"Unmitigated damage" clarification

[Chronomo]

I did do a search for this and didn't find anything so apologies if the answer to this has already been posted.

The tooltips don't seem to clarify exactly what counts as "unmitigated" damage. It seems to me there is a semantic ambiguity here and I'm not 100% clear on the answer. Consider the following:

An enemy attacks you for 6 damage and you are blocking for 4. You take 2 damage.

Is this considered unmitigated damage because you failed to block all the damage? Or is this considered "mitigated" because you didn't take the full attack?

Thanks for your time.

[TripSin]

In your example, you mitigated 4 damage but took 2 unmitigated damage. So since you did take some unmitigated damage you would, for example, lose combo.

[Chronomo]

Thanks for the response. I guess my question then is why not just say damage? Why bother with this "unmitigated" qualifier which just confuses the issue? Does mitigated damage (i.e. damage that you block) trigger certain effects?

[TheOwl]

Because "taking damage" is every damage, including the mitigated damage. I'd say the best they could do would be to say "when you lose health" instead (unless there's some ways of losing health that don't count as unmitigated damage?)

[Kaythal]

Damage dealt to yourself by your cards isn't "unmitigated", or is it?

[simonex93]

it isnt, like bleed

[pacovf]

For whatever it's worth, I have played this game since alpha launch, and I am still unclear on what unmitigated damage is. 

[SpicyNiceCream]

If you actually lose health that means taking unmitigated damage.

[JamesFactory]

I feel like the only part that's tricky regarding unmitigated damage is when you're taking a multihit attack and still get multihit effects when it's partially mitigated.

eg: You have 4 defense, enemy is hitting for 3 times for 2. You get the full amount of ailments as if the defense wasn't there. Granted the word itself is problematic from a dictionary point of view, as unmitigated doesn't mean what it means in the game, and is probably just from the word mitigation being used for tanking in games and un- meaning not.

If something is an 'unmitigated disaster' it means there was nothing to lessen the effects of said disaster.  The nomenclature is wrong but follows consistent logic in the game universe which basically means you have to realize that the term unmitigated in Griftlands doesn't mean what it means in real life, if it did any mitigation at all ie 1 defense vs 50 attack would stop the effect from going through.

I don't think the mechanics of 'unmitigated damage' should change, though the nomenclature definitely should even if it was just 'not fully mitigated damage' it would be clear.

[Kevin]

Interesting thread! We made some changes to card descriptions after reading this that should help to reduce confusion. See the next update for details.

[RageLeague]

I can think of one instance of health loss that is not unmitigated damage, and that is losing health through losing max health from diseased. I don't think that should count as damage, ever.

Also, making health loss and unmitigated damage separate allows more possibility for effect that causes the player to lose health, but won't trigger smith's moxie. Right now gnarled effigy is very detrimental for other characters, but good for smith because of his moxie system.

[Gr1m-]

On 6/3/2020 at 6:10 PM, RageLeague said:

Right now gnarled effigy is very detrimental for other characters, but good for smith because of his moxie system.

Yes you are right, it's even benefical for Smith to pick up some social banes to increase your Moxie.

Jakes Smuggler's "Fragile Health": Whenever you gain a debuff, take 2 damage.
Spark Barons Security Guard "Sketchy Equipment": Take 2 damage whenever you use an item