I heard this ruling came from the realms, so here I am asking how does an attack that deals no damage (incapacitate) end up triggering Mystics when the Mystic has 2 action tokens?

I flagged this as discussion in the hopes that someone can explain this without losing their temper.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Mystics triggers immediately when the Mystic takes DAMAGE from an ATTACK.......

Incapacitate is an ATTACK that deals NO DAMAGE.......

What am I missing?? Or has that ruling been changed???

Edit....just to add to....dealing a Mystic damage isn't enough to trigger the TA......that damage has to be from an attack......how does having 2 action token convert into attack damage???

This changed with the last Incap revision:It normally deals no damage, but if the target already has 2 action tokens, it DOES deal damage. That's enough to trigger Mystics.

Here's one thread with orange confirmation: http://www.hcrealms.com/forum/showthread.php?t=447107

Someone said this at an event I was at the other day as well. I would also like an explanation.

Incapacitate:
Give this character a close combat or ranged combat action to make an attack that deals no damage. If the attack hits, give the target an action token; if the target already has 2 action tokens, deal the target 1 penetrating damage.

When the target has 2 tokens, they are dealt damage.

Mystics:
When a character using the Mystics team ability takes damage from an attack, the attacker is dealt 1 unavoidable damage. This damage is not an attack.

When they take damage, they deal damage.

Now if Incap is used to place a 2nd token that deals pushing damage, then no Mystics damage happens.

I agree the interaction with Mystics is counter intuitive, but at least Incap has a use when targeting a pushed figure.

EDIT : yall's ninjas!

Mystics clearly states that the damage must be from an attack. Has anyone been able to explain, with actual rules rather than rulings, why this has become the case here? If anyone took the time to read the mystics TA before making the ruling, they would see that the damage must be from an attack. Incap clearly states in no uncertan terms that the attack deals no damage. Why this inconsistency in ruling??

From an attack......how does no one understand this ?

"Give this character a close combat or ranged combat action to make an attack that deals no damage. If the attack hits, give the target an action token; if the target already has 2 action tokens, deal the target 1 penetrating damage"


Incapacitate normally deals no damage, but it clearly states that incapacitate (which is an attack) WILL deal the target damage if it has two action tokens....

Mystics merely requires an attack dealt damage, the last 6 words of incapacitate are "deal the target 1 penetrating damage", obviously this is damage dealt from the incapacitate attack.

I guess the underlying question is.....can someone show via the rulebook where conditional damage dealing, i.e. having 2 action tokens, becomes attack damage in the instance of a no damage attack?

Would I also take mystics damage if I force blast a mystic off of elevated terrain and they are dealt 2 damage? The mystics are being dealt damage via a condition being met. According to MiketheRed, dealing damage is enough......

Incapacitate is dealing the damage, incapacitate the power says "deal the target one penetrating damage" Incapacitate is an attack. If incapacitate deals damage it becomes "damage from an attack" for mystics purposes.


The first part if incapacitate is perhaps confusingly worded as it is a holdover wording from another time, but there is no cleaner way to say it. If one said "the attackers Damage value becomes 0" replace then modify would let incap deal damage via perplex. So instead incapacitate should probably say "that normally deals no damage" as it is possible for incapacitate to deal damage... QED the PAC wording.

No, force blast is not an attack, incapacitate is an attack. Incapacitate the attack CAN deal damage under the one listed circumstance.

mystics doesn't require "attack damage" BC that term doesn't exist. Mystics activates when the mystic takes "damage from an attack"

incapacitate is an "attack". you even said as such in previous posts. when the mystic is hit with incapacitate and has two action tokens it takes damage from that use of incap. thus damage from an attack, which is what mystics looks for.

hope that clarifies a little better

Obviously this damage is from the character having 2 action tokens. Just like tha damage from pushing is obviously from placing a second action token. There is nothing to indicate that the attack all of a sudden deals damage. Especially since the first line of incap says that it does not.

The last line of incapacitate says it does deal damage. It isn't pushing damage, it is damage SPECIFICALLY dealt by incapacitate. If a power would place a token on someone that isn't incapacitate it will not deal this "already has two tokens" damage, that is damage SPECIFIC to the incapacitate attack.

To put it another way
Mystics asks:
Was this an attack? Yes, incapacitate is an attack.
Was damage dealt? Yes, incapacitate said to "deal one penetrating damage"

Mystics will activate.

I just wish whoever decides to make these improper and unsubstantiated rulings would at least have the heart to correct their mistakes and redact bad rulings. For those who agree that there is no official game term "attack damage," that's a bogus cop out. No one had any misundedstandings differentiating that knock back damage wasn't from an attack. No problem not taking mystics on that one. Especially since knock back can be generated by an ATTACK ROLL of doubles, stemming from an attack, making knockback damage damage from an attack by default.


That's one heluva jump in logic.....but not too far from "having 2 action tokens makes a no damage attack a damage dealing attack."

Just sayin......

i'm not making a ruling, i'm just trying to help. just like the 15 other posts that have provided adequate explanations.