When an opponent CPU is defeated (I don't play against online players so I can't verify anything for multiplayer), my own creatures get in a few final hits before it goes to the next screen with the slot reels. Those last few hits can convert to life for myself, for example if I have empathetic bond on and he is killed (reverted to 0 HP) by my skeleton when I am at 98 HP, it often gets in a few more hits thus my HP go to 100 and I get the 'master elementalist' award. However only SOME of them get their hits in. If, for example, I had lots of skeletons (20 or so), empathetic bond, a druid's staff, and a blessing-boosted vampire, and 85 HP, and the first few hits kills them, I won't get the 'master elementalist' bonus because, despite that I had enough skeletons and vampire damage to bring me up to full AND the staff, it only allows a FEW of the skeletons to get in heir final hits, the vampire not even getting a hit in, and the weapon never getting a chance to heal me. Another example is simpler: I have a vampire in my lineup, and use miracle, then attack, when the opponent is at HP=1. Despite that the first attack kills them, two or three more attacks go through, but my lineup is so large that the vampire does not get to hit.
In other wise, despite the opponent being at HP=0, a few more hits get in, but not ALL the hits get in, and certainly not all the other things that would normally happen.
I can easily see how this would arise. If it only begins confirming once the enemy's HP has gone to 0 but does other calculations in the meantime, a few more things happen before it confirms and ends the game. However, I would like to put out a call for an all-or-nothing approach, and furthermore put out a call for an all-approach specifically, partly because it is to the player's benefit ^.^
What I mean by that is that, instead of having a few extras go through, have either all attacks go through (the entire turn play out as usual), or simply stop right when the opponent has HP=0. This way there is no frustration with the seemingly contradictory 'why didn't I get the life from the vampire?' vs 'why did I get extra life, and if so, why not as much as I should have gotten?' and such. The all-approach (letting the whole turn play out, staves and all) is beneficial because we have no way that I know of (as players) of changing the order of our attackers. Had we the ability to do so, we could place the vampire as the main attacker to do the last bit of damage, or have all the skeletons go first, ect. Because this is impossible, there's little way to know, as far as I have found, when to put out a creature to ensure that it will attack at a particular time in the attack phase, relative to the others.
This said, we are left with the frustration of having little clue how to play out the scenerio such that the one we want to attack will indeed attack. The 'none' approach, stopping at exactly HP=0, does get rid of the contradiction mentioned earlier, but does not address this problem of being unable to determine attackers. The 'all' approach allows all attackers and staves to attack, all life to be gained or lost, leaving no percieved contradiction.
An easy way to do this would be to have the HP<0 checked at the following times: A. when damage is delt by a spell (like drain life), and B. at the END of an attack phase only. Thus the two things that can do damage - spells and attacks - are taken into account, but you can't kill them with a spell and THEN attack, and your attack won't be cut off at some semi-random time because if you DO attack, the entire attack will go through before HP>0 is assessed.
Furthermore, one can then have little extra benefits for, say, reverting a person to HP = -50 (or doing 50 overkill damage).
Anyway, that is all. Have a good day!
