21 replies to this topic

[Stefan2581]

I think the wording would be more specific like : "When this unit would be destroyed by damage being placed on it after an attack,instead (of placing that dmg on this unit), move this unit to an adjacent planet."

 

But since it says: "When this unit would be destroyed by taking damage, ... "

it sounds like the replacement effect replaces the "destroyed being" of the unit.

[Veetek]

As I understand it, this part of Ktom's post actually explains the whole Reanimating Warrior issue:

 

There is no time between taking the last, fatal damage and being destroyed. That is, there is no game state or status in which a unit has as much or more damage as HP but is not destroyed/removed fro play. I think you would need such a state if you were going to interrupt the destruction separate from the placing of damage.

 

Being dealt fatal damage and being destroyed happen as a single occurence. You can't interrupt/react to one without interrupting/reacting to the other, even though these two things can act as separate triggers. So, in effect, the entire damage placing step is replaced by the Warrior's ability.

 

Take the Repulsor Impact Field as an example:

 

"Reaction: After attached unit is damaged by an attack, deal 2 damage to the attacker."

 

If you could react to the damage being placed separately from the unit being destroyed, you could trigger the Repulsor after it's unit was dealt fatal damage, but before it was destroyed.

But you can't, since the unit is destroyed instantly when it takes fatal damage, before any reactions to taking damage have a chance to trigger.