counting the damage reduced

By Cetonis, in UFS Rules Q & A

Pretty simple Hilde question - If an attack gets +3 damage, and then is given -4 damage, has its damage been reduced by four, or one?

4

It has been increased by 3

It has been decreased by 4.

Now the net change is 1, but it was decreased by 4

Yeah except her ability says the amount this turn...

so if was given +3 and -2 and -4 ... would the amount reduced still be 6? Or only 3?

aslum said:

Yeah except her ability says the amount this turn...

so if was given +3 and -2 and -4 ... would the amount reduced still be 6? Or only 3?

total reductions for the turn would be 6

This is why card text is important

I was just a little unsure because of past rulings on Evil Plans.

Difference with Evil Plans is that the control check hacks are floating effects created by multiple cards (IE multiple Transferences or Akuma), each of which resolve separately. So when Evil Plans responds, it only responds to one modifier.

Example:

1st Transference: -3 check, +3 damage if played. Floating effect 1 is active.

2nd Transference: -4 check, +4 damage if played. Floating effect 2 is active.

3rd Transference: -2 check, +2 damage if played. Floating effect 3 is active.

Control check is made.

Player decides the order to resolve floating effects will be 3, 1, 2.

Player responds to floating effect #2, returning the control to printed. When checking the modification for floating effect #2, it was -4 so it's only +4 damage.

what about hilde's character E, where your attack gets +X speed and damage, x is double the total amount the attack's damage has been reduced.

what happens if you pump your attack to say 10 damage, printed of say 4, then enhance with healer (this attack is returned to its printed) for the purpose of Hilde's enhance would that be treated as damage reduction (going from 10 to 4)

no because healer does not reduce damage it just returns it.

Except that it would be a reduction, and it's already been ruled that way (albeit in reverse) on Gnome w/ regards to Holding Ground and such.

aslum said:

(albeit in reverse)

This was absolutely not a reversal. As you have eloquently pointed out in the past, wording is very important on cards. Cards in the past (like Fight or Flight) have stated that attacks may not receive bonuses. A bonus and penalty have been defined as the wording +X and -X respectively. That's different from returning to a value. The new cards are carefully worded to ensure that there are no ways around the wording. "You may not increase the damage" and "This attack may not have it's damage reduced."