But, "The first attack doesn’t activate the Damage Depletion Modifier" is part of the flurry power

And Flurry is in effect for both attacks of Flurry, what's your point?

He didn't understand that the Damage Depletion Modifier doesn't trigger when a character uses Flurry no matter how many time it's used in a turn.

I think s/he is trying to say that if the trio uses Flurry for their multiple attacks, then for (top dial)

Example:

Attack 1:
Flurry 1a- 6 possible damage (printed value)
Flurry 1b- 6 possible damage (because DDM doesn't kick in for the first attack)

Attack 2:
Flurry 2a- 6 possible damage (because its a new attack and DDM did not kick in earlier, meaning his damage value never dipped below a 6 for Attack 1)
Flurry 2b- 6 possible damage (because DDM did not kick in for the first attack)


BUT....

As much as I understand what s/he is saying, I think the way it actually works is:

Attack 1:
Flurry 1a- 6 possible damage (printed value)
Flurry 1b- 6 possible damage (because DDM doesn't kick in for the first attack)

Attack 2:
Flurry 2a- 5 possible damage (because DDM kicks in after the second attack of Flurry 1)
Flurry 2b- 5 possible damage (because DDM doesn't kick in for the first flurry attack in 2a)

Yup, that's how it works

No, it's not. Nothing "resets" the DDM.

Edit: Quoting the relevant bits so that people play this correctly:

DAMAGE DEPLETION MODIFIER
Each time an attack resolves, modify the attacker’s damage value by -1 (minimum 1) until the end of the turn.

FLURRY
Give this character a close combat action. After the close combat
attack resolves, it may make a second close combat attack as a free action. The first attack doesn’t activate the Damage Depletion Modifier.

So, let's say Avengers Prime uses three Flurries with a Damage Value of 6.

First attack: 6 damage

Second attack: did you attack this turn? Technically, no, so 6 damage.

Second Flurry

First attack: did you attack this turn? Yes, once, so 5 damage.

Second attack: did you attack this turn? Yes, once, so 5 damage.

Third Flurry

First attack: did you attack this turn? Yes, twice, so 4 damage.

Second attack: did you attack this turn? Yes, twice, so 4 damage.

That's how the DDM works. There is no way to understand how the DDM works and think anything other than this would occur.

No, it isn't.

This is the text for the DDM from the most recent copy of rules we have.

THIS THIS THIS.

This is correct.



This came up years ago with the Nightwing/Batgirl duo, which could use Flurry in place of its Duo Attacks on its first two clicks. IGNORING their "Double Trouble" trait for now. . . it was long since ruled then that damage was 3, 3, 2, 2. The FIRST swing of the first Flurry does NOT activate the DDM, meaning the SECOND does.

Normally, you would not have a third and fourth swing beyond that, so it would seem the DDM wouldn't matter. . . but it still does. When you go to the THIRD swing in the turn, you look back. "How many swings have I done that actually trigger the DDM? Just that second swing of the first Flurry? OK. I'm down by 1 damage."

Then, swing three in this example is ALSO the first swing of the second Flurry. Per the wording of Flurry, that swing does NOT activate the DDM. Thus, when you get to Swing #4, it asks the same question as above. The answer is the same; Swing #3 isn't counted into the equation here, so you get the same answer as above.

If you were to go to a fifth and sixth attack with a THIRD Flurry, then you would be at 1, then 1, in this example. Swing #5 would say, "I have done TWO swings this turn that actually activate the DDM. 3 minus 2 = 1." Swing #6 would say, "Hey, me too, since #5 doesn't activate the DDM. 3 minus 2 = 1."

The only modern figure I can think of that vamroc may be thinking about (not trying to read their mind, just trying to understand their position) that doesn't suffer from ANY effects of DDM with Flurry would be the LE Doc Ock. But as I recall (and the dial below indicates) that is because of the special nature of their attack wherein his damage value is locked.

In fact, that piece and his power actually proves the point that Wolverazio was making in his example.

Except in the case of Flurry which is what the OP was about

Can you read? Or are you just trolling?

Flurry states "The FIRST attack" doesn't activate the DDM.

The First attack does not. This is true.

Ask yourself, in isolation of the FIRST attack, does the power state blatantly and plainly that the SECOND attack does not?

It does not state that specifically.

Therefore, the SECOND attack of Flurry does indeed activate the DDM. It does not affect that particular swing, of course. It's more of a passive "Here, hold my penalty modifier, boys" that's waiting for something else to happen.

If that something else happens, such as a third or fourth attack, then, yes, those subsequent attacks look back and say, "First attack didn't activate the DDM. SECOND attack did, because the power description for Flurry does not explicitly state that the second swing does NOT."

If you were to start with a 6 damage and Flurry into infinity somehow, it would go as follows.

6, 6 / 5, 5 / 4, 4 / 3, 3 / 2, 2 / 1, 1 / 1, 1 / 1, 1. . . etc.

That's how Flurry and the DDM coincide. That's all there is to it.

Please do not take this as a personal affront or attack. This is not a matter of a thread full of people attacking you personally or such. We are genuinely trying to find different ways to word the same thing and get the point across.

and thats what i was trying to say in my post, but you disagreed lol

I believe the answer to that would be 'under a bridge'.