving an attack against a poisoned unit, each Lore result produced during a combat roll may be committed to cause one damage. "

The bullet point you cited is there just to resolve a single very specific case, and you've treated it as a whole rule.

In fact you have to read ALL OF THE PARAGRAPH completely. Thus, the first sentence states:

"When a unit is resolving an attack against a poisoned unit, each Lore result produced during a combat roll may be committed to cause one damage. "

Where is this stated? That would have cleared it up for me.

I pulled the prior quote from the reference sheet (which mirrors the card).

derp... nevermind, at head of poison section on reference sheet.

Thank you very much!

Np.

Actually, the card has the text closer to that first clause, as the one you've cited is just a very special case.