Dollkeeper vs Gideon/Andriel

[ANIMEniac]

Had trouble finding the ruling on this.

Would Dollkeeper still kill off Gideon/Andriel even if they reduce the battle damage to 0?

[captiantiny]

um....... idk exactly... but i would no it would not destroy them because it didn't actually do the damage

[jedibcg]

From Gideon:
If battle damage is inflicted to this card while it's attacking, reduce the amount to 0.

From the Dollkeeper:
If this card inflicts damage to a character, destroy that character.

From Adriel:
If battle damage is inflicted to this card while it's blocking, reduce the amount to 0.

503.4 Sometimes multiple triggers happen at the same time. If all the triggers originated from cards under one player’s control, that player decides the order in which they happen. However, if the triggers originated from cards under both players’ control then the active player decides the order in which they happen.

So it would depend. While attacking Gideon would live because his trigger would haven first (I would assume the player would choose to have his trigger first). While defending Adriel would die because his trigger would happen second (again I am assuming the player with the Dollkeeper attacking would choose his trigger first).

Unless I am missing something Hordak, Lioge, kallisti, anyone?

[ANIMEniac]

There are so many ways to think about this.

One argument i had was over "battle damage" triggers. Gideon's effect triggers off battle damage. So can we then say that Dollkeeper did in fact do battle damage to cause Gideon's trigger?

Also, considering that both effects are being triggered simultaneously, i don't think Gideon's effect would prevent Doll's from taking resolving since both have already been triggered.

From what i understand, if effects are activated/triggered, their effects would resolve. Just like how you can't chain to "erase" a rulestext with Inhibit to stop an already activated ability from resolving, I don't think reducing the battle damage to 0 changes the fact battle damage has already been dealt.

[Oy_mate]

Gideons ability reads "If battle damage is inflicted to this card". So therefore damage must have been inflicted in order for the trigger to activate.

Dollkeepers trigger is "If this card inflicts damage". So it must have inflicted damage for Gideons ability to trigger and therefore its own ability triggers.

Once both abilities trigger it isn't important which goes first as both will resolve so although Gideon does not die from damage, he will die from the Dollkeeper card effect.

End result is Gideon will die.

[waiya]

no dollkeeper would not kill gideon or adriel I call your attention to the following

407.1 If something tries to inflict 0 damage, then no damage is actually inflicted.

407.2 If damage greater than 0 is inflicted, damage increase and reduction effects are applied but nothing else that should trigger happens yet.

407.2a If the final adjusted amount of damage is 0, nothing further happens. However, if it was battle damage, the source character is considered to have inflicted its damage for the purposes of ending the resolution loop.

407.2b If the final adjusted amount is greater than 0, all appropriate triggers now occur.

so in the senario of dollkeeper vs gideon

a dollkeeper assigns 2 damage
b gideon would trigger first as it is a reducer..
c damage reduced to 0
d as the adjusted inflicted damage is 0 407.1 takes effect and it is considered that no damage was inflicted and not 0 damage

think of it this way, when it comes to gideon and adriel hitting them for battle damage while they are attacking or blocking respectfully is no different then your guy basically missing.

i might be wrong but I'm pretty sure that's how it goes

[ANIMEniac]

I think there is the difference of hitting for 0 and having damage reduced to 0.

407.2a states that even if reduction takes damage to 0, the card is still considered to have inflicted damage. That still sounds legal for Doll's trigger to occur.

407.1 i think is worded to prevent someone from trying to assign 0 battle damage (like with Dollkeeper against a huge party) and try to say they did in fact do battle damage to everyone, although they can only do 2 actual damage.

[captiantiny]

grrrrrrrr... both sides have valid points... JOSH HELP!!!!!!

[waiya]

with my understanding of the damage rules

inflicting damage and having it reduced (has damage modifiers happen first before anything else can trigger) to 0 is no different from attacking with a guy that has 0 str

otherwise dollkeeper that had his STR reduced to 0 by virulent dogmatist could still destroy characters by inflicting 0 damage.

Now it would help if I pasted the whole thing I will bold relavent parts


407 Damage

407.1 If something tries to inflict 0 damage, then no damage is actually inflicted.This covers all characters that have 0 STR when assigning damage

407.1a This means nothing that would trigger as a result of damage being inflicted happens. so in the case of 0 damage Gideon would not try to reduce it and dollkeeper would not kill it

407.1b If it was battle damage, the source character is considered to have inflicted its damage for the purposes of ending the resolution loop.(I will come back to this)

407.2 If damage greater than 0 is inflicted, damage increase and reduction effects are applied but nothing else that should trigger happens yet.This part clearly show Gideons reduction happens first, in a sense the game gives priority to pump and reduction over all other effects

407.2a If the final adjusted amount of damage is 0, nothing further happens. However, if it was battle damage, the source character is considered to have inflicted its damage for the purposes of ending the resolution loop.

407.2b If the final adjusted amount is greater than 0, all appropriate triggers now occur.

ok so to reference the rules it would go

dollkeeper blocks gideon
speed 4
dollkeeper assigns 2 damage to gideon
game halts all triggers and checks for reducers/increases and applies them
damage is now 0 so 407.2a applies and nothing further happens this backs up the earlier rules 407.1 and 407.1a

now the reason "However, if it was battle damage, the source character is considered to have inflicted its damage for the purposes of ending the resolution loop." is in there is to prevent the following from happening.

player A attacks with a 1/1/3 and player B blocks with a 0/2/3
now with out that added bit player B could wait and let speed 3 damage be assigned and resolve. then play runic reinforcement to raise the STR of his blocker.
then the game checks for the highest speed that has not assigned damage. thus he could argue that the 0/2/3 did not assign damage therefor it can now assign its new 3 damage.
But with the rule. the game considers 0 damage assigned as 0 damage inflicted so that it can not later try to hit again

[captiantiny]

oh ok ya i understand hmmm... nice to know