It is incorrect. You would KO both figures and determine it based on points.

Hey bub why ask why, drink Bud dry.
Really what is your question?

He came for an answer but there are 2 as I explained. He probably didn't come for 2 but that is what he got.

The advise will help him determine whether he wants to play by the judges rules ahead of time as I also already explained.

You may want to try reading in the future. No one suggested being confrontational, if that's how you took it then that is on you.

To answer your final question, the answer is because the whole situation has passed so the later you speak of no longer exists, all he can do now is see how things will go in the future. Please try not to waste my time in the future.

Yep, that's incorrect as well. The action that KO'd the opponent has to fully resolve before the game ends, which includes the token and push damage.

I've had a couple games end this way before.

Either you have no clue, or you need to reread your first post because your choice of language is very much confrontational.

Oh boy. We've actually had a few games end this way very recently. I'm not gonna enjoy explaining this to everyone. Just know the rules lawyers are gonna make me explain this one then not believe me anyway. They never believe anyone unless it's explicitly stated by someone official.

Maybe I can write it down and tape it to a bat. Explicitly state it upside their head.

How does your interpretation/ opinion about my suggestion have anything to do with answering the OP's question or any other question besides your own which could just have well be done in pm's. Now you are wasting more time than mine and yours. I need to reread nothing as I am fully aware of what I said. If you can't conceive of a way to state my suggestion without sounding confrontational than not only should you avoid using said advise but you should rethink who it is without the clue and consider serious help. Now really enough is enough.

I hear ya. Here's a start for how to explain it:

Fortunately for your rules-lawyer-apprehensive friends (and you!), it's pretty simple and clear once laid out.

Your first post reads much more confrontational than jtallday's.

All that needs be said. Thank you.

Happy to help, mate.

There are so many of those rep messages in the realms specifically about RP, it isn't even funny.

And he suggests going to the judge after the last tourney instead of before the coming event but mine is labeled confrontational while his is just as sweet as can be. Weird I know.

True, my first post was more confrontational towards jtallday; for that I can only say sorry, his post ruffled my judge feathers.


The confrontational I was referring to originally was his advice on how the player should approach the judge of the event. My advice was talk to the judge about the ruling, inquire why the ruling was made, and if the judge makes a mistake, try to help the judge see the error. His post was ask the judge if the judge was going to use house rules or the real rules, which I classify as confrontational because it assumes the judge purposely ignored the rules and does not leave the possibility that the judge just made a mistake.

Conversely your post assumes that the judge made a mistake. I never suggested that he sass the judge, and your method could certainly be done with sass or even taken the wrong way if delivered wrong. Asking a judge about a ruling they made at least a week or 2 ago may be less helpful than you intend to believe just because the judge may not remember the situation or doubt the players recollection. It also is not necessarily a guarantee of how a judge will rule next time.

It is more than possible that the judge made a mistake it is a guarantee considering the rules state otherwise unless that decision was a house rule in which case I would not have been too far off at all. I didn't expect to be quoted verbatim and telling a judge that they made a mistake isn't automatically any less of a blow than suggesting that they were using rules that are outside of the stated rules.

I accept your apology and assure that if you hadn't come at it the way you did my response would have been much different. My response was only meant to invoke thought on your behalf and I'm glad to see that you have done some reflecting and broadened your considerations, it is a commendable trait.

I'm not so sure about that. I remember Spiderman-2099 was on his last click (full dial) and so was my Man-Thing, and he shot me and killed me but also took mystics. The judge seemed pretty adamant and sure that, although yes I did get the victory points, he still got the win because the Mystics damage technically kicks in after I already take the damage and die. Therefore, I still killed his piece, but mine was killed first, leaving me with no characters on the board, as the Mystics then kicked in and killed my opponent's Spider-Man.

I think I lost 300-299.

However, I really was not cool with that ruling at the time because it seemed to just spit in the face of the Mystics TA, but there was nothing I could do about it, and nobody else at the venue seemed to have a dissenting opinion.

I'd really like if an orange would be so kind as to come in here and hit us with some knowledge.

Why do you need oranges, when the answer can be found clearly from the rulebook (as pointed out by rorschachparadox)?