Gimli's Armor Questions

[hrcho]

Wait, where is this going... if the shadow player uses a whirling strike against gimli, and the dwarf prevents it with his armor, then loses the skirmish, does gimli take a wound since he is wearing the helm and can take but one wound during a skirmish?  In that case I would be inclined to believe he would take a wound.

No, Gimli takes no wounds then. 1 wound was assigned to him due to Whirling Strike, that wound was prevented with Gimli's Armor and due to Gimli's Helm, no more wounds can be assigned to him.

[Pepin The Breve]

Have to double check the rules about taking wounds, but here is what i think:

The text of Gimli´s Helm states: Bearer must be Gimli. He takes no more than 1 wound during each skirmish phase. Skirmish: Discard Gimli's Helm to prevent all wounds to him.

If you use Whirling Strike against him and prevent wound from being placed so he didn't take any wound yet, still if he lose skirmish the wounding for losing is placed. In that context i read assigned = taken.

I think This Helm text should be interpreted with good sense, even that you can interpret rules to discard Gimli´s helm
at skirmish phase and assign all threat wounds to him (making them just disapear) i think player should agree that is kinda overpowered. Something close to Lady Redemmed, she was not banned until shadows came out but that doesn't mean that the card is not unbalanced per se.

[Elessar's Socks]

I think a character "takes a wound" when a wound token is placed on that character, and not when a wound is assigned to him (assign wound -> about to take a wound -> takes a wound). In other words, you can keep assigning wounds to Gimli until a wound token is placed, at which point no more wounds can be assigned to him.

[jdizzy001]

that makes since. but did we determine if gimli can cancel the wound he reduced from the dmg +1 minion?

[hrcho]

I think a character "takes a wound" when a wound token is placed on that character, and not when a wound is assigned to him (assign wound -> about to take a wound -> takes a wound). In other words, you can keep assigning wounds to Gimli until a wound token is placed, at which point no more wounds can be assigned to him.

I am 99% sure assigning a wound does not mean token placing. I actually know there was a discussion about Gimli's Helm somewhere and the concept of wound assignment was in the middle of it. I can't find it now, maybe someone else has more luck... come to think of it, it may have been about Armor.

I found this, though:
"If a character cannot take wounds, wounds cannot be assigned to that character. However, if a card prevents wounds, wounds may still be assigned to that character."

This is the situation:

Gimli bearing Gimli's Helm and Gimli's Armor is skirmishing a Man who is dmg +3 (WLOG) and plays Whirling Strike during skirmish. Now, here is what happens:

Due to Whirling Strike, a wound is assigned to Gimli and the token for that wound is about be placed, except for Gimli's Armor which prevents that token placing.

Both player pass their actions and the Man wins the skirmish.
Now, if it weren't for Gimli's Helm, 4 wounds (dmg +3) would be assigned to Gimli and then the tokens would be placed for each of those assigned wounds. However, the text of Gimli's Helm clearly (well, not that clearly) states that only 1 wound during each skirmish phase can be assigned to him. Considering that 1 wound was already assigned to him, all the other are gone with the wind.

It doesn't matter if that wound was prevented. Wounds can only be prevented if they were previously assigned. And if 1 wound was assigned, then no more can be assigned to Gimli bearing Gimli's Helm. Q.E.D.

[Elessar's Socks]

I think a character "takes a wound" when a wound token is placed on that character, and not when a wound is assigned to him (assign wound -> about to take a wound -> takes a wound). In other words, you can keep assigning wounds to Gimli until a wound token is placed, at which point no more wounds can be assigned to him.

I am 99% sure assigning a wound does not mean token placing.

Well, agreed there, but I don't think any of us are saying that. The issue here seems to be whether a wound is taken when it is assigned, or whether a wound is taken when the token is placed.

If "taking a wound" = assignment, then Gimli's Helm will allow only one wound be assigned to Gimli.

If "taking a wound" = placement, then Gimli's Helm will allow wounds to be assigned until one is actually placed.

Personally I'm leaning toward the latter, but I haven't found something definite in the rules.

[chompers]

I am not sure if this helps .. but going back to the Morgul Brute example

Wound the Ringbearer or add a burden Add a burden or wound the RingBearer to prevent this .... I choose to wound the RingBearer. So i presume i assign the wound. I then prevent it. So we revert back to the burden because the wound was never taken. This to me implies that taking a wound occurs when the wound is placed rather than assigned ... otherwise there would be no need to revert back to the burden because the wound was taken when the wound was assigned.

If my argument makes sense .. then taking a wound must equal placement of wound (over assignment of wound) ... or have i missed something?

[TheJord]

Morgul Brute is different. Its not "add or burden or wound the Ring-bearer". Its "add a burden; wound the Ring-bearer to prevent that". Prevention and cannot are two different things in this game.

What we are saying is, if Gimli cannot take more than 1 wound, has he taken his 1 wound if that wound was prevented?

Prevention is about stopping effects while allowing costs to be paid ie winning a skirmish but not taking the effect.

[chompers]

I messed up my argument above by not reading Morgul Brute but i still think it may still be valid? I am not trying to focus on prevent and cannot, but rather the question EA asked regarding when a wound is taken - when it is assigned or placed - and apply it to a different and known situation.

If the wound is taken when it is assigned I assume this order takes place for the Morgul Brute example

I choose to prevent the burden so i wound the ringbearer - i assign the wound - I prevent the wound - wound was taken because wound was assigned - no need to revert to burden.

We know this is not true - therefore a wound must be taken when it is placed and if i am right solves the problem with Gimli's Helm - he must place a wound before he can stop all other wounds affecting him in a skirmish phase.

[Elessar's Socks]

I was thinking of Promise Keeping: "Each time a companion takes a wound during a skirmish that involves a minion, exert a companion." If taking a wound happens upon assignment, you'll get to exert a companion before placing the wound token. I've never heard of PK working like that.

[hrcho]

If the wound is taken when it is assigned I assume this order takes place for the Morgul Brute example

I choose to prevent the burden so i wound the ringbearer - i assign the wound - I prevent the wound - wound was taken because wound was assigned - no need to revert to burden.

We know this is not true - therefore a wound must be taken when it is placed and if i am right solves the problem with Gimli's Helm - he must place a wound before he can stop all other wounds affecting him in a skirmish phase.

Hmm... very good argument there and compliments on your logic and mathematical way of thinking. You assumed the opposite of what you thought and it led you to a contradiction. Nice work. You should study mathematics

This is proof enough for me and I am convinced. Nice work, chompers.

[chompers]

If the wound is taken when it is assigned I assume this order takes place for the Morgul Brute example

I choose to prevent the burden so i wound the ringbearer - i assign the wound - I prevent the wound - wound was taken because wound was assigned - no need to revert to burden.

We know this is not true - therefore a wound must be taken when it is placed and if i am right solves the problem with Gimli's Helm - he must place a wound before he can stop all other wounds affecting him in a skirmish phase.

Hmm... very good argument there and compliments on your logic and mathematical way of thinking. You assumed the opposite of what you thought and it led you to a contradiction. Nice work. You should study mathematics

This is proof enough for me and I am convinced. Nice work, chompers.

Maths / Science teacher Not an English teacher - not great at explaining my crazy ideas ...

[Thranduil]

I was thinking of Promise Keeping: "Each time a companion takes a wound during a skirmish that involves a minion, exert a companion." If taking a wound happens upon assignment, you'll get to exert a companion before placing the wound token. I've never heard of PK working like that.

Yes! Exactly. The Helm stops him taking more than 1 wound, but unless the wound is actually placed, he hasn't taken anything because it was prevented.

Thranduil

[jdizzy001]

so once a wound has been placed, gimli can use the armor to prevent further damage

[Elessar's Socks]

Once a wound has been taken/placed, Gimli's Helm will stop further wounds from being assigned to him... but Gimli's Armor won't have the opportunity to prevent further wounds, for that reason.