Destruction of Adaptive Plating Subroutines

When the last adaptive plating subroutine is destroyed, does omnitron lose immunity? Or does it stay immune to the damage type it was last immune to, effectivly neutralizing one of the heroes (unless a type changing card is in play)?. When a new adaptive plating subroutine enters play does it change this permanent immunity? Or does it make omnitron immune to yet another type of damgage? 

Generalizing, is omnitron immune to one type of damage per adaptive plating subroutine that entered play, ignoring the second, third, or 4th... subroutine in play now?

The card says:

After omnitron is dealt damge omnitron becomes immune to that type of damage.When omnitron is dealt a diffrent type of damage, omnitron's immunity switches to that type.

I've always taken it that the APS is what's granting the immunity, thus if it's destroyed the immunity is lost. I would also figure taht as all APSs have the same description, they all work in exactly the same way, thus the only benefit Omnitron gets from having multiple copies out is that there are more of them for the heroes to destroy (so if they can only destroy one at a time, Omnitron gets to enjoy immunity to stuff for longer).

Since it doesn't say "At the start of the turn..." or "deal damage, if the damage is dealt this way...", it appears that the APR is supplying the immunity.  As far as I can tell is if you break it, you break his immunity.

Omnitron can't really be immune to different types of damage with multiple APR.  If he's immune to Projectile with one and another comes into play, the other still hasn't been "primed," so to speak, with damage.  It has no effect until he's dealt damage.  If dealt Projectile, he's immune to it from the first and the second doesn't trigger (because damage wasn't dealt).  Let's say Ra fire Blasts him for 5 Fire damage.  Omnitron is dealt the damage, the first APS makes him immune to Fire, and then the second makes him immune to Fire.  He's double immune!  But only to Fire, not in addition to Projectile.  Any which way, you wanna break all of them that come into play.  Unless your damage pool is rather diverse, they suck royally.

Would you think that a one-shot that said "omnitron becomes  immune to projectile damage would be meaningless? If not, why do you think that APR is granting the immunity since it also  uses the word becomes ?

My question was about an Adaptive Plating Subroutine entering play, being destroyed, then entering play again, not about two subroutines in play. That was already answered.

Adaptive Plating Subroutine has the same affect if the damage types of the heroes in turn order is melee,projectile,melee,projectile,melee… or melee,proojectile,fire,cold,lighning… or anything inbetween (melee,projectile,fire,projectile,cold…).

Basically, an APS is only useful to Omnitron if he's being hit with the same type of damage twice in a row. So, probably not too difficult to get around unless you're playing with, say, Mr Fixer, Haka, and Legacy or something.

I always place my heroes in an order that is advantageous for this, but Adaptive Plating Subroutine always causes issues anyway.  Keep in mind, a lot of heroes derive power from making several attacks in a row, and they often deal the same type of damage with these attacks.  A large number of heroes can't use a one-shot then a power and have them both deal damage to Omnitron.  Some heroes rely on multiple attacks for their offensive, like Wraith with two powers, or Tempest's Vicious Cyclone.  Some heroes specialize in double attacks - Absolute Zero's Thermal Shockwave, or anything of Nightmist's redirected through the Amulet.  Ra can only attack him once a turn, maybe twice if he's willing to throw the Staff, and he can't use Imbued Fire.  Sometimes there's no issue with the APS, but leaving it in play causes at least a momentary hiccup every single time.

One game I played featured Argent Adept, Visionary and Tachyon against him.  They aren't known for their damage output, but they use different types.  We left both Subroutines in play because we didn't anticipate an issue.  It meant that Tachyon, on whom we had to rely to do the bulk of the damage, could not effectively overwhelm Omnitron in Lightspeed Barrages.  It took some really complicated tricks from the Argent Adept to let her play cards on his turn, interspersed with his own fire and cold, and interrupted with Visionary's psychic attack to finally pull it off.

Why not just use the Adept to destroy the APS with his "destroy and ongoing or environment" song? Or is the APS a Device rather than an Ongoing? Hmm, wait, that wouldn't work, as I know it isn't a target so you'd never be able to destroy it if that were the case.

*Shrug.* For the simple reason that we didn't have it.

Oh okay...fair enough, then ;).

I don't think I'm quite understanding your first point.  Do you disagree with me and think that he stays immune to a damage type after the card is destroyed?

For the second, my apologies for misunderstanding.  As far as I know, cards don't retain any effects from being in play previously and start fresh when they enter play.  No, APS would not carry over immunity if it was destroyed and another entered play.

As for your third, yes…that is what APS does.  What does that have to do with what I was saying?

Yes, i think that omnitron stays immune to a damage type due to the usage of the word becomes.

Cards that say "…untill…" have effects after they are destroyed.(aka zelous offense and  heroic interception), the latter of which is one-shot.Yes, i agree with you that the answer tom my second initial question is no.

You made a sidenote about adaptive plating subrountines sucking if you're damage pool is not diverse and i was saying that what matters is order of types, not number of diffrent types.

What is providing the immunity after the adaptive plating is stripped from Omintron's body?

Ah.  Yes, I meant that if you had a party that primarily dealt one or two kinds of damage, it would be rather tricky working around his immunity by order.  If the order is Bunker, Expatriette, Haka, and Mr. Fixer, the likelihood of dealing only Projectile for two turns then only Melee for two turns can limit the party's effectiveness quite a bit.  But you're right.  If a damage pool is made up primarily of two different damage types (certain Ongoings and One-Shots being an exception), it isn't a problem if it shifts from Type 1 to Type 2 each turn against APS.

If an ongoing doesn't specify a timeframe, then it lasts until the card is destroyed and no longer. If I have an ongoing that says my damage is increased by 1 and it's destroyed, I stop getting the +1 damage. I'm not really sure why you would think Adaptive Plating Subroutine would the only ongoing in the entire game that somehow magically continues to funtion from the trash.

If you cant read the effect you cant get the effect. Cards game have no memory.

That's not entirely true.  If a card says something happens until a hero's next turn (for example), and the card goes away, that doesn't change the fact that the effect is in play until the hero's next turn.  I believe that's been determined on the forums, though I (of course) can't find it right now.

In the past I've always played it such that when the APS goes away, the immunity goes away, but I think a strict reading of the card suggests that the immunity does not go away.

What provides the immunity after the APS is gone? Well, my general answer is 'Comics!', i.e. it doesn't have to make sense.

A more logical answer might be that the APS alters the rest of Omnitron in response to an attack. With the APS gone, Omnitron can't be altered again, but the original alteration is still there. Just a possibility.

That was actually a question to get pppery to think about it in terms of 'story', if Tachyon runs at superspeeds to stip all the plating off of Omnitron which had previously adapted into an ultra hard shell to stop Expatriette's bullets from impact on its soft...ware... what is now providing protection from the righteous rounds of JUSTICE!

If we say that a card continues to apply its bonus after it is destroyed just because it doesn't say when it ends, I would love to play with Visionary and her ongoing retrival!

If Adaptive Plating Subroutine says "omnitron is immune to the type of damage it was last dealt", than i would think that destroying loses immunity, but the usage of the word becomes makes me think that omnitron does not.As areson9 said, things do not have to make sense.

It can make sense : what is destroyed is the "adaptative subroutine", the process by which Omnitron partly rebuilds itself to resist damage - not the result of this process. You managed to kill the nanobots who modify his molecular structure, but did not revert their previous work.

But this doesn't help with the question at hand - and I have no idea what the official answer would be. I know that I first played with the "lose immunity when card is destroyed" rule, then decided to keep the immunity, then went back to destroying it when the card is destroyed, for the only reason that there is no way for the heroes to get rid of the immunity otherwise...

Nor do you have any way to track it/be reminded of it, unless it happens to be an immunity you have a token for.

I use a "you can't deal damage" token and put it on the card that did the damage and created the immunity as a reminder.

We're telling you that when APS is destroyed Omnitron loses his immunity. If you didn't want an answer, I'm not really sure why you asked a question.

I agree that the wording on Adaptive Plating sounds like the immunity stays.  I've never played it that way though, because it seems fairly obvious that it is not the intended effect of the card.  I empathize with the desire to follow all card instructions like a computer program, but this is a case where I accept some implied meaning.

I think the more precise wording for how I have always played this card would be "If Omnitron has been dealt damage since this card entered play, Omnitron is immune to the last type of damage that he was dealt."

When equating card wording to that of computer execution, a card that creates a potentially infinite lingering effect after destruction sounds to me like a memory leak.

Unforunately Zero you are telling him what you believe the card /intends/ to happen - which is probably correct. It is most certainly the most sane way of playing it.

However, the way the card is worded without an exit clause to it, as /written/ it could potentially continue indefinetly. Unless there is a rule in the rule book that i missed (entirely possible!) that says destroyed card effects are canceled, it could easily be read as continuing. Becoming is the key world, not 'while this card is in play, omnitron is immune to the first type of damage delt to him each turn' or 'If this card leaves play, this immunity is ended' ect ect.  Obviously as this has only -just- been asked on the forums then it is unlikely anyone is playing with it that way, or if they are then they have no problem with it. But it could probably use a clarification yes

I don't really care about how this argument turns out, since I'm still going to play it the same way after Christopher comes in to make his official ruling that it plays the way everyone is saying it plays. I just wanted to pop in to point out that making a word ridiculously larger like this is one of the worst ways to point it out. It just makes you look belligerent, rather than informed. Try italics or quotes next time.

Well to be fair, he did bold it a few days ago, then bold and slightly enlarge it, then try the really large font.  And yet many people just keep responding that ongoing effects go away when a card goes away without acknowledging the main point: this card is worded as a triggered reaction, not an ongoing effect.  There are definately triggered reactions with lasting effects after the card leaves play (look at sonic mine), but the rest of them all include an end condition (like 'until the start of the next villain turn').

We all seem to come to the conclusion that the immunity goes away with adaptive plating, but I don't think there is a great argument for why other than "it seems like that's what the card should say".

The thing is, I did acknowledge the becomes thing: "If an ongoing doesn't specify a timeframe, then it lasts until the card is destroyed and no longer." APS doesn't specify a timeframe. Therefore its effects go away when it's destroyed.

It doesn't need a "while this card is in play" any more than Micro Targeting Computer or HUD Goggles do.

I'm inclined to agree with Cosmonaut Zero.  There already is a precedent for effects that do not go away regardless of player interaction, and that comes from Indestructible cards.  If >G's intention was to cause a permanent immunity to Big O, they would have.  But where would this theory end?  Does this mean that damage dealt by cards that have been destroyed are restored after they leave?  Legacy's Heroic Interception states that all other heroes are immune to damage.  It doesn't say the card is providing the immunity, so when it's destroyed do they remain immune to damage?  I suppose I'm confused as to why the word "becomes" makes this issue terribly muddied.

Cards like Next Evolution last until the beginning of the turn, even if they are destroyed, because they specifically say "Until the start of the next turn."

If it doesn't say that, then the immunity goes away instantly. This applies to things like heroic interception and ground pound, as well as things like Ethereal Bonds.

Do you have a rule book quote or a card quote for that effect CZ?

If you don't have a specific in writting rule, then its Read as Intended with Plating. If you do, then it becomes Read as Written and is much harder to argue against. 

Is there a rule presented that validates this interpretation of "becomes"?

becomes  3rd person singular present of be·come (Verb)

The second definition being the important one. 'Turn into' - there is no timelimit on Becoming. It simply turns into this aspect. 

That's Read as Written.

And there is a precedent for any card that creates an ongoing effect with no time limit, and that is to end the effect when the card is destroyed.  This is not stated anywhere in the rulebook, but it has been explained by Christopher and Adam (I've never played a game with Paul), and it makes since both commonly and logically.  To interpret 'become' to not only have a time limit, but also to break the precedent of limitless effects removed when the corresponding card is removed, it's not consistant with the rest of the game.

in·crease/inˈkrēs/

Verb:

Become or make greater in size, amount, intensity, or degree: "increase awareness of social issues"; "increasing numbers of students".

So if you take, say, Legacy's Surge of Strength ("Increase damage dealt by Legacy by 1"), then by your own logic that bonus is also permanent; there's no time limit on increase either.

Ok, I repeat myself :

If there is no card to tell you something is there there is nothing !

While dictionaries are informative, pulling out definitions seems rather patronizing and doesn't actually address the written rules.  Can we stick to the game and its glossary rather than pulling up an outside authority that means relatively little in a game with its own terminology and mechanics?

I think precedence is important to establish. If cards can continue to have lingering effects after they've been destroyed, there really is no point to ongoing destruction, and would make cards like Danger Sense too powerful. Also, if the effect lingers, there's not much point having multiple copies in the same deck other than increasing the chances of drawing it. Also, there wouldn't be a need to have indestructible cards if you can make effects permanent by adding in the word becomes.

Sorry, bro, but you are wrong. APS causes the immunity, so once it's gone the immunity is gone. There is no room for debate.

<Mod Voice>  Stop  </Mod Voice>

(You don't want that to be followed by "Hammer time.")

Healthy debate is acceptable. This has devolved into unhealthy debate. For example, saying "There is no room for debate" when there are obviously difference of opinion is insulting and disrepectful.

We want this to remain a positive environment to promote a healthy and vibrant community. I think we all want that. Please keep that in mind when you post.

We'll try to dig Christopher out from under the pile of cards and notes to see if he can provide some insight. In the meantime, please feel free to civilly discuss your opinions.

see -thats- all I was asking for. Somewhere, some other official source that has stated this is an ended effect. 

As written the definition of becomes is important because as far as I  know there is no other card that uses that term that does not say it ends. If Christopher and Adam have said that the common sense logic applies, then I'm all for it.

I think that its important to note here, -I agree with the common sense- and that is how we play it. We do not give Omnitron a perm damage immunity when plating is destroyed. 

The point is that in terms of rules systems you have to apply Read as Written - that is the exact definition of the words (hence my defining) and the exact meaning of those words in order, with no other added effects that are not stated directly. This is the only fair way to interpret rules because Read as Intended (which is what we are doing with this card) opens it up to people whose interpretations are different than others. Its not a big deal with this card, cause it seems everyone applies to a common interpretation that it ends. But it -could- become such. 

And even then, RaW is not perfect. It is very easy to see RaW in two different ways, but it is less likely than RaI where 2 people can have widly different ideas of what was intended. 

The only other cards I know with the same grammar are the Tomb of Anubis Treasure cards.   "They gain the following power:" as opposed to "They have the following power".  In this case, common sense says that they are supposed to lose the power not only if the card leaves play but also if it moves to another play area when another trial is destroyed.  (Though whether that second event is even possible could be another difference between written and intended effect).

Also, I want to second the idea that everyone seems to agree on intended effect and best way to play here.  The debate is just on how you read this literally.  That may seem pedantic and pointless to some of you, but some of us find it interesting.

I think the real problem here is the rulebook doesn't state the obvious: when cards are destroyed their effects go away unless a duration was specified. We all play with this rule because without it the game breaks. But it's still something we all had to assume, and when somebody really challenges it it's impossible to point to anything that confirms it. If you go too far that direction you end up with Magic's 196 page monstrosity. Apparently there's a desire for that level of specificity at times or they wouldn't have put all that effort into creating it, but I don't really think of Sentinels as the kind of game where people are generally going to want to lawyer (or in this case devil's advocate) that hard.

Okay, he's back under the cards and notes, but while we had him in the sunlight Christopher gave us a cryptic message. Once we deciphered it (turns out it was in another language - who knew there were other languages out there?), here's what he said:

When Adaptive Plating Subroutine comes into play, it initially does nothing. It just sits and waits for Omnitron to get hit. Then, when the giant robot does take damage, Adaptive Plating Subroutine kicks in, making Omnitron immune to that type of damage after the damage has been dealt. Then, Adaptive Plating Subroutine sits there, maintaining that damage immunity until another type of damage comes along and changes it. You all seem to understand this just fine, but I wanted to reiterate the basics of how it worked, just so we were all on the same page.

The important distinction here is that Adaptive Plating Subroutine is the thing making Omnitron immune to melee or fire or rabit damage. So, if Adaptive Plating Subroutine is not in play, then Omnitron has no damage immunity.

Final answer: When APS goes away, the protection does, also.

(Did he say rabit damage? )

He did say rabit damage! New damage type confirmed for Vengeance!? ;D

Well, when talking about Twist the Ether, he also mentioned cheese damage, kitty damage, and Chris damage.

What about duck damage? Why does everything always go to the rabbits?

I am VERY PLEASED by the idea of kitty damage. I have a sudden urge to play Visionary and Expatriette against Matriarch. I need to do some kitty damage to some birds.

Rabbits are funnier.

Seriously, there's the hats and stuff…

Yeah, but what's with all the carrots? What do they need such good eyesight for anyway?

CZ: +1 Shiny point.

(I've got a theory that it's a demon. A dancing demon…)

No, something isn't right there.  Demons would deal Infernal damage.

Or is it Abyssal damage?  The only demon we really have so far actually deals melee damage.  Hm.  A good joke ruined, I guess.  Or a good joke leading to other jokes?

I've got a theory: It doesn't matter.

You're thinking bunnies. Big difference.

Speciesist!

Or maybe midgets ?

I've got a theory some kid is dreaming, and we're all stuck inside his wacky broadway nightmare...in which rabbits are shot from Expatriette's gun cache and Tachyon is as speedy as a kitten.