Flying Edge

By Dokurorider, in UFS Rules Q & A

Posted at

Flying Edge states, E: This attack gets +X damage. X equals the total of your momentum and your opponent's momentum halved (rounded down.

Do you add your momentum and half of your opponent's momentum, or add both then half it, for example if I have 4 momentum and my opponent has 2 would I add 4 + (2/2) or (4+2)/2 ?

Posted at

your momentum (4)+ opponents(2) /2 or +3dmg

Posted at

*STAMP* for L

( A + B ) / 2 = +X damage

Posted at

Um... That's not what the card says though.

The card says A + B/2, not (A+B)/2

If it said "Half of the total of your and your opponent's momentums" then you would certainly evaluate it that way. However it litterally says the total of A and Half B.

Posted at

Aslum, go away. -_-

The "total of" part is saying to do that part first. So that's what you do.

Contrast this with Siegfried4 who halves his opponent's momentum before subtracting. no "total".

can we let this rest? we covered this at length when the set came out. -_-

Posted at

No, I won't go away. Just because you are happy with butchering basic arithmatic order of operations doesn't mean the rest of us have to be pleased with the silliness.

You can rule that it works at odds with the English langauge and Math, and that's fine. However I am not going to cease pointing out that the ruling is silly and based on moderator whim rather then what's actually PRINTED on the card(s). I'm not suggesting that anything I say over rules your decisions, just that sometimes your decisions are wrong. If you prove me wrong (it's happend a couple times) fine, and if you all change your tune fine, but as long as you guys bluster on ignoring something as basic as that I can't help but point out the problem.

Posted at

here's the problem:

the card, for having multiple equations to be worked out, is NOT CLEAR AT ALL. the fact we've been discussing this since october should be proof enough.

now, all we can offer you is the ruling on how the card is played, because the "total" of 1 number makes less than no sense. we don't have the capacity to issue errata, only suggest it. a lot of our suggestions have been acted upon, and some we're still waiting on.

so, outside of making the ruling on how the cards work, our hands are tied. alsum, please appreciate that. and feel welcome to e-mail steve/james/etc.