Is it possible to use Major Derlin's effect to reduce damage granted by a crit effect?

VS OR



I'm not sure where this stands from a rules basis but Derlin sounds like he could negate one damage of the two delivered with ACMs and possibly the faceup dealt by APTs.

Will one of the rules gurus enlighten me?

Its a contentous issue (in regards with TF:A as well).

As I read it:

Previously, the answer was a Flat-out, 100%, no . As the Calculate Damage was done separate to any critical effect. Things were nice, clean and simple. We had a Critical effect, and then we had a "Suffer Damage" Sub-Step.

Then the Fire Control Team ruling in the FAQ has tossed that into disarray, by linking the "First Damage card suffered this turn" of the default critical effect to the Critical Card delivered by "APTs." Because that means the Damage Card from APTs was Damage.

So the answer to that is maybe .

I still lean on the side of not, as APTs is a Damage Card, and not Damage . Specifically different.

With ACMs, they do not come under "Total Damage" (which is why the Brace Token does not effect them - as per FAQ too), so I'm inclined to say that it shouldn't effect ACMs either (and neither should Bright Hope)...

But I'm sure someone will argue it.

Just ask FFG.

36 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Its a contentous issue (in regards with TF:A as well).

As I read it:

Previously, the answer was a Flat-out, 100%, no . As the Calculate Damage was done separate to any critical effect. Things were nice, clean and simple. We had a Critical effect, and then we had a "Suffer Damage" Sub-Step.

Then the Fire Control Team ruling in the FAQ has tossed that into disarray, by linking the "First Damage card suffered this turn" of the default critical effect to the Critical Card delivered by "APTs." Because that means the Damage Card from APTs was Damage.

So the answer to that is maybe .

I still lean on the side of not, as APTs is a Damage Card, and not Damage . Specifically different.

With ACMs, they do not come under "Total Damage" (which is why the Brace Token does not effect them - as per FAQ too), so I'm inclined to say that it shouldn't effect ACMs either (and neither should Bright Hope)...

But I'm sure someone will argue it.

I think you would be better off leaving the Fire Control Team FAQ ruling as its own special outside case. If FCT isn't involved the Crit effect resolving and damage totaling is separate and "clean." Don't drag any non-sense from the FCT mis-ruling into the rest of the nice clean rules and situations that don't involve it.

Sometimes you just have to accept a contradiction. We do this often -- Look before you leap/He who hesitates is lost -- for example.

Just now, Frimmel said:

I think you would be better off leaving the Fire Control Team FAQ ruling as its own special outside case. If FCT isn't involved the Crit effect resolving and damage totaling is separate and "clean." Don't drag any non-sense from the FCT mis-ruling into the rest of the nice clean rules and situations that don't involve it.

Sometimes you just have to accept a contradiction. We do this often -- Look before you leap/He who hesitates is lost -- for example.

Its a great affirmation for real life, of course.

But in a Rules-oriented discussion, it has to be resolved. The one-off must be referenced as a precedence, because it will be argued .

I'm very inclined to say no here

Major Derlin reduces the damage from an attack, ACM is a damage due to crit effect, and APT isn't in the damage total, the card simply grants a faceup card dealt, but it isn't exactly as a damage, because once again, it's a crit effect.

To be clear:

Most of the evidence points to "No" in this regard, and that's the advice I give as to a "simple" answer.

But I also caution that the true answer is a lot more complicated than that. Its not the way I wish it would be, but I'm not a tester, or an advisor, or anything other than a guy who tends to 'get' rules, and spends a lot of time going over them. That's all

This is all very helpful, thanks guys.

I'm a simple guy, I like simple answers, I think for now I'll take your perspective into account and just just go with a simple no. lol

No, Dras, it isn't more complicated than "No." You keep making it more complicated by bringing up that FAQ mis-ruling anytime anyone asks about any other interaction of "damage" and critical effect. You keep dragging that out as though it applies to anything else. Quit acting like it is anything but wrong and applies to anything other than the situation given in the FAQ.

Trying to muddy up stuff like this with it won't get the FAQ changed. You'll just make a bigger mess and still not get what you want.

Just now, Frimmel said:

No, Dras, it isn't more complicated than "No." You keep making it more complicated by bringing up that FAQ mis-ruling anytime anyone asks about any other interaction of "damage" and critical effect. You keep dragging that out as though it applies to anything else. Quit acting like it is anything but wrong and applies to anything other than the situation given in the FAQ.

Trying to muddy up stuff like this with it won't get the FAQ changed. You'll just make a bigger mess and still not get what you want.

You make the assumption I'm trying to change the FAQ - I'm not (I mean, I am, just not in this way, because this way is a useless exercise) - and even if I was , then I fail to see how pointing out how a rules interaction and precedence can be taken does not accomplish the goal - Because at the very least, it points out how easy it is to have it happen, when a "once off, off the cuff" ruling makes its way into greater readings. It equips people to see and understand the greater thread behind the rules interactions - how a rules change in one section can have unintended consequences elsewhere...

To bring it up again - it is the same as "Attack". By using the Same word to describe two separate but related incidences, you now have created an unintended interaction where referring to one "attack" by default relates to the other "attack" - and that has consequences that then require an FAQ (re: Slaved Turrets).

If anything, I'm more boggled because I don't understand the reasoning behind the Rules interaction of FCT+APT+Default Crit. If Michael Gernes came out (like James Kniffen did in the past) and said "This is a direct Nerf to the power of APT and nothing else.", then I'd drop it and go on being Merrily Ignorant - because the rules advice is telling me to be so at that point.

I've tried answering messages with "Yes." "No." "That's not allowed." - and almost every time I've done so, I've gotten flak for being, and I quote: "dismissive and self righteous and high handed."

In the meantime, I see no reason to not educate and empower people to identify these sorts of issues, and discuss them rationally.

Fair enough. Good points that I agree with.

Thread went from




to



really fast...

My presence does tend to malf-things up, in a cluster-like way, very quickly.

Its not a True Cluster-Malf until the Brass is involved, though, so I keep getting away with it.

If you really want to malf things up, we can start discussing whether "Damage Cards" are actually "damage" (spoiler alert: I don't think they are).

4 minutes ago, DiabloAzul said:

If you really want to malf things up, we can start discussing whether "Damage Cards" are actually "damage" (spoiler alert: I don't think they are).

I agree. Damage is the mechanism by which damage cards are usually dealt, but I think this is the strongest argument against Derlin applying to APT specifically.

My point exactly.

With the two weapons upgrade cards shown in the OP...what if the attacker rolls multiple crit results? Would the effects stack (i.e. 1 f/u damage card per result rolled)?

42 minutes ago, Scopes said:

With the two weapons upgrade cards shown in the OP...what if the attacker rolls multiple crit results? Would the effects stack (i.e. 1 f/u damage card per result rolled)?

The crits doesn't stack, you get to resolve one and only one critical effect no matter how many crits you rolled. Only in case the ship has Fire Control Team equipped you can resolve two different critical effects, but even so, if they both require a crit from the same color, only one crit icon from that color would let you resolve both effects.

45 minutes ago, Scopes said:

With the two weapons upgrade cards shown in the OP...what if the attacker rolls multiple crit results? Would the effects stack (i.e. 1 f/u damage card per result rolled)?

No.

RRG pg 4 CRITICAL EFFECTS:

Quote

A critical effect, denoted by the “<critical>:” header, can resolve if there is at least one <critical> icon in the attack pool.

• The attacker can resolve only one critical effect per attack.

Exception - Fire Control team, (weapon team upgrade), exhaust to allow you to resolve 2 (different) critical effects

On 11/4/2018 at 7:10 PM, Ardaedhel said:

No.

On 20/6/2017 at 7:58 PM, Drasnighta said:

"dismissive and self righteous and high handed."

Does the fct faq really muddle up DAMAGE from attack and crits?

It only muddles up FACE UP DAMAGE CARDS from attack and crits in my opinion.

So for Derlin it is still cleanly separated.

I just always assumed that Derlin reduces damage that was rolled . Which as stated above, is different from damage recieved from other sources, like card effects.