$5.00
$20.00
$15.00
Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Giga-Robo!» Forums » Rules

Subject: "Inflict Damage" "Inflict Damage Per Success" rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Nate Parkes
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
This might be already addressed by the language cleanup pass currently underway, but I found this common wording a little troublesome.

From Cards:


Azyn Punch!

Special Text: Inflict damage.

Azyn Gatling Blaster!

Special Text: Inflict damage per success.

Azyn Blaster!

Special Text: Push your opponent 1 hex.

From Rules:

Step VI of Combat: The winning Attack’s Rules text is resolved: The Rules text may inflict additional damage, Forcefully Move players, Trigger abilities, require Recovery Rolls, generate tokens in players’ Cooldown Meters, or have other effects.

Step VIII: The losing player totals the winning Attack’s damage value, any additional damage inflicted by a card’s rules text, plus any
damage inflicted by Collisions or Impacts. If they have a Barrier Activated, they reduce the inflicted damage by 3, remove the
Barrier from their Robot Board and reduce their Armor by the remaining amount of damage.

My Question:

If I make a successful AZYN PUNCH! on my opponent, the rules text is resolved in step VI, which reads "Inflict damage."

I think the intent of this text is effectively "I am a vanilla card," but it could also be interpreted as "Inflict damage twice, once when you resolve the 'inflict damage' special text in step VI, and again when you apply the card's printed Attack damage value in step VIII.

On the other hand, if there was an instant or ability that canceled an the rules text on an opponent's card, it could be interpreted that it cancels all damage from the Azyn Punch (since the "Inflict Damage" rules text is cancels), while it wouldn't cancel the damage inflicted by Azyn Blaster (since the rules text doesn't refer to damage, so damage is inflicted normally).

But first, I wanted to make sure:

a) Is the intent of "inflict damage" cards only that they inflict damage normally?

b) Is the intent of "inflict damage per success" cards that the multiplied damage value replaces the printed damage value on the card?

c) If an "Inflict Damage" or "Inflict Damage Per Success" text was cancelled, would the card inflict any damage?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nate Parkes
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
It reminds me a little of an issue They Might Be Giants discovered in their rider--because they had altered the section covering the unloading of the equipment to specify the staff must be sober (following a bad experience), they had unintentionally implied that any staff NOT unloading could be drunk.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mathew rynich
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Argama Flight Crew
badge
INFERNO BLADE!
mbmbmbmbmb
I had brought this up to them during the campaign and they said they were going to clean up that language because they agreed it was inconsistent.

The "Inflict Damage" text was added because blank text on the card was confusing some playtesters. Unless I am misremembering Alex confirmed that it is just reminding you to inflict the regular card damage.

I believe Alex proposed that he include the "inflict damage" reminder on all the cards. That way it would be consistent. Though that means the rules for resolving an attack need to address that it's telling you to inflict damage on the card, which can be confusing since right now card text and inflicted damage happens at different steps and can be interrupted by an Instant.

I agree that this would create a problem where if they every created a card text blanking ability it would also imply that the damage would be negated as well. So it does constrain their card design a little bit. Though having consistent rules wording is preferable to the current demo card text.

Add: I still think the current demo rules don't properly explain how bonus damage is inflicted in the context of a combo. Meaning if I receive +1 melee damage from a pilot card then I play a three card combo do I get +1 damage to that attack or +3 damage. In other words am I modifying the damage value on the cards or the total damage of the attack. Furthermore If I initiate the same combo and the ruling is that I modify the total attack value then what happens if one of the cards is a ranged attack and the other two are melee. Does that mean I get no bonus damage. Those sorts of things need to be cleaned up (or made more obvious) in the final version.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nate Parkes
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
phillosmaster wrote:
I had brought this up to them during the campaign and they said they were going to clean up that language because they agreed it was inconsistent.

The "Inflict Damage" text was added because blank text on the card was confusing some playtesters. Unless I am misremembering Alex confirmed that it is just reminding you to inflict the regular card damage.

I believe Alex proposed that he include the "inflict damage" reminder on all the cards. That way it would be consistent. Though that means the rules for resolving an attack need to address that it's telling you to inflict damage on the card, which can be confusing since right now card text and inflicted damage happens at different steps and can be interrupted by an Instant.

I agree that this would create a problem where if they every created a card text blanking ability it would also imply that the damage would be negated as well. So it does constrain their card design a little bit. Though having consistent rules wording is preferable to the current demo card text.

Add: I still think the current demo rules don't properly explain how bonus damage is inflicted in the context of a combo. Meaning if I receive +1 melee damage from a pilot card then I play a three card combo do I get +1 damage to that attack or +3 damage. In other words am I modifying the damage value on the cards or the total damage of the attack. Furthermore If I initiate the same combo and the ruling is that I modify the total attack value then what happens if one of the cards is a ranged attack and the other two are melee. Does that mean I get no bonus damage. Those sorts of things need to be cleaned up (or made more obvious) in the final version.


Yep. I have faith that's it going to come together in a great way. But I'm just anxious for the game, and so I start poking at things.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Cheng
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
B) would be the correct answer—inflict damage per success replaces the printed damage value on the card.

A combo is treated as a single attack, so you'd inflict +1 damage on top of the entire combo, rather than +1 damage on each individual card in the combo. That part's currently in the rules, but we have an extensive overhaul that demonstrates how combos are constructed, with diagrams and such (also every section is getting full diagrams.)

The "inflict damage" text was originally there due to initial playtester confusion, clarifying that an otherwise rules text-less card still resolves and inflicts damage. We're currently playing with the formatting so that there's a bottom section for damage specifically, so that the cards effectively have 3 sections, "Requirements", "Rules Text", and "Damage". This also helps clean up some of the density of some Requirements on cards. That said, the formatting is still being adjusted.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oblivion Doll
New Zealand
flag msg tools
phillosmaster wrote:
Meaning if I receive +1 melee damage from a pilot card then I play a three card combo do I get +1 damage to that attack or +3 damage. In other words am I modifying the damage value on the cards or the total damage of the attack. Furthermore If I initiate the same combo and the ruling is that I modify the total attack value then what happens if one of the cards is a ranged attack and the other two are melee. Does that mean I get no bonus damage. Those sorts of things need to be cleaned up (or made more obvious) in the final version.


This provides a couple of interesting questions. One was answered, but the other part isn't really clear (at least to me).

If a combo includes both melee and ranged attacks, how do the attack types apply? Is the combo only counted as a particular type if all cards used are that type? Or does it take on both types if both are included?

I think I remember someone saying in a previous discussion that combos only gain the attack type if all cards are the same type, but I can't find the reference to confirm that right now.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Cheng
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Modifiers to subtypes still apply to the individual cards comprising the combo, but in terms of resolution, a combo is considered a single attack.

The revisions to the rulebook and card text are clarifying this a lot by having specific reverences to cards/abilities affecting a card or an attack, so that the rule about treating combos as a single attack isn't even necessary (except for resolution.) This way, if an ability affected all "ranged attack cards", the modification would affect individual ranged attack cards in the combo, but if an ability affects "your attack", it would be applied once on top of the total inflicted effects and damage from the combo.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mathew rynich
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Argama Flight Crew
badge
INFERNO BLADE!
mbmbmbmbmb
I think Oblivion Doll is curious about something like this specifically:

I'm running Kato Born To Fight. He's piloting Dai-Raijin V who plays a three card combo ARC HUNTER! + FLASH STRIKE! + IONIZE! FIRE!

Do I apply the +1 melee damage from Born To Fight to this combo attack considering it comprises two ranged attacks and 1 melee attack? Born To Fight sort of requires that we classify the entire attack as Ranged or Melee to determine if we get the bonus damage.

Thanks for talking this out with us Alex. I appreciate all the work you are doing to button up the language.

Add: I had been playing it that the +1 melee from Born To Fight happens once when we total damage and that the combo needed to include only melee attacks to be considered a melee attack for Born To Fight.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Cheng
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I understand—that's all with the current iteration is the thing. For example, Born To Fight now reads "Increase the damage of all Melee Attack Cards by +1", and for contrast, Iron Fusion Stage 2 reads "Increase the amount of all inflicted damage by +1". The Combo section also now clarifies that the Rules Text of each card is resolved 1 card at a time from left-to-right, but all damage is totaled and inflicted once once the attack successfully resolves. So Born To Fight spikes each card in the combo, adding to the total, while Iron Fusion Stage 2 adds 1 damage on top of the combo. The phrasing on the latter 2 is temp, bu the way, but those are the intentions.

We're going to release a really comprehensive update to Tabletopia once the language is all finalized, and the remaining sculpts are finished (so we can upload the expansions as well). The demo is unfortunately in a state of limbo as we're finalizing everything else.

Edits: Fixed typos.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mathew rynich
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Argama Flight Crew
badge
INFERNO BLADE!
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks Alex. The new rules wording sounds much cleaner.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.