Arena Rex Forums

Arena Rex Forums
It is currently Sat Dec 09, 2023 3:00 am

All times are UTC-05:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Stheno vs Tribune
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 9:39 am 
Offline
Viridis
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 4:38 am
Posts: 1484
Location: Scandinavian Denmark
Just want to check if you guys agree that I played this right.

Tribune's Sanction: This model's controller gains a Favor when a model attacking this model fails to achieve at least one net success.

Stheno's Inevitable: When this model makes an unsuccesful attack, treat the attack as if it generated 1 net success.

The second ability totally cancels out the first, right? It seems to me like it's very clear-cut, but it feels a little bit wrong/evil to negate his stuff completely, so I just wanna be sure.

_________________
My Arena Rex painting log


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Stheno vs Tribune
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 1:23 am 
Offline
Noxius

Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 8:51 pm
Posts: 24
I think the fact is says 'treat it' as if it had one net success means that the Tribune still gains the favor. Stheno still gained no successes, but acted as if it had.

I believe you get none, Tribune earns favor, and then Stethno does her one success. Thats just how I read it.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Stheno vs Tribune
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:40 am 
Offline
Viridis
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 4:38 am
Posts: 1484
Location: Scandinavian Denmark
I think that's the part that makes me unsure, yeah. Whether "treat it as" also treats it as such in terms of Tribune's ability.

_________________
My Arena Rex painting log


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Stheno vs Tribune
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:16 am 
Offline
Crudus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 8:19 am
Posts: 112
This is one of those weird one's where I can see it being ruled either way. And as far as I am aware, there really isn't any similar ruling with other interactions to help shine some light.

The closest I can think about would be Lupa's Caveat Emptor - After this model declares an attack, before rolling dice, the defending model may pay 2 Favor to this model's controller to make the result of the attack a draw with no net successes on either side. Favor added to the attack or defense roll is lost.

The difference being "make the result of the attack" rather than "treat the attack as if". Caveat Emptor pretty clearly indicates it's actually changing the result of the attack and not simply acting like it's changing. However, the affect of the ability is a bit different, and I don't know if it would really apply in the same way to Inevitable.

This is an interesting question.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Stheno vs Tribune
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:18 pm 
Offline
Viridis
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 4:38 am
Posts: 1484
Location: Scandinavian Denmark
Since we use nicknames on the forum and real names on facebook, I don't know how many are following, but I asked in the facebook group and opinions seem divided. Julian thinks that Tribune should not get favor, because the attack is automatically successful, and Matt thinks that he should get favour, because the attack isn't really successful, it just pretends to be.

Stu has a third interpretation, which is that Inevitable only kicks in if Stheno gets zero successes on her attack roll, and then Tribune gets to roll his defense against it, which would make the question irrelevant if that was true.

Stu also points out that the question is also relevant for counterattacks. If Stheno attacks Tribune and Tribune counterattacks, and Stheno rolls 1 success and Tribune rolls 5, what would happen? Other than the issue of favor, would Tribune get to inflict damage on Stheno, or does Inevitable make that impossible?

The answer again depends on how "real" the one net success that Inevitable creates is supposed to be.

It would be interesting if they could both get successes on each other simultaneously... but also kinda weird. If we imagine that we would resolve Stheno's one success first, since it is her turn, she could just push Tribune one inch away and not follow up, and then he would not be able to apply any of his successes, so I guess in practice it doesn't matter...

But you can also reverse the situation. If Stheno counterattacks, does that count as an attack for the purpose of Inevitable? If yes, and we go with the "strongest" interpretation of Inevitable in relation to the question above, then Sthenos counterattacks are impenetrable, since she will automatically win them if she loses.

Inevitable is a lot more complicated than I first imagined...

_________________
My Arena Rex painting log


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Stheno vs Tribune
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 1:39 pm 
Offline
Crudus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 8:19 am
Posts: 112
I'm inclined to believe that a counterattack and a normal attack are not the same thing, so Inevitable doesn't kick in during a counterattack reaction.

Counterattack
Cost: Reacting model gains 1 fatigue.
Trigger: After an enemy model declares an Attack Action against the reacting model.
Effect: Roll your ATK instead of DEF against the attack. If you roll more net successes than the attacker, resolve those net successes as if you had made a successful attack. Declaring a Counterattack reaction is not considered declaring an attack against the opposing model.

Counterattack is a specific reaction that modifies the standard combat steps. ("To resolve an attack, the attacker rolls a number of six-sided dice (d6’s) equal to their ATK and the defender rolls a number of d6’s equal to their DEF.") In addition, it specifies that making a Counterattack reaction is not considered declaring an attack. So they are very clearly two distinct things.

Inevitable specifies that it only kicks in when making an unsuccessful attack. And counterattack clearly states it is not an attack.


http://arenarex.wikia.com/wiki/Combat
http://arenarex.wikia.com/wiki/Reactions


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Stheno vs Tribune
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 1:54 pm 
Offline
Viridis
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 4:38 am
Posts: 1484
Location: Scandinavian Denmark
Counterattacking does not state it is not an attack. It states that declaring a counterattack is not considered the same as declaring an attack.

It only talks about declaration. Not about actually being an attack or not.

That said, I agree with you that I think the intent of counterattack is that resolving it is not the same as resolving an attack. It ends up giving you the result of having made an attack, but without being an attack itself.

I just don't feel like that's what the rules say. See the other thread I just necromancied.

_________________
My Arena Rex painting log


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Stheno vs Tribune
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:10 pm 
Offline
Crudus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 8:19 am
Posts: 112
I think it can be inferred that a Counterattack, and an Opportunity Attack are not attacks simply because they are keywords. They are each their own specific "things" separate and distinct from one another.


ATTACK
Cost: Gain 1 fatigue.
Effect: Target an enemy model within the engagement range of the attacking model. Resolve the attack as described in the Combat section.

From the combat section: "To resolve an attack, the attacker rolls a number of six-sided dice (d6’s) equal to their ATK and the defender rolls a number of d6’s equal to their DEF. Any die that rolls a four or higher (4+) is counted as a success."

That is all there is to make an attack. Anything different than that is by definition, "not" an attack.

If a Counter Attack was the same as an Attack, it would simply be worded as follows:
Counterattack
Cost: Reacting model gains 1 fatigue.
Trigger: After an enemy model declares an Attack Action against the reacting model.
Effect: Declare an Attack Action against the attacking model.

By design, they did not word it as such. They intentionally wanted a counterattack (and opportunity attack) to be something distinct from an "Attack". At it's core, a Counterattack is a modification to the standard combat definition of an Attack. Thus making it different than an attack.


In any event, I seem to have gone off on a bit of a tangent from the original topic. hahaha. Very good original question, when it can raise up a host of further questions.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Stheno vs Tribune
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 5:52 pm 
Offline
Crudus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 1:47 pm
Posts: 257
Location: Los Angeles, CA
For those not following on Facebook this is the argument I made there
(I’m Julian):
“The way I read it, Stheno’s Inevitable is part of her attack and makes you treat that whole attack as of it generated 1 net success. So the attack does in fact achieve the one net success requirement. Tribune’s Sanction would not trigger.”

The argument against it is that there is a different between an event occurring and simply treating it as if it occur. I state that I believe that without any instruction to treat anything differently the two are in effect the same:

“...but if you aren’t applying all the rules that would normally apply upon achievement of the event (in this case a net success), are you really treating it as if it did [happen]?
This is getting a bit philosophical now, but in order to truly treat one event as a different event you have to apply all the circumstances of the original unless the instructions specifically tell you to disregard any part of it, which in this case they don’t.”

_________________
Morituri te salutamus.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Stheno vs Tribune
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:44 pm 
Offline
Viridis
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 4:38 am
Posts: 1484
Location: Scandinavian Denmark
KaptainWalrus wrote:
I think it can be inferred that a Counterattack, and an Opportunity Attack are not attacks simply because they are keywords. They are each their own specific "things" separate and distinct from one another.


I don't think I disagree with you as such, but I do want to probe the question of "what is an attack?" a bit more.

It sounds like you are saying that nothing is an attack other than what the rules explicitly state is an attack. Based on that, you are saying that an opportunity attack is not an attack, as per your quote above. Right?

"Reaction: Opportunity Attack
Cost: Reacting model gains 1 fatigue. Trigger: After an enemy model declares a Move Action while in the reacting model’s engagement range. Effect: Roll ATK +1 bonus success versus opposing DEF of that enemy model."

It doesn't say anywhere that it is an attack, so it is not an attack.

So would you say that special rules that refer to attacks never apply when it comes to opportunity attacks?

_________________
My Arena Rex painting log


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 Next

All times are UTC-05:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
Theme Created by HOLLYSMOKE
Theme updated to phpBB 3.1.3 by KamijouTouma