Timing of Triggered Effects Upon Playing a Card

So, I recall that in previous discussions of Negative Energy Field and Surprise Shopping Trip, it's been established that triggers contingent upon playing a card happen after the card is actually played.  I am not clear on whether this means you *completely resolve* the card and then have these triggers happen, or if you insert the trigger resolution right before the text of the card, essentially having it be in play but not have done anything yet.

Say there's an Informant out.  Fixer plays Charge and kills it.  Is a villain card played when I play Charge, before the damage is dealt to kill her?

Make it more complicated, say that CR plays Eye on the Prize x2.  Playing the second one is part of the effect of the first one, so the "stack" hasn't cleared; does the Informant have time to make a couple calls before she's gunned down?

At what exact moment in sequence do triggers occur?  I'm pretty sure that no matter what the answer is, something is going to go pear-shaped somewhere as a result.

You've remembered wrong. Triggers on play a card trigger as soon as the card enters play but before its effects are resolved. So the informant would play the top card of the villain deck the instant the card hit the table but before it did anything, so if you played a damage resistant card, it wouldn't matter if you were hit, and so on and so forth. Exception is Hairtrigger Reflexes and targets ntering play so that she doesn't completely shut down the Matriarch, but that's more in the vein of unintended, unfun consequences than actual rule.

You may be thinking of trigger effects on using powers which do resolve only after the power has completely resolved, including any card destruction/plays from the power.

Personally, I think Expatriette totally shutting the Matriarch down is a lot of fun.

This is wrong now.

The reason Effects that triggered on cards entering play happened before the text on the card was because the order the cards entered play is the order they were resolved in.

So any reaction to a card entering play was already in play before the card just entering, therefore it went first, followed by the card that just entered play.

That rule no longer applies, and the new rule is the order is resolved in the order the players choose.

So card enters play:

Its text and any triggers that activate on a card being played (or entering play) all try to happen at the same time.

The players then choose what order they happen in.

For Example (from our recent Forum game vs. IL Vigilence vs. accelerated assault:  Tachyone played Accelerated assault when she was at 1hp, we chose to have the damage go through to IL before vigilance incapacitated her.  If the card had been Hypersonic Assault or Wraith with Throat Jab there would not have been any retaliatory damage.

As for the Eye on the Prize double up it would go as such:

1.  Play Eye on the Prize:  choose to activate the card effect or the response (simultaneou)  Let's say you choose to do Eye first:

2.  Damage Informant 1, draw a card play Eye on the Prize:

3.  Now your choice is to resolve the second Eye on the Prize or the Informant response to the second Eye (the first has to wait for the first Eye to fully resolved, due to your previous choice.)  Let's say you choose Eye again.

4.  Deal Informant 1 damage, destroying her, then Operative deals you damage (since there is no competition for this timing there is no choice), then you draw and play another card.

5.  The two reactions waiting to occur do not occur, as the Informant left the field and cannot do anything anymore.

Now let's say in a fit of raging insanity you decide in step 4 to damage something other than Informant:

4.  Deal #wrongtarget 1 damage, draw a card, play a card, now you get a third choice, the card play for informant's latest reaction or the card itself, lets say you go with the card and it is your Danny Boy.

5.  Danny Boy is played, having resolved its effect: all at once Informant would process three card play reactions as the two Eye on the Prize cards resolve as well as Danny Boy, all at the same time.  (You could worry about the order they resolve in, but the result remains that three cards are played from the top of the villain deck, and your two Eye on the Prize go to the trash, while Danny Boy remains)

Part of the reason why I'm not certain the OoO ruling applies here is based on this thread:

https://greaterthangames.com/forum/topic/nighmist-amulet-and-investigate-4478#comment-50914

We've known for some time that in cases like this, you stop in the middle of a sentence (let alone between two sentences) to resolve other card effects before you go back to finish the original effect.  Thusly, it's very hard for two things to be happening "simultaneously", and it seems pretty clear to me that the moment when a card is considered to have been played ought to be the very instant it hits the table, before the first word of the first sentence of its rules text gets read off.

Text on a card activates immediately.  There is no delay for the others to exploit, the very instant the card enters play both try to happen.

Enter play -> text activates.

There isn't speed of reactions, when a card enters play it triggers its own text.  When a card enters play it triggers any and all reactions to a card entering play.

Therefore the cards effect and all effects that trigger when a card enters play will be trying to trigger simultaneously.

That is conjecture at the moment. There is nothing that says the previous ruling that put into play is a separate stage that occurs before text on the card is read is now overturned. Barring that, I'm going to agree with Envisioner that it is still a separate stage and so not simultaneous. You could decide which of two cards that both trigger on card put into play (say the Informant and something from the Realm of Discord) triggers first, but that doesn't mean everything is simultaneous.

A better example of what confuses me is Visionary's "Wrest the Mind".  It works like this:

"Whenever that target deals damage, you may redirect that damage to another target.  If you do, the visionary deals this card's target."  And that's all you ever implement, because even though you haven't reached the part of the sentence that says to deal damage yet, you do indeed deal damage, killing the target, destroying WtM, and thus preventing the other damage from being dealt to Visionary herself.  (I still think this wording should be changed, even if the result is that the card is in 6-point type.)

So, if you can stop in the middle of a sentence to check for card effects, why can't you stop at the beginning of a sentence to check for card effects?  If you do, then certainly SST and Informant will go "whoa, a card was played" and do their thing, entire microseconds before that card actually does anything.  Arguably static effects might be applied at that time, so Heavy Plating could prevent SST from hurting you when you play it, but card effects that require resolution seem like they ought to, y'know, actually need to resolve, which is a process that takes time, and Informant/SST/etc. would insert themselves into that sequence at the first possible opportunity.

Consecutive effects resolve In order of newest to oldest. Simultaneous effects resolve in order of players choice (exception for start/end turn effects). 

Let's go back a bit. There was a time when some people said that you first put it into play facedown, activate all "entering play" triggers, then turn the card over. This idea was thrown out with the Negative Energy Field ruling. In that ruling, it says that Negative Energy Field can hit the card that was just played. This shows that a cards text enters play immediately.

Although many players have suggested that parts are the same card can come into play at the same time, this has never been proven. If the hp is in play, there is no reason the rest of the card isn't. Does it make sense that a card with damage reduction loses hp but doesn't get the damage reduction? Did he get to the battlefield and only then put on his armor? So it seems that everything on a card is in play the moment it hits the table, which is before "entering play" triggers.

If so, what is the problems with the fowl cards? In that case, the card itself created the problem by specifying a trigger. That part of the card is saying when it activates, which seprates it from the activation of the rest of the card (like its hp). This put it in the same timing frame as Hair-Triger Reflexes, which then used the rules for simultaneous timing. Orignally that was card order, now player choice, but the fowls will still trigger first due to a ruling not wanting the deck to be shut down. So why wasn't it worded differently so that it doesn't activate at the same time as other triggers? I think it is because there is no simple wording for an ability that only triggers once when it comes into play besides that.

The only question that remains is how do you handle One-Shots (the rule book only says it happens immediately): Does it actiavte immediately like the other cards, or does it have an inherent "when this card enters play" on it (which all similar abilities have)? Practically speaking, i am not sure if this matters. If it is the former, it happens first. If it is latter, it would fall under the same timing as simultaneous actions, and the player can choose the order, which would be before the other card activates.

I don't understand the debate you are talking about Pydro.  That whole argument makes no sense from any side, at least to me.

Cards have text.

When a card enters play its text doesn't suddenly appear, its text activates.  This is why some cards tell you a card has no text, because those cards are in play, and otherwise that text would be active.

Here's some excerpts from the Glossary

On PLAY:

When a card is played, the text on it takes effect.

On ONE-SHOTS:

The effects of a one-shot card happen immediately upon being played.

The text activates when the card enters play, a trigger effect.

So the activation of the text is simultaneous to any other effect that triggers on the card entering play.

Cards have text, but when they are not in play that text is not affecting the game, which is why Unity's cards can tell you not to play them in the play phase.  The text is there, but the card is not in play and that text does not affect the game, just your ability to play it.

This simply cannot be true, otherwise the Negative Enrgy Field ruling doesn't make any sense. Accroding to you, Negative Enrgy Field cannot hit the card just played since its text (and hp) did not activate before Negative Enrgy Field, which was in play first.

Going by the old rules, if a target is played and Negative Enrgy Field in play, we have the following situation:

We have two cards: 1) Negative Enrgy Field's "entering play" effect, and 2) the text of the new card (this includes its name, hp, and effects).

If both were triggers, then Negative Energy Field triggers first, and the new card isn't in play yet to have hp. However, this is not the ruling.

Therefore, by definition, the card has to come in BEFORE the triggering event. This is showing the order of the cards, and proving they are not simultaneous.

EDIT: This also unfies playing a card with using a power. You don't say you are using a a power then perform its effects, creating 2 steps. The actual affect is the power (Toxic Seaweed ruling). Same thing here, you don't say you are playing a card, then play the card, rather "playing a card" is the act of doing what the card says.

My head hurts. 

To clarify, I am not suggesting that the card enters play in some magical way (ok, I am, but just because that sounds so much cooler). I am just saying that based on previous ruling, the card's text and "entering play" effects are not simultaneous, and therefore did not go by the old simultaneous ruling, or by the new one.

The text activates when played.

HP and static effects do not need to activate.

When a target enters play it has HP and text.  Static effects and HP would be in play before any triggers, because they don't have timing.  Since they don't require activation they are in play.

Look at the wording of the two definitions above.

When a card enters play its text takes effect.  Static effects do not have timing, and HP isn't an action.  When a target enters play it takes effect, it doesn't have timing, just like static effects don't have timing.

If a Gene-Bound Guard entered play when Hair-trigger reflexes was in play there would be no timing conflict, Hairtrigger would trigger, but would have its damage reduced by 1.  There would be no conflict of timing, as the static effect and its HP would not have timing.

EDIT: My view of things have changed, as I describe in the next post, but I didn't want to delete this one.

To clarify, Fortitude reduces damage while still in hand? In the deck? in the trash? Obviously, there is something in the playing of the cards that "activates" the text. Something that says that now this text applies. Regardless of what you call it, the text didn't apply, but after being played it does. This means there is a trigger, and this trigger is "when this card is played." This sounds very simnilar to "when a card enters play."

Just because it is always active, doesn't mean it doesn't have timing. It has a specific time when it becomes active, and a specific time when it isn't (when the card is removed from play). When you say "static effects don't have timing" it doesn't mean they don't have an activation, it means they are always active once they are in play, but playing the card triggers it, or in other words activates it. (EDIT: I took out my proof from Fortitude and Superhuman Durability only becuase I didn't want the discussion to go int hat direction, not becuase I didn't think it was a good proof.) You are saying that "always on" means no timing, which means there is not activation. Umm…ok. So they are always on, even in your hand. No that can't be, so it does have an activation, when it is played, but it doesn't have an actiavtion in relation to other triggers that would activate when it is played. So, even though both trigger when something is played, they have two separate and distinct timings. I think you lost me here. Static effects are always on once they are on, but I don't see anything that would also affect its trigger timing. This would create an eniterly new idea that triggers behave differently depending on what they will produce.

After rereading it, I think you have this backwards. Static effects don't happen first becuase they have no timing, but rather other effects happen later because they have a specific timing. Let's take a look at the fowl cards as an example. We have the hp (name, type etc.) which have no designated timing, and we have a text that says when this card comes into play. We also know that a card needs to be in play, before an "enter play effect." The f owl is played, with all of its text activating as normal, however, the "entering play" text gets pushed back until after it enters play. This text is different because it specifically says so, and with all Ongoings and Equipment anything that would happen at a different time specifically says so. The question is how to treat One-Shots.

I was thinking about this some more, and I think there needs some more clarifications. I first wanted to see if "static" effects actually do happen before other effects (how exactly hp is "static" or an "effect" I am not sure), and I ran into a few problems. Let's say Iron Legacy had out Vigilance, and his damage was pumped to 5, and Legacy played Superhuman Durability. If static effects happen first, the order might look like this:

1) Play Superhuman Durability, 2) The name and type enter play (static), but the condition doesn't (its a trigger), 3) Iron Legacy deals Legacy the full 5 damage, as a response to the card play, but before Superhuman Durability's trigger is active, 4) Superhuman Durabilities trigger is now active.

This seems very silly to me, and required a rethinking of the entire situaton. When a card is played, all of its text is immediately active. This means that it has a name, hp, its static modifiers can affect the game, and its triggers can now be triggered. When a card itself has an "entering play" trigger, this would then activate now with any others. So, it might look like this: 1) All text is active, 2) Triggers activate. The also works quite well with the wording of "play" in the glossary: when a card is played, the text on it takes effect. In fact, to keep this consistent with power usage, you can go so far to say that "playing a card" = "activation of its text", as there is nothing that can interrupt this.

The question though is how does this relate to One-Shots. Is the text of the One-Shot as it is written, or does it have an inherent "when this card enters play" effect, and trigger like other triggers. If "playing a card" = "activation of its text" is true, the effect would happen before "entering play effects. The rulebook (not the glossary, although it is similar) says: One-Shot cards come into play, have an immediate effect, then go to the appropriate trash. At first glance, this seems to indicate that there are three distinct steps, but this might not be true.

First we have this strange word of "immediate." "Immediate" seems to be linking the two part together, possibly in a way that can't be interrupted. One thing for sure, is that this is not the standard word for triggers. Second, this definition is located right by the other defintions of Ongoings and Equipment cards. If you were defining things and explaining how they were different, you would emphasize those aspects. How are One-Shots different: 1) They also happen right away, unlike Ongoing where the effect can be delayed until needed. 2) They go to the trash right after. Finally, if the intent of this definition was to say when the cards text comes into play, why doesn't it do the same thing by the Ongoings and Equipments. All it say there is "Ongoing cards come into play and stay in play..." or "Equipment cards come into play and stay in play, just like Ongoing cards."

It definitely seems like when a card is played its entire text comes into play, and the rulebook doesn't seem to contradict this in regards to One-Shots. However, I do see how One-Shots can be different, I am just not sure how to prove it.

Oh, I remember this from when I asked about IL's Vigilance.

https://greaterthangames.com/forum/topic/iron-legacys-vigilance-4063

Though a lot of good points were made, I'm not sure we ever got a clarification or came to a consensus…

I could see phantaskippy's take working in some regards.

Not sure about the powers aspect though. But the alternative of considering which order those ongoing power cards entered played (with character cards always being first, obviously) would probably make things a little too confusing.

Did anyone ask them at PAX?

Okay, I agree with Pydro's last post, I don't think I was very clear in my explanation though.

What I believe the proper rules are:

1.  Text is always there, but it is not active or in effect until it enters play.

2.  When a card is playedenters play its text is now "In the Game" or in glossary terms, it takes effect.  This means reaction triggers are live (like Super Human) and static effects are affecting the game.

3.  The effects above do this because they have no timing when the card is played (they do not compete for timing at this time, powers and response triggers don't trigger by their card entering play, and static effects don't have timing this way)

4.  If the card is a One-Shot its effects are triggered by the card entering play.  This is a triggered reaction to the One-Shot card entering play and therefore has timing that can compete with response triggers.

Here's a Hypothetical example:

Lets say there is an ongoing card that has a power on it, the first line of the card text is "When this card enters play you may play a card now"  the second line is "POWER: do the Hokey Pokey"

When this card enters play (no response triggers in this example) the text takes effect and the first line triggers.  You could then play a card that said "Use a power now!" and that power could indeed be the power from the first card played, because that text is in the game, it is "live" you may indeed do the Hokey Pokey.

You do not need to wait for the first line to fully resolve for the Power to be usable, that text is in the game the instant the card enters play, the effect is not activated until it is selected as a power to be used.

Similary Super Human Durability's text would be "live" as soon as the card enters play, there would be no timing conflicts, it would just enter play.  Vigilance would trigger, but if boosted to 5 damage Super-Human would reduce it, or Synaptic interruption, it's text would be active and you could choose to redirect the damage from vigilence.  It stinks for Expat and Flak Jacket, since playing that when Legacy is doing three damage with Vililance has the same effect as not playing a card.

One-Shots will always compete with any effect that triggers when a card enters play, since One-Shots have an inherent trigger of activating their text effects as soon as they enter play.  The current ruling of player's choice causes that conflict to always be resolved by heroes choice.

Wait, wait, I thought the concensus was that I wouldn't get to do that damage.

(Not that it mattered: we took out IL without that damage anyway.)

You asked the question, Meerkat said he thought IL would damage first, and I posted my comment.  Then your turn reflected that you dealt the damage.

I don't think the debate really got going there.

Using the new official Order of Operations, having Tachyon resolve Accelerated Assault before Vigilance resolves is a legal action.

Edit: Also, the Negative Energy Field ruling is kinda obsolete since the Order of Ops. was changed by Christopher in my opinion. I'd suggest reevaluating its usefulness in this context.

See, that’s the problem. Negative Energy Field doesn’t come under the new ruling, because it didn’t come under the old ruling.

Negative field would definitely affect a target that triggered it, its HP doesn't have timing.  There is no activation of it being a target, it is a target, once it enters play it is a target that is in play.

Yeah, timing isn't the issue there.