From the rulebook :

1) Actions are declared, put on the "stack" and then resolved in reverse order.

2) Forced are resolved as soon as their conditions are met, and one can't "interrupt" them.

3) Damages are first assigned and then applied (with Counterstrike being an exception with damage applied as soon as assigned).

All this cause me troubles when it comes to Dwarf Ranger (the best Dwarf card printed so far IMHO).

The Dwarf Ranger has a Forced that allows you to deal 1 damage to a target everytime another dwarf goes ot the discard pile. Thanks to the above #2, your opponent can't play Action "in response" to this damage. But since damages are first applied and then resolved, does your opponent may take actions between the resolution of the Forced (assigning 1 damage) and the "appliance" of the damage ?

For example, one of my dwarf died an horrible death, and my Ranger used his Forced to kill off my opponent's Lobber Crew (1/1 orc unit with a sacrifice action). May my opponent in response sacrifice his Lobber Crew or not ?

Same question with the game is in a status where there are no Action Window (consider my dwarf to have been sacrificed to a bloodthirster at the very begining of a turn). In this case, does assigning damage creates a "Action Window" of its own ?

According to Dormouse flowchart, there is no action window at the beginning of the turn but the Dwarf Ranger skill is "Forced" and as you said, forced actions resolve when their conditions are met.

I am not a specialist in W:Invasion but it's just my logical assumption.

Two things :

- Forced effects don't need an action window, they just need their trigger.

- There is always an "action window" between assign and apply damage steps

Cain_hu said:

So, Cloud of Flies (deals 1 uncancellable damage at the start of the turn) should create an "action window" of its own, allowing you to corrupt one of your Clan Rat to boost another skaven in your Kingdom Zone to collect one more resource (just an example of use for such an action window) ?

Cain_hu said:

So you mean that if the "Forced" includes damaging, it also creates an action window? Did I understand correctly? Furthermore, an opponent can trigger a counteraction (according to the fact that an action window has just been created), yep?

Well it's an interesting question, and as your example proves it can be very weird. If I call it back, all damage except Counterstrike works the same like combat damage... and when you receive combat damage you could play actions between assign and apply.

Hovewer if there is NO possible actions between the two then only forced or static effects (like Toughness and Warrior Priest ability) could kick in. That makes Talabheim Detachment, We Need Your Blood, Pilgrimate and several other cards much-much weaker and limited.

Hm... now I'm not feeling sure in the answer any longer. )

I believe that any attempt to respond to a Force Effect dealing damage would constitute as an interrupt of it's ability, and that it needs to resolve fully without interruption as the rules dictate. I see this as being the other exception to the assign/action/apply steps we have in combat and how non-combat damage is handled, with the original exception being Counterstrike.

Oh FAQ, FAQ where art though?

But soft! What light through yonder firewall breaks?
It is the FAQ, and the flowchart is the sun!
Arise, fair flowchart, and kill the oft repeated questions
That make us sick and pale with grief .

I'm still of the opinion that non-combat damage is dealt (so assigned and applied, thus Toughness kicks in), but that there is no Action window between those two steps.

"Outside of combat, some card effects also deal
damage to units or to a player’s capital. When these
effects resolve, this damage is first assigned and then
applied to the target in a manner similar to the way
damage is handled in combat." (p. 17)

This bit is what is the topic of discussion. It doesn't say that you do the full Assign Damage Step (with Action window) and Apply Damage Step (with Action window), just that damage is applied "in a manner similar". Which I read that damage is assigned and applied like it is in the Battlefield Phase (take damage tokens, place then next to the Unit in question, kick in Toughness, apply damage).

Otherwise, you'd get those weird Action windows out of nowhere (like Cloud of Flies). Also would get some funky chains:

Player A: Play Flames of Tzeentch

Player B: Pass (so no response)

Player A: Assign Damage

Player B: Play Action in the "Action window". Which would be inside the resolution of a card's effects! Not to mention that opponent would then be able to respond to this new action, starting yet another stack...

Player A: Apply Damage

But how is the any different than how Counterstrike is handled, where damage is assigned and immediately applied? If there is no Player Action Window between those two steps for non-combat damage then it is handled exactly like Counterstrike (barring Counterstrike not being able to be canceled) and not handled in a similar manner to combat damage.

dormouse said:

I don't know TBH. Just seems there is a lot of possible trouble if there is an Action window in between assign and apply of non-combat damage. What if opponent plays his own non-combat damage card during the Action window?

Player A: Flames

Assign Damage

Player B: Non-combat damage Action, which kicks another assign-action-apply stack

Assign Damage

Player A: Another Flames, kicking in yet another assign-action-apply stack

and so on...

Maybe the idea is just to allow Toughness to work vs non-combat damage, which is assigned and applied, whereas CS does the two "steps" at once?

dormouse said:

The difference is that counterstrike doesn't trigger forced effects that would be triggered when damage is assigned, while normal non-combat damage does trigger those effects. I think Dam is probably right, that there is no action window between assigning and applying NON-COMBAT damage. The rules do not explicitly state that such an action window does exist, the only line that could imply this is "... this damage is first assigned and then applied to the target in a manner similar to the way damage is handled in combat." (p. 17) But I do think that this only means that you put damage tokens next to the cards, effects that trigger when damage is assigned take place, damage is applied, while the action window between those two steps of the battlefield phase is part of the turn structure.

Well, assigned and immediately applied does not automatically preclude causing Forced Effects to trigger when damage is assigned since Forced effects never require an action window to kick in, they self initiate immediately following their trigger being met, which would make this seem that we have a conflict between two resolving effects which is solved by the active player. I don't think we've had a ruling by Nate on this, so it seems like we are doing a lot of assuming.

We just don't know what that phrase is meant to entail, and the opportunity to respond during an action window to an action is always present, regardless of whether it is non-combat damage or not, according to the rules, that is what action chains are all about. If I trigger an effect that does no damage, you can trigger an effect that does no damage before mine resolves, and I can trigger another effect... assigning damage would be considered part of the trigger, and applying damage would be the resolution of the effect. I don't see how that is any harder than any other action chain.

Toughness has nothing to do with the assign damage step. All damage cancel happens at the beginning of the apply damage step. Counterstrike cannot be cancled not because damage is assigned and then immediately applied, but because the rules specifically state that it cannot.

dormouse said:

But according to the rules you can only respond to Actions, not to Forced Effects. An action window between assigning and applying damage would only be relevant to forced effects that inflict damage, because without an action window you would have no way to respond. For actions this problem doesn't exist, because you can always play an action in response.

Yes, that was my whole point. A Forced Effect according to the rules cannot be interrupted (as in the effect is triggered and then resolved, damage is assigned and then applied) which, to me, means it could not be "responded" to with an action, only "answered" with an action if it takes place in a Player Action Window. It makes no difference whether it is damage or not, Forced Effects cannot be interrupted, once triggered the entire effect must resolve.

Non-combat damage that is not from a Forced Effect however has no such exception, and as such would be able to be responded, IOW have an effect triggered, an action taken, before it completely resolves... this would be the player action window in between the assign and resolve damage steps, as I view it. This is all supposition on my part. I have no answers and no guidance by Nate, so I'm trying to reason things out just like everyone else... but if non-combat damage is handled similar to combat damage except Counterstrike the difference between how those are handled is the immediate application of damage. It stands to reason then that non-combat damage as a result of a player action should be handled with a chance to respond during the assign/apply steps. Or at least, that is how I see it.

dormouse said:

Then I simply misunderstood you, sorry.

dormouse said:

But you do not respond to the effects themselves, but to the action, because the effects take place or are resolved only after the action chain has been "built". You simply cannot respond to effect itself. So what im basically saying is: You cannot respond to damage dealt by Forced Effects and you can respond to damage dealt by actions by responding to that action, thus there is no need for an action window between assigning and applying non-combat damage.

That may not be true. With your supposition that there is no action window in between the assign and apply damage steps, at what point is the effect of a damage dealing action interrupted? The playing of the card but before the effect has resolved is how it should be under normal circumstances... which is to say that no damage has been assigned either, we simply have a card that if it is not canceled or its target removed will then assign and then immediately apply damage. That player action window between the two steps is the only thing that would allow for damage to be assigned and then an opportunity for responding actions to happen. Without the damage first being assigned no actions that redirects or reassignment of damage is possible, because there is no damage yet thanks to LIFO.

While that is certainly true, I am not aware of any situation where that would matter, because all actions that reassign or cancel (or do other things with damage) say something to the effect of "The NEXT damage to target unit ...". Like Steel's Bane "Action: Cancel the next 10 damage that would be dealt to one target High Elf unit this turn." Thus it is not necessary to play them once damage has been assigned, instead you play them once your opponent plays an action that deals damage.