Arcane Wonders Forum

Mage Wars => Rules Discussion => Topic started by: exid on January 09, 2016, 02:46:44 PM

Title: joined strength
Post by: exid on January 09, 2016, 02:46:44 PM
how does it work?

is the 1 damage dealt to the animal, and then healed and dealt to the beastmaster? (problem with finite life on the animal... and with the death of the animal)
or is the 1 damage dealt directly to the beastmaster? (no problem  :))
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: RomeoXero on January 09, 2016, 03:05:29 PM
One damage goes directly to the Beastmaster and reduces the total damage dealt to the creature
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: exid on January 09, 2016, 03:13:20 PM
thanks!
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: WTFGamer on January 18, 2016, 01:30:16 AM
One damage goes directly to the Beastmaster and reduces the total damage dealt to the creature

So by that logic, would an attack by the Rod of Arcanum that only did 1 damage after any armor result in a Beastmaster loss of mana?

Joined Strength says "Whenever it is attacked and receives damage...".

Which way does this coin flip. land?
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Boocheck on January 18, 2016, 02:15:36 AM
(cant wait for Academy cards to be avilable via Card database :) )

Rod of Arcanum - When this attack damages an enemy Non-Mage creature, that creaturs controller loses 1 mana (if he has any to lose).

Joined Strenght - Whenever it is attacked and receives damage you must transfer 1 of that damage to your mage.

First - There is Critical damage and Normal damage. Normal damage is reduced by armor so if you rolled 2 normal damage and oponent have 2 armor, you not deal any damage and Rod of Arcanum will not activate its ability.

Second - You hit enemy non-mage creature for 1 damage (-1 life) - Condition of Rod of Arcanum was just met and Beasmaster have to lose 1 mana. Then Joined Strength is activated and that damage goes to Beastmaster instead. Joined strength cannot be activated unless that creature recieves any damage. I think the word "transfer" is a main key here. If you want to transfer something, you need to FROM to WHERE and if that damage was not on that creature, you would not have the FROM condition met.

Hope i make sense :)
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: exid on January 18, 2016, 02:24:20 AM
Second - You hit enemy non-mage creature for 1 damage (-1 life) - Condition of Rod of Arcanum was just met and Beasmaster have to lose 1 mana. Then Joined Strength is activated and that damage goes to Beastmaster instead. Joined strength cannot be activated unless that creature recieves any damage. I think the word "transfer" is a main key here. If you want to transfer something, you need to FROM to WHERE and if that damage was not on that creature, you would not have the FROM condition met.

i don't agree! if the unique damage point goes directly to the BM, the rod's ability doesn't trigger and the BM doesn't loose mana.
(and if the damage goes first on the creature and is then transfered, it modifies RomeoXero's answer to my first question)
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Zuberi on January 18, 2016, 02:50:19 AM
Since it is not available in the database, here is the effect text of the two cards:
Quote from: Joined Strength
This creature gains Melee +1. Whenever it is attacked and receives damage you must transfer 1 of that damage to your mage instead. If this creature is destroyed you may pay 1 mana to move Joined Strength to a new target in your zone.
Quote from: Rod of the Arcanum
When this attack damages an enemy Non-Mage creature, that creature's controller loses 1 mana (if he has any to lose). If this Mage is level 5 or higher, Rod of the Arcanum rolls an additional attack die.

Now, the key thing here is that you are transferring 1 point of damage instead of the creature receiving it. I interpret this to mean, like RomeoXero, that the damage is dealt directly to the Beastmaster and the creature never  experiences it at all. Since the creature never takes the damage, Rod of the Arcanum's mana drain does not trigger.

For timing purposes, this all occurs during the Apply Damage and Effects step. During this step, Joined Strength triggers changing where you apply the damage to. Then, since the creature didn't take any damage, Rod of the Arcanum fails to trigger.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Boocheck on January 18, 2016, 02:59:42 AM
For timing purposes, this all occurs during the Apply Damage and Effects step. During this step, Joined Strength triggers changing where you apply the damage to. Then, since the creature didn't take any damage, Rod of the Arcanum fails to trigger.

To transfer something from point A (creature) to point B (mage) that damage  must exist at some point on that creature. If there was word Redirect and not Transfer, i would have no problem. In this case, that damage will end up on mage but triggering conditions for Rod were also met.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: exid on January 18, 2016, 03:40:34 AM
To transfer something from point A (creature) to point B (mage) that damage  must exist at some point on that creature. If there was word Redirect and not Transfer, i would have no problem. In this case, that damage will end up on mage but triggering conditions for Rod were also met.

that was my point with my first question:
is the 1 damage dealt to the animal, and then healed and dealt to the beastmaster? (problem with finite life on the animal... and with the death of the animal)
or is the 1 damage dealt directly to the beastmaster? (no problem  :))
and i was answered the damage doesn't go to the creature... nobody denied.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Zuberi on January 18, 2016, 09:39:31 AM
Except that you are transferring the damage instead of the creature receiving it. When event A occurs instead of event B, it means that event B did not occur. You could also think of it in terms of transferring 1 point of incoming damage, thus you are transferring something from A to B. Incoming damage.

Now, with this interpretation the question does come up whether to apply just the creature's Armor to the damage calculation or to apply both the creature's and the Mage's. It's not perfectly clear, but I believe that only the creature's would apply. The card implies that the transfer occurs when you are at the point of the creature actually receiving the damage, and thus after armor calculations in my opinion.

Perhaps the wording could have been better done. I believe they chose to use the word transfer rather than redirect to make it clear that it occurs after armor calculations, but now we do have confusion about whether it is ever applied to the creature (and the first still isn't completely clarified). Close one door and open another.

If the damage wasn't transferred until after it was applied to the creature though, then we could have the creature dying before the transfer could occur. Thus negating the transfer, even if the transfer could have potentially saved the creature's life. This is most certainly not how I've been playing the card, but I can't say with 100% accuracy that it is incorrect, just that it is not how I believe to be correct.

My interpretation is again thus:
You begin the Damage and Effects Step.
You calculate the damage to be received after armor and such.
Your Mage receives 1 point of this damage instead of the creature, and the creature receives the rest.

If the creature doesn't actually take any damage, then anything that triggers off of it taking damage (such as Rod of the Arcanum) does not trigger. It's exactly the same as if your damage was prevented by Armor. It doesn't matter that the creature would have taken damage, because it didn't.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Laddinfance on January 18, 2016, 09:44:42 AM
Instead is a replacement. So, if you only dealt a single point of damage to a creature with joined strength, then it would never receive that damage as it's put on your Mage instead.

You only apply the armor for the creature and not also for your Mage.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Boocheck on January 18, 2016, 09:52:30 AM
I admit my defeat :)

(just the fact i was "arguing" with Zuberi was awesome enough :D  )
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: iNano78 on January 18, 2016, 11:46:05 AM
I agree with everything Zuberi said, except:

If the creature doesn't actually take any damage, then anything that triggers off of it taking damage (such as Rod of the Arcanum) does not trigger. It's exactly the same as if your damage was prevented by Armor. It doesn't matter that the creature would have taken damage, because it didn't.

In my opinion, damage was dealt, therefore Rod of Arcanum (or anything else that triggers on damage being dealt) does trigger.  The fact that the damage ended up on the mage is irrelevant; the attack caused damage.  This is different than armour, since armour cancels out the attack dice before you get to the "apply damage and effects" step (right?).

I can understand the interpretation that the attack didn't damage the creature, and that the mage (which is also a creature) was damaged by something other than the attack (e.g. the transfer, not the attack directly).  But as I see it, the creature was damaged, even if the damage was then transferred to the mage (before it appeared on the creature, so as not to kill a creature with 1 health point left before it was transferred).

Maybe I'm biased by how damage gets applied in other games, though, as this is how it would work in, say, X-wing Miniatures (e.g. a ship is "hit" = damaged, even if the damage is then transferred by an effect - like "Draw Their Fire" - which causing other effects like losing your "Stealth Device" even if the attacked ship ended up not taking any damage since it was transferred/redirected to another ship).
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Zuberi on January 18, 2016, 04:03:31 PM
@iNano78
Perhaps this shall satisfy you. If you look at page 25 of the Rulebook v4, you will see that by all definitions the attack did Hit the creature. This is true even if all blanks were rolled, or all damage was absorbed by armor, or the damage was transferred elsewhere. The creature was hit by the attack.

However, the trigger for Rod of the Arcanum is that it damage a Non-Mage creature. Mage Wars is very simple when it comes to determining things like this. If you put damage on something, then it took damage. If you don't, then it didn't. No non-mage creatures received any damage from the attack, therefore the Rod does not trigger even though it did successfully hit it's target. Hitting the target was not it's trigger condition. Since it did hit though, it will cause things like a Damage Barrier attack still, similar to the X-Wing ship losing stealth.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: iNano78 on January 18, 2016, 04:17:44 PM
@iNano78
Perhaps this shall satisfy you. If you look at page 25 of the Rulebook v4, you will see that by all definitions the attack did Hit the creature. This is true even if all blanks were rolled, or all damage was absorbed by armor, or the damage was transferred elsewhere. The creature was hit by the attack.

However, the trigger for Rod of the Arcanum is that it damage a Non-Mage creature. Mage Wars is very simple when it comes to determining things like this. If you put damage on something, then it took damage. If you don't, then it didn't. No non-mage creatures received any damage from the attack, therefore the Rod does not trigger even though it did successfully hit it's target. Hitting the target was not it's trigger condition. Since it did hit though, it will cause things like a Damage Barrier attack still, similar to the X-Wing ship losing stealth.

OK, but look at the trigger for Joined Strength.  It says "... Whenever [this creature] is attacked and receives damage, you must transfer 1 of that damage to your Mage instead. ..."

If the creature wasn't dealt damage by the Rod, then no damage would have been transferred to the Mage.  For Joined Strength to transfer damage, the creature must have "received damage."  Otherwise, Joined Strength wouldn't trigger.   If Joined Strength triggered, then the creature must have received damage, and thus the Rod also triggers, since it has the same condition.  In other words, there must be a point where the creature received damage, at which time both the Rod and Joined Strength trigger, then the damage itself gets transferred to the Mage (when damage and effects are applied).
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: sIKE on January 18, 2016, 04:32:00 PM
I think technically what is happening in the Apply Damages and Effect step is that you are transferring 1 (the first 1 technically) of the points of damage that was rolled and applying directly to the Mage, instead of applying the point of damage to the target creature first and then transferring it to the Mage.

I understand how you feel, I lost a "May" and "up to 3" last week....
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Kharhaz on January 18, 2016, 04:47:27 PM
@iNano78
Perhaps this shall satisfy you. If you look at page 25 of the Rulebook v4, you will see that by all definitions the attack did Hit the creature. This is true even if all blanks were rolled, or all damage was absorbed by armor, or the damage was transferred elsewhere. The creature was hit by the attack.

However, the trigger for Rod of the Arcanum is that it damage a Non-Mage creature. Mage Wars is very simple when it comes to determining things like this. If you put damage on something, then it took damage. If you don't, then it didn't. No non-mage creatures received any damage from the attack, therefore the Rod does not trigger even though it did successfully hit it's target. Hitting the target was not it's trigger condition. Since it did hit though, it will cause things like a Damage Barrier attack still, similar to the X-Wing ship losing stealth.

OK, but look at the trigger for Joined Strength.  It says "... Whenever [this creature] is attacked and receives damage, you must transfer 1 of that damage to your Mage instead. ..."

If the creature wasn't dealt damage by the Rod, then no damage would have been transferred to the Mage.  For Joined Strength to transfer damage, the creature must have "received damage."  Otherwise, Joined Strength wouldn't trigger.   If Joined Strength triggered, then the creature must have received damage, and thus the Rod also triggers, since it has the same condition.  In other words, there must be a point where the creature received damage, at which time both the Rod and Joined Strength trigger, then the damage itself gets transferred to the Mage (when damage and effects are applied).

Consider:

Rod of A deal rolls 1 normal damage on a creature with joined strength and one health remaining; Does it get destroyed immediately before joined strength triggers the life saving damage transfer?

Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: ringkichard on January 18, 2016, 06:08:54 PM
Since it is not available in the database, here is the effect text of the two cards:
Quote from: Joined Strength
This creature gains Melee +1. Whenever it is attacked and receives damage you must transfer 1 of that damage to your mage instead. If this creature is destroyed you may pay 1 mana to move Joined Strength to a new target in your zone.
Quote from: Rod of the Arcanum
When this attack damages an enemy Non-Mage creature, that creature's controller loses 1 mana (if he has any to lose). If this Mage is level 5 or higher, Rod of the Arcanum rolls an additional attack die.

The wording is a little funny on Joined Strength, which may be confusing matters. Hypertechnically, it's weird to transfer damage instead. Previously, you could transfer damage that had been dealt, like Lifebond +X does in Druid's Treebond ability, or you could perhaps redirect an attack or its damage like Reverse Attack does, but it does seem a bit strange to use the verb "transfer" this way.

But the key, as others have said, is the word "instead". In that context, Joined Strength transfers one damage to the mage, instead of letting the attack deal it to the creature. It's not even clear to me that the rules do (or do not) consider that damage "dealt" or even caused by the attack. It may just be damage transferred from an attack to a mage.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Zuberi on January 18, 2016, 06:25:21 PM
The wording is a little funny on Joined Strength, which may be confusing matters. Hypertechnically, it's weird to transfer damage instead. Previously, you could transfer damage that had been dealt, like Lifebond +X does in Druid's Treebond ability, or you could perhaps redirect an attack or its damage like Reverse Attack does, but it does seem a bit strange to use the verb "transfer" this way.

But the key, as others have said, is the word "instead". In that context, Joined Strength transfers one damage to the mage, instead of letting the attack deal it to the creature. It's not even clear to me that the rules do (or do not) consider that damage "dealt" or even caused by the attack. It may just be damage transferred from an attack to a mage.

I agree entirely, and we might still need a ruling whether the damage dealt to the mage still counts as coming from the initial attack.

OK, but look at the trigger for Joined Strength.  It says "... Whenever [this creature] is attacked and receives damage, you must transfer 1 of that damage to your Mage instead. ..."

You have a point. The wording is a bit weird. However, we have an official response from Laddinfance now that confirms the creature never receives damage because it is transferred instead (see below). Thus, the trigger for the Rod never occurs. I will agree that the card could be cleaned up to make it's intention clearer, but I think we all now know the intention.

Instead is a replacement. So, if you only dealt a single point of damage to a creature with joined strength, then it would never receive that damage as it's put on your Mage instead.

You only apply the armor for the creature and not also for your Mage.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: exid on January 19, 2016, 12:01:29 AM
I agree, the card is not but Laddinfance is clear: the damage goes directly to the mage.

About the source of this damage coming to the mage, it could be:
1) the weapon
2) joined strength
3) nowhere
and is it a direct damage?

this could be important for other efffects (imunity to the weapon type, for exemple)
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Laddinfance on January 19, 2016, 07:55:40 AM
The damage comes from the attack. Joined Strength is just changing the destination.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: jacksmack on January 19, 2016, 08:51:11 AM
How does vampirism interact with joined strength?
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: ringkichard on January 19, 2016, 09:29:03 AM
Quote
Vampiric (Attack Trait) When this attack causes damage to a Living creature, the attacker heals (removes) up to half the damage caused (round up). If the attack does more damage than the targetís Life total, the excess damage does not count for healing. If the attack makes multiple attacks during the same attack action, it gains this bonus only for the first attack it makes. The Vampiric trait does not stack. If an attack places a condition on a creature which counts as damage (such as the Tainted conditon), the conditon does not count as damage dealt by the attack. Therefore, it will not count as damage dealt for the Vampiric Trait.

Looks like it doesn't change anything.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: exid on January 19, 2016, 10:09:42 AM
The damage comes from the attack. Joined Strength is just changing the destination.
thanks!
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Zuberi on January 19, 2016, 08:37:54 PM
How does vampirism interact with joined strength?

Adding to what ringkichard said, the fact that you are dividing the damage between multiple objects appears to be irrelevant currently, given a strict reading of the Vampiric trait. It is all still coming from a single attack, so you total up the damage, divide in half, and round up to determine how much you heal.

The only way this would interact with Vampiric is if either the animal or the mage was non-living, which is not currently possible. Speculating on this scenario, I would assume any damage dealt to the non-living creature would be disregarded when determining how much to heal, but it seems unlikely that a non-living animal would be printed any time soon, and even less likely for a non-living mage. So, this speculation isn't a huge concern yet.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: exid on January 19, 2016, 11:56:24 PM
How does vampirism interact with joined strength?

Adding to what ringkichard said, the fact that you are dividing the damage between multiple objects appears to be irrelevant currently, given a strict reading of the Vampiric trait. It is all still coming from a single attack, so you total up the damage, divide in half, and round up to determine how much you heal.

The only way this would interact with Vampiric is if either the animal or the mage was non-living, which is not currently possible. Speculating on this scenario, I would assume any damage dealt to the non-living creature would be disregarded when determining how much to heal, but it seems unlikely that a non-living animal would be printed any time soon, and even less likely for a non-living mage. So, this speculation isn't a huge concern yet.
if the damage would be dealt to the creature first and then transfered (what it is not), this damage could count 2 times for the vampiric trait!
 ;D
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: ringkichard on January 20, 2016, 10:57:43 AM
Zombified Animals in Arena could fail to trigger Vampiric, I guess?
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: RomeoXero on January 20, 2016, 12:17:03 PM
But I believe joined strength is Beastmaster only and rise again is dark mage only, so you'll never have the two meet in the middle as one mage will never have both.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: exid on January 20, 2016, 12:43:26 PM
the problem could happen: in a 2vs2 game, if a beastmaster dies and gives the control of his animals to his buddy necromancer!
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: iNano78 on January 20, 2016, 12:55:51 PM
the problem could happen: in a 2vs2 game, if a beastmaster dies and gives the control of his animals to his buddy necromancer!

Or - same team - a Necromancer (or Warlock) uses Reanimate or Rise Again on an animal, then the Beastmaster casts Joined Strength on it.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: RomeoXero on January 20, 2016, 01:59:56 PM
Well INano is correct, but I don't believe in Exids example that the joined strength would carry over, as mage only cards cannot carry over to another mage of a different type. Similar to how a Goran pet werewolf could not transfer control to a non warlock, neither via mind control or teammate mage death.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Zuberi on January 20, 2016, 10:03:56 PM
Okay, I was wrong. The scenario is currently possible when you take multiple mages into account, one a dark mage raising animals as zombies, and the other a beastmaster casting Joined Strength on said zombies. This would only occur in a team game though, since you wouldn't have reason to cast Joined Strength on an opponent's creature. So I suppose we do need an answer to the rare scenario. Again, my guess is that you just wouldn't count the damage dealt to the non-living creature and only heal for the part dealt to the living one. So, attacking the zombie animal with a vampiric attack would heal you 1, due to the 1 damage transferred to the living mage.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: exid on January 20, 2016, 11:57:05 PM
but I don't believe in Exids example that the joined strength would carry over, as mage only cards cannot carry over to another mage of a different type.

oups!
you're rhight.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: exid on January 20, 2016, 11:57:39 PM
So, attacking the zombie animal with a vampiric attack would heal you 1, due to the 1 damage transferred to the living mage.

sounds right to me.
(did i mention that i LOVE these discussions?)
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: iNano78 on January 21, 2016, 06:19:53 AM
Okay, I was wrong. The scenario is currently possible when you take multiple mages into account, one a dark mage raising animals as zombies, and the other a beastmaster casting Joined Strength on said zombies. This would only occur in a team game though, since you wouldn't have reason to cast Joined Strength on an opponent's creature. So I suppose we do need an answer to the rare scenario. Again, my guess is that you just wouldn't count the damage dealt to the non-living creature and only heal for the part dealt to the living one. So, attacking the zombie animal with a vampiric attack would heal you 1, due to the 1 damage transferred to the living mage.

I can think of another scenario.

Beastmaster vs Dark Mage. Dark Mage has been using Battleforge to fully outfit himself with lots of Armor plus a Veteran's Belt, and/or has several facedown Enchantments that likely include Reverse Attack, Block, etc. The Dark Mage used Animate Dead on an animal earlier. And the Dark Mage is near death.

Here, you might be better off casting Joined Strength on your opponent's zombie animal and transferring 1 damage per attack directly to the Mage. If you or any of your creatures have Vampirism, you might like a ruling.

...

Just reread Joined Strength and it sounds like it always transfers the damage to the controller of Joined Strength (aka "you") and not the controller of the creature it's attached to. Too bad. Can't even Steal Enchantment it over to the Dark Mage because it's Beastmaster only. Oh well. Worth a try.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: ringkichard on January 21, 2016, 06:48:46 AM
It's really unlikely, in any case.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Mystery on February 15, 2016, 08:35:15 AM
what about the satyr rolling 4 dmg against a creature with joined strength. That would mean similar to rod of arcanum, it never receives the 4th damage, so the satyr wouldnt deal the stagger either
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Kharhaz on February 15, 2016, 08:56:42 AM
what about the satyr rolling 4 dmg against a creature with joined strength. That would mean similar to rod of arcanum, it never receives the 4th damage, so the satyr wouldnt deal the stagger either

The Satyr deals 3 damage to creature and 1 to the BM. The Stagger effect would not trigger
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Mystery on February 15, 2016, 09:48:39 AM
as i expected


So finally the dmg on joined strength never touches the creature
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Biblofilter on May 30, 2016, 01:59:12 PM
Im just bringing this up cause it happened today and i didn't know of this discussion.

My BM had a Pet Thunderift Falcon with a Joined Strenght on it. My opponent put it to sleep.

To wake it up i have to deal 2 damage?

The wording on Sleep in my old core set rulebook say "If the creature receives any damage.." and the wording on Joined Strenght "..whenever it is attacked and receives damage you must transfer that damage to your Mage instead.



Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: DaveW on May 30, 2016, 02:52:27 PM
Yes, the first point of damage goes to the mage without impacting the creature at all... so the second would wake it.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Boocheck on August 19, 2016, 07:48:50 AM
New problem :)

Joined Strength have - Whenever it is attacked and recieves damage you must transfer 1 of that damage to your mage instead.

Disciple of Radiance - Whenever your mage casts a healing incantation, Disciple of Radiance may deal 1 direct damage to a target creature in her zone.

Question - If i have 3 Disciples in a zone with an enemy creature, that has Joined Strength, and Priestes activate theirs ability by Mend. If i target that creature with Joined Strength, will be damage transfered to mage instead? We had this situation in Arena, where mage was in different zone. Our ruling was that creature with Joined strenght Was not attacked, thus condition for transfer effect was not met.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: ringkichard on August 19, 2016, 08:16:28 AM
Correct.
Title: Re: joined strength
Post by: Zuberi on August 19, 2016, 09:15:28 AM
To expand on ringkichard's comment, you are correct that Joined Strength only transfers damage when the creature is attacked. The direct damage from Disciple of Radiance is not an attack and thus does not get transferred. Similarly, the damage from a Ghoul Rot or a Burn Condition does not get transferred.