LSJ- question Yong Sun adv.

Card text : Yong sun Advanced, Sabbat cardinal: Yong-Sun gets +X bleed, where X is the number of vampires in the target Methuselah's ash heap. Does the word "target" mean "the target of the bleed" ? or may I choose, being the controller of Yong Sun advanced, any Meth's ash heap and give Yong Sun the convenient +x bleed I will use against my prey ? Thanks Nagaraja

"Nagaraja" <ego...@club-internet.frNOSPAM> wrote in message news:4013ec4d$0$6966$7a62...@news.club-internet.fr... [ quoted text not captured ] The +X bleed for Yong-Sun Adv means the target of the bleed action. Example: Meth goes bleeding his prey who has two burned Vampires through Toy Chest Test(Weenie Killer). But gets deflected to his grandprey. Who, to his luck, has non burned Vampire. So the initial bleed action of Yong-Sun at his prey would be for 3, but as it become deflected, the bleed amount against his grandprey drops to 1. Further you see that its not written that you can choose a target, thus the target is always the Meth Yong-Sun Adv. is actually bleeding. with kind regards Erol

Erol wrote: > "Nagaraja" <ego...@club-internet.frNOSPAM> wrote in message > news:4013ec4d$0$6966$7a62...@news.club-internet.fr... >>Yong sun Advanced, Sabbat cardinal: Yong-Sun gets +X bleed, where X is the >>number of vampires in the target Methuselah's ash heap. >> >>Does the word "target" mean "the target of the bleed" ? > The +X bleed for Yong-Sun Adv means the target of the bleed action. Correct. When taking a directed action, the term "target Methuselah" refers to the Methuselah who is or controls the target of the action. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

LSJ wrote: > Erol wrote: >> "Nagaraja" <ego...@club-internet.frNOSPAM> wrote in message >> news:4013ec4d$0$6966$7a62...@news.club-internet.fr... >>> Yong sun Advanced, Sabbat cardinal: Yong-Sun gets +X bleed, where X >>> is the number of vampires in the target Methuselah's ash heap. >>> >>> Does the word "target" mean "the target of the bleed" ? >> The +X bleed for Yong-Sun Adv means the target of the bleed action. > > Correct. When taking a directed action, the term "target Methuselah" > refers to the Methuselah who is or controls the target of the action. thanks a lot. stupid yong sun....farewell sweet combo :-( Nagaraja

Nagaraja wrote: > thanks a lot. > stupid yong sun....farewell sweet combo :-( Umm, wha? Yong-Sun is nothing *but* a sweet combo. Regular Yong-Sun says "Yong Sun may burn the top vampire on your prey's crypt as a (D) action". Advanced Yong-Sun says "+X bleed, where X is the number of vampires in target's Ash heap." Both Yong Sun's have THA. Rutor's Hand lets you untap and take 2 actions a turn. Do the math... Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6 "Punk rock's been pretty good to me for twenty years. It's my year to give back: I'm dedicating the next year of my life to fucking the Bush administration." -Fat Mike

> The +X bleed for Yong-Sun Adv means the target of the bleed action. > Example: Meth goes bleeding his prey who has two burned Vampires through Toy > Chest Test(Weenie Killer). But gets deflected to his grandprey. Who, to his > luck, has non burned Vampire. So the initial bleed action of Yong-Sun at his > prey would be for 3, but as it become deflected, the bleed amount against > his grandprey drops to 1. > Further you see that its not written that you can choose a target, thus the > target is always the Meth Yong-Sun Adv. is actually bleeding. How does this work with justicar retribution? Does Yong possess the +bleed all the time or only when bleeding? Will he burn if the prey has 2 vampires in the ash heap? I'm wondering since "The target" is a variable. > with kind regards > > Erol Cheerio Axel

monkeycid wrote: > How does this work with justicar retribution? Does Yong possess the > +bleed all the time or only when bleeding? Will he burn if the prey > has 2 vampires in the ash heap? I'm wondering since "The target" is a > variable. Justicar Retribution rulings: "Counts the bleed amount that each vampire would have when attempting to bleed their Prey. [RTR 19980623]" So, yes, if Yong's prey has 2 or more vampires in the ash heap, Justicar Retribution would burn him. --Colin McGuigan

Peter D Bakija wrote: > Nagaraja wrote: > >> thanks a lot. >> stupid yong sun....farewell sweet combo :-( > > Umm, wha? Yong-Sun is nothing *but* a sweet combo. Regular Yong-Sun > says "Yong Sun may burn the top vampire on your prey's crypt as a (D) > action". Advanced Yong-Sun says "+X bleed, where X is the number of > vampires in target's Ash heap." Both Yong Sun's have THA. Rutor's > Hand lets you untap and take 2 actions a turn. Do the math... > > Yes. I did the math. And am not impressed at all. the combo I wanted to build was with sabbat inquisitor in order to burn vamps with tha of your own crypt and thus give Yong Sun a +x bleed bonus where x is the number of burned vamps in my ash heap. I would have bloat with redeem the lost soul and my crypt would have include something like 8 yong sun and 8 yong sun advanced or something like that, or some Lasombra. See what I mean ? THAT is a combo. Nagaraja

I did that deck with the ruthor's hand , its pretty fun to fun. Combined with Beast who can burn vamps the old fashion way , Yong Song get a shitload of bleed pretty fast. Its pretty fun to play. But if i am deflected , the +X Bleed is the number of vamps in the new Meth ash heap right ? Mechadick

Mechadick wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Yes. --Colin McGuigan

Nagaraja wrote: > Yes. I did the math. And am not impressed at all. > the combo I wanted to build was with sabbat inquisitor in order to burn > vamps with tha of your own crypt and thus give Yong Sun a +x bleed bonus > where x is the number of burned vamps in my ash heap. I would have bloat > with redeem the lost soul and my crypt would have include something like 8 > yong sun and 8 yong sun advanced or something like that, or some Lasombra. > See what I mean ? THAT is a combo. Umm, yeah. Is there a way you could fit a Clan Impersonation in there? That could only make it better... :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <4014e3fa$0$6970$7a62...@news.club-internet.fr>, "Nagaraja" <ego...@club-internet.frNOSPAM> mumbled something about: >Peter D Bakija wrote: >> Nagaraja wrote: >> >>> thanks a lot. >>> stupid yong sun....farewell sweet combo :-( >> >> Umm, wha? Yong-Sun is nothing *but* a sweet combo. Regular Yong-Sun >> says "Yong Sun may burn the top vampire on your prey's crypt as a (D) >> action". Advanced Yong-Sun says "+X bleed, where X is the number of >> vampires in target's Ash heap." Both Yong Sun's have THA. Rutor's >> Hand lets you untap and take 2 actions a turn. Do the math... > >Yes. I did the math. And am not impressed at all. Sorry, our game is balanced. Have you looked into Magic? >the combo I wanted to build was with sabbat inquisitor in order to burn >vamps with tha of your own crypt and thus give Yong Sun a +x bleed bonus >where x is the number of burned vamps in my ash heap. I would have bloat So wait. You were going to bring out a 10-cap who can't bounce bleeds, you were going to call a vote to make him an Inquisitor, put a Rutor's Hand on him at some point, and then every turn burn your OWN vampire and bleed? Why can't you still do this but just remove the Inquisitor step in the meantime? It works just as well. >with redeem the lost soul and my crypt would have include something like 8 >yong sun and 8 yong sun advanced or something like that, or some Lasombra. Redeem the Lost Soul would remove your bleed bonus as fast as you created it, since it removes the vampire from the game and hence your ash heap. Better think again. >See what I mean ? THAT is a combo. Yeah, that's one word for it. Even if it WERE legal, I'd say you'd get ousted on turn 8, and your prey would have Deflected the first bleed of 3 you sent over to him. I'm not impressed, but for different reasons. -- Derek Deafness never kept composers from hearing the music. It only stopped them hearing the distractions.

Derek Ray wrote: > I'm not impressed, but for different reasons. I'm telling you, man, you get a "First, you Clan Impersonate Yong-Sun..." in there, and it's gold! Gold! [ quoted text not captured ]

Colin McGuigan <maguaSP...@speakeasy.net> wrote in message news:<5kudnfBFRra...@speakeasy.net>... [ quoted text not captured ] This seems odd. Case A. Methuselah Jane has Anson in play, with a flamethrower. Jane uses Anson to Rotshrek her prey once, and can't do it again that turn. Now I thought the logic behind Jane not getting two OOT masters was that, even though Anson granst an extra master phase, you can't be sure he will still be in play when Jane's next master phase comes around - for example, someone might banish, burn or Seeds of Corruption Anson in the meantime. In other words, you can't "loan" the effect of an extra OOT master against the uncertain possibility of having Anson's ability still operational during your next master phase. And quite rightly. Case B. Jane has Yong in play, and Jane's prey (Michelle) has a burned Pochtli and a burned Carlotta. Michelle calls Justicar Retribution, burning her predators Yong. Michelle then Posesses both Pochtli and Carlotta back into play, the effect being that if Yong had not been burned, Yung would not have the +2 bleed. In Case B, the burning of Yong was based on the prediction that Yong would have +2 bleed, a prediction that turned out not to be true by the time Yung's controller had her turn. So in this case, Michelli IS being "loaned" an effect against an uncertain possibility. Have I got this right?

In message <BC3B244A.135D4%pd...@lightlink.com>, Peter D Bakija <pd...@lightlink.com> mumbled something about: >Derek Ray wrote: > >> I'm not impressed, but for different reasons. > >I'm telling you, man, you get a "First, you Clan Impersonate Yong-Sun..." in >there, and it's gold! Gold! I'd be more of a fan of putting a Dominate skill card on him the turn after the turn after he comes out (because of course you need to have Legendary Vampire on him the turn he comes out). [ quoted text not captured ]

Peter D Bakija wrote: > Derek Ray wrote: > >> I'm not impressed, but for different reasons. > > I'm telling you, man, you get a "First, you Clan Impersonate > Yong-Sun..." in there, and it's gold! Gold! Platinum.

Derek Ray wrote: ---snip fun stuff with a flaming tone--- > I'm not impressed, but for different reasons. I guess my ironic tone has not been felt il my previous post. It happens. Will abuse of smileys next time. Nagaraja

On 26 Jan 2004 21:47:23 -0800, icantbelievehollow...@hotmail.com (Hollowboy) scrawled: >Colin McGuigan <maguaSP...@speakeasy.net> wrote in message news:<5kudnfBFRra...@speakeasy.net>... >> monkeycid wrote: [snip] [ quoted text not captured ] yup. the 'no loan' for OOT is a clarifying aid for a rule printed in the rulebook. the 'loan' for Justicar Retribution is based on a ruling made ages ago, when some cards had "+1 bleed when taking a bleed action" and some were just flat "+1 bleed" and you needed something clear and simple to rule it to. it's worked this way with other conditional bleeds (Constanza) for years. to change it for yong sun would be inconsistent in that regard. changing oot limits would just be bad for the game, i think. salem domain:canberra http://www.geocities.com/salem_christ.geo/vtes.htm

Hollowboy wrote: > Colin McGuigan <maguaSP...@speakeasy.net> wrote in message news:<5kudnfBFRra...@speakeasy.net>... >>Justicar Retribution rulings: >>"Counts the bleed amount that each vampire would have when attempting to >>bleed their Prey. [RTR 19980623]" > > This seems odd. > > Case A. > In other words, you can't "loan" the effect of an extra OOT master > against the uncertain possibility of having Anson's ability still > operational during your next master phase. > And quite rightly. Correct. "Rightly" because their is, indeed, a loan. The MPA borrowed must be repaid. > Case B. > In Case B, the burning of Yong was based on the prediction that Yong > would have +2 bleed, a prediction that turned out not to be true by > the time Yung's controller had her turn. > > So in this case, Michelli IS being "loaned" an effect against an > uncertain possibility. > > Have I got this right? Except for the "loan" terminology, yes. What would be repaid? When? Why are you looking only at Yong's controller's next turn? Why not look at Yong's next bleed? At any rate, a card that looks at a minion's current bleed looks at the *current* bleed the minion has (i.e., the amount the minion would bleed for in a default bleed action is the minion took a bleed action "right now") rather than trying to factor in, as you say, an uncertain possibility. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: > At any rate, a card that looks at a minion's current bleed looks at > the *current* bleed the minion has (i.e., the amount the minion would > bleed for in a default bleed action is the minion took a bleed action > "right now") rather than trying to factor in, as you say, an uncertain > possibility. assuming that he is going to bleed is also factoring in an uncertain possibility (certainly the most likely one, but still uncertain). why not just look at the current bleed without taking in account who the target is? that doesn't factor in any uncertain possibilities at all.

hawk_the_demon wrote: > why not just look at the current bleed without taking in account who > the target is? that doesn't factor in any uncertain possibilities at > all. All bleeds have targets. Why use any target other than the default target? [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<40168E40...@white-wolf.com>... > hawk_the_demon wrote: > > why not just look at the current bleed without taking in account who > > the target is? that doesn't factor in any uncertain possibilities at > > all. > > All bleeds have targets. > Why use any target other than the default target? What sort of "bugs" me is the word "target". It sees more and more use these days, and sort of reminds me of TOCCG... ;) (Not that I had any problem with TOCCG, but still, phraseology adds to the mood in one way or the other.) Yong Sun gets +X bleed, where X is the number of vampires in the target Methuselah's ash heap. Efficient but ugly. Also, those familiar with TOCCG usually interpret "target" on general like a target thay choose when triggering the effect. Yong Sun gets an additional +1 bleed for every vampire in the ash heap of the Methuselah being bled. Not necessarily less accurate or longer, not necessarily better-ringing, but definitely a more "vampirish" phrase that lacks the word "target". Bye, Daneel

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<40168E40...@white-wolf.com>... > hawk_the_demon wrote: > > why not just look at the current bleed without taking in account who > > the target is? that doesn't factor in any uncertain possibilities at > > all. > > All bleeds have targets. > Why use any target other than the default target? in the rulings document under the equipment section: 'A weapon's "current damage" is the amount of damage that the weapon would inflict if used as a strike by bearer against a generic opponent.' the default target for that weapon would be the opposing minion in the current combat. this could potentially be modified by numerous effects. why not use a 'generic target' for bleeds as well?

[ quoted text not captured ] The "generic opponent" *is* the "default target", yes. > why not use a 'generic target' for bleeds as well? Because bleeds are directed at the prey by default, making the prey the natural "generic target". [ quoted text not captured ]

de...@hell.is (hawk_the_demon) wrote in message news:<63352126.04012...@posting.google.com>... > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<40168E40...@white-wolf.com>... > > hawk_the_demon wrote: > > > why not just look at the current bleed without taking in account who > > > the target is? that doesn't factor in any uncertain possibilities at > > > all. > > > > All bleeds have targets. > > Why use any target other than the default target? > > in the rulings document under the equipment section: > 'A weapon's "current damage" is the amount of damage that the weapon > would inflict if used as a strike by bearer against a generic > opponent.' > Inaccurate analogy. Strikes target minions, bleeds target players. Having a different standard for each is perfectly valid. > the default target for that weapon would be the opposing minion in the > current combat. this could potentially be modified by numerous > effects. > ...which is why the 'generic opponent' metric is applied in the first place. > why not use a 'generic target' for bleeds as well? Because the default bleed action is defined as being against your prey. There is no reason to omit this aspect, as it is clearly defined at any time during the game. Here's where I don't support your assertion that the bleed target is uncertain. The fact that a default bleed with a particular minion will be against your prey is _absolutely_ certain in all instances of the game state, because that is a part of the definition of 'default bleed'. The disposition of your prey's game state (in this example, the number of vampires in the prey's ash heap) is also a clearly definable value for all instances where Justicar Retribution (or any other action) will be played. Since the definition of 'default bleed' accomodates the prey as the target in all instances, it stands to reason that in instances where 'default bleed' is considered, we shouldn't arbitarily change from the specific prey (and her game state) to some imaginary generic opponent. DaveZ Atom Weaver

LSJ wrote: > The "generic opponent" *is* the "default target", yes. > > > why not use a 'generic target' for bleeds as well? > > Because bleeds are directed at the prey by default, making the prey > the natural "generic target". fair enough. some good points from AtomWeaver (post below) as well.