ok so if sinestro is on the field and i attack an exshausted kyle rayner with my six drop mr freeze, then to avoid being stunned i play sucker punch. and now that trumps sinestros ability right? cause it's on the chain and things with the words"can not" go over cards that say you can right? right?

oh and here's sinestro's text
Whenever an attacker stuns a defender you control other than Sinestro, stun that attacker.


please help.... me.....



dave

The problem is that by the time Sinestro's trigger resolves, Mr. Freeze is not an attacker, nor is he attacking an exhausted character, so he IS able to be stunned and Sinestro still "gets him."

-Mike

Effects that trigger off a character becoming stunned or leaving play look back to the moment just before that character became stunned or left play.

At the moment it looks back to, your guy was still an unstunnable attacker.

Thus, he's fine.

When did that change? Sinestro used to stun Red Star after power ups, did he not?

-Mike

Look at it this way: if the rules didn't look back to the moment before, how could Sinestro even stun "That attacker"? "That attacker" doesn't exist anymore.

I understand that, but didn't Sinestro stun Red Star who had been powered up during an attack even though he wasn't able to stun "during the attack"?

-Mike

I believe the final ruling was that Sinestro's power triggered after the defender is stunned, and the attacker referenced is not currently attacking, and therefore for the attack stun prevention is overruled, therefore, they would stun.

EDIT: sorry if I don't make sense.

EDIT EDIT:from an earlier thread

Well, I understand that you check the moment right before they become stunned, but that moment comes after the attacker is no longer an attacker. "that attacker" is merely used because "that character" is too vague. You check to see what stuff was, but Sinestro still will stun the guy because he wasn't an attacker after attack conclusion when the triggered effects were added.

Thank you for bringing up that bit of rule text. I was a little busy watching the debate.

This is what I thought it said and doesn't this mean that the former attacker WILL be stunned?

-Mike

No where in that text does it discuss when any character is stunned due to an attack.

602.7 Players compare the attacker’s ATK against the defender’s DEF and the defender’s ATK against the attacker’s DEF. For team attacks, use the combined attackers’ ATK values—rather than each individual attacker’s—for the purposes of these comparisons. If a team attacker’s ATK is 0 or less, its ATK is treated as 0 for the purpose of combining its ATK with that of other team attackers. (See rule 104.2.) After these comparisons are made, the following happen simultaneously:

602.7a For non-team attacks, if the attacker’s ATK is greater than or equal to the defender’s DEF, the attacking character stuns the defending character. For team attacks, if the attackers’ combined ATK is greater than or equal to the defender’s DEF, each attacker simultaneously stuns the defending character. (See rule 708.11.)

602.7b If the attacker’s ATK is greater then the defender’s DEF, the defender’s controller loses endurance equal to the difference between the attacker’s ATK and the defender’s DEF. This is called breakthrough endurance loss, or “breakthrough” for short. Team attacks attacking a character don’t cause breakthrough, unless they specify that they do (see rule 602.7c). During the process of applying replacement modifiers to the upcoming breakthrough event, if at any time it is reduced to 0 or less, then no breakthrough is caused, and further modifiers that would replace an amount of breakthrough being caused will not apply.

602.7c For team attacks that specify that they cause breakthrough, if the attackers’ combined ATK is greater than the defender’s DEF, the defender’s controller loses endurance equal to the difference. Anything looking for a breakthrough value will use each attacker’s ATK separately, after it has been applied against the defender’s DEF in the order chosen by the attacking player.

Example: You team attack an opposing 5 DEF character with Beast, Furry Blue Scientist, who has 2 ATK, and Vision, Young Avenger, who has 8 ATK and reads "While Vision is team attacking with exactly one other character, team attacks can cause breakthrough." As that attack concludes, you choose to apply Vision’s ATK first followed by Beast’s. The defending player takes 5 breakthough (3 from Vision and 2 from Beast).

Example: As the above attack concludes, instead, you choose to apply Beast’s ATK first followed by Vision’s. The defending player takes 5 breakthough from Vision (Beast causes no breakthough).

602.7d If the defender’s ATK is greater than or equal to the attacker’s DEF (or the chosen attacker’s DEF for team attacks), the defending character stuns that attacking character. (See rule 708.11.)

These are all part of the attack conclusion but happen prior to what PI quoted and therefore the attacker is still and attacker and unable to be stunned,

First of all:

Well, consider these two quotes, and note the section numbers:

The defender becomes stunned BEFORE the attacker loses the Attacker characteristic. At the moment just before the stun, the attacker is still an attacker.

!?

Keep reading the next sentence of that rule:The characters are still an attacker and a defender for the purpose of Sinestro triggering. That's a totally different question from whether the character is still attacking as the effect resolves.

At resolution, he's not an attacker, he's not attacking, there's no attack going on whatsoever. He absolutely gets stunned.

Then why does Zazzala trigger while face-down? At both trigger and resolution, she has no text.

Because of the last line of 502.4: