[LSJ] The Becoming

Good evening. Is it legal to move 3 Discipline cards of the same kind to The Becoming? A previous ruling ( http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/92a33efbf4cad7e5 ) says that you don't get to replace them between each other which seems to indicate that they're moved at the same time (so the Becoming won't have superior, say, Celerity before all three cards are placed on it which would prevent placing of the last one). Becoming, The Type: Action Requires: non-sterile Cost: 2 blood +1 stealth action. Requires a non-sterile vampire. Put this card in play. It becomes a 0-capacity vampire of the same clan as the acting vampire. Move up to 1 blood from the acting vampire and up to 3 Discipline cards from your hand to this vampire. This vampire cannot act this turn. If this vampire has no capacity- increasing Discipline cards, burn him or her. Celerity Type: Master Master: Discipline. Put this card on a vampire. This vampire gains one level of Celerity [cel]. Capacity increases by 1: the vampire is one generation older. Cannot be placed on a vampire with superior Celerity.

henrik wrote: > Good evening. > > Is it legal to move 3 Discipline cards of the same kind to The > Becoming? No. > A previous ruling ( http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/92a33efbf4cad7e5 > ) says that you don't get to replace them between each other which > seems to indicate that they're moved at the same time (so the Becoming > won't have superior, say, Celerity before all three cards are placed > on it which would prevent placing of the last one). They're still done in sequence. That sequence occurs before replacing. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Jan 2, 10:06 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > henrik wrote: > > A previous ruling (http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/92a3... > > ) says that you don't get to replace them between each other which > > seems to indicate that they're moved at the same time (so the Becoming > > won't have superior, say, Celerity before all three cards are placed > > on it which would prevent placing of the last one). > > They're still done in sequence. That sequence occurs before replacing. Looking at the previous ruling: The question was: > Do the discipline cards that are mentioned in the card text have to be > in your hand immediately after you have drawn to replace The Becoming > or can you play them one after another as you draw them after playing > them one at a time? To which you answered "The former" If I understand correctly, this is meant to be an application of the rule that you (normally) declare effects of actions as you announce them. If so, I believe the "former" option is also incorrect, in that you do not replace the card before you declare its effects. Unless ... this effect, and the options associated with it, are not treated as effects of the action per se, but as effects and options that are triggered is a consequence of putting the card in play when the action resolves successfully. If so, i thing the questioner's "former" option would also be incorrect, since you should also replace any action modifers and/or combat cards that are played before the action resolves successfully.

jwjbw...@gmail.com wrote: > On Jan 2, 10:06 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> henrik wrote: > >>> A previous ruling (http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/92a3... >>> ) says that you don't get to replace them between each other which >>> seems to indicate that they're moved at the same time (so the Becoming >>> won't have superior, say, Celerity before all three cards are placed >>> on it which would prevent placing of the last one). >> They're still done in sequence. That sequence occurs before replacing. > > Looking at the previous ruling: > > The question was: > >> Do the discipline cards that are mentioned in the card text have to be >> in your hand immediately after you have drawn to replace The Becoming >> or can you play them one after another as you draw them after playing >> them one at a time? > > To which you answered "The former" > > If I understand correctly, this is meant to be an application of the > rule that you (normally) declare effects of actions as you announce > them. If so, I believe the "former" option is also incorrect, in that > you do not replace the card before you declare its effects. Actually dissected in more detail by the netizens in the posts that followed in that thread. The effect of the Becoming action: You put this card in play. In play, it becomes a vampire. Once it is a vampire, you can move blood and Discipline cards to it. So, declaration: A: Vampire Bob is attempting a Becoming action at +1 stealth costing 2 blood. This action does <card text>. A: replace Becoming. ... <blocks are declared and resolved; everyone replacing cards as they go> Eventually: All: no more blocks. A: OK. It's in play. It's a vampire. Vampire Bob moves 1 blood to him. I move these three Discipline cards from my hand to him.

On Jan 2, 1:41 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I just want to make sure it does not end like this: A: OK. It's in play. It's a vampire. Vampire Bob moves 1 blood to him. I move these three Discipline cards, celerity, obfuscate and fortitute, from my hand to him. B: Wait. You never said you would be moving 3 discipline cards or any blood to the vamp. You're supposed to declare all effects when the action is announced. If I had know you intended to put celerity, obfuscate and fortitute, I certainly woulda blocked. A: Oops. [The Becoming burns, because it has no discipline cards]

[ quoted text not captured ] Easily verified. Just check what I said in the section you quoted above.

On Jan 2, 3:19 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Easily verified. Just check what I said in the section you quoted above. I shall assume the sequence is meant to be complete, and therefore that no terms, other than card text, were announced when the action was declared. Then it's clear enough. Sorry for being dense. And thanks.

Also, you don't have to declare what you are going to do with the rest of the action. Same as with a political action. Off course you have to announce what the action does but now you intend to solve it. For example, a Kine Resource Contested. You have to tell people that you can distribute 4 points of damage among 2 or more players but you don't have to announce how you are going to distribute those points. Same as with The Becoming. You have to announce that you are getting one and that you can move up to three disciple cards to it, but you don't have to announce which ones. With both examples you can even lie about what you are going to do when asked if that makes people not block it.

[ quoted text not captured ] Then what is the difference to other cards like Sudario Refraction. On a previous thread, it was said that one needs to declare what cards they are getting. Because ash heaps are public. Pool is also public, so why does one only have to say the pool damage after? The number of cards in hand is also public. Shouldn't you have to declare the number of those you are to use as Discipline Cards? My problem here is that in similar situations, I find different rulings. I might be wrong in judging them similar... Shouldn't you declare "what is public" as much as possible?

Brum wrote: > Then what is the difference to other cards like Sudario Refraction. On > a previous thread, it was said that one needs to declare what cards > they are getting. Because ash heaps are public. Not because ash heaps are public. Because the action is to choose cards from your ash heap. > Pool is also public, so why does one only have to say the pool damage > after? > The number of cards in hand is also public. Shouldn't you have to > declare the number of those you are to use as Discipline Cards? > > My problem here is that in similar situations, I find different > rulings. I might be wrong in judging them similar... > > Shouldn't you declare "what is public" as much as possible? It has nothing to do with the question of what is public. It has to do with the question of when things are chosen. Sudario's action is to choose cards. So you choose cards. Becoming's action is to put a vampire in play. So you choose to put a vampire in play. And, after the vampire is in play, it gives the option to move blood and cards to the new vampire. Similarly, you do not declare what card you will be discarding when you use Compel the Spirit at basic Necromancy or Permanency at basic Chimerstry.

Aeschere wrote: > Also, you don't have to declare what you are going to do with the rest > of the action. Same as with a political action. No. Political Actions are exceptions to the general rule that all effects are announced when the card is played. See Section 6.2.1. Announcing the Action. Of course, there can be other exceptions to the general rule. See Section 1.4. The Golden Rule for Cards. For instance, if a card tells you to make a choice at the time of the resolution of the card (for instance, if it tells you to put a card in play, and THEN choose X), this is a clear case of the card contradicting the general rule. You cannot make a choice later if you are committed to a choice you made earlier. But whether or not a card intends to contradict the general rule can be a matter of interpretation.

On Jan 2, 4:06 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > Is it legal to move 3 Discipline cards of the same kind to The > > Becoming? > > No. > > They're still done in sequence. That sequence occurs before replacing. Ok. How about other restrictions on the discipline cards? Abombwe seems to be the only current one, and it can only be put on laibon vampires or vampires with protean. Do you need to either perform The Becoming with a laibon or start out with a protean master if you want to move an Abombwe master the Becoming (as part of the action of course, I realise that standard rules apply once the action is over)? Also, I suppose the same would apply to Path of Death and the Soul as well as The Becoming since both of them uses the same wording. Correct? Abombwe Type: Master Master: Discipline. Trifle. Put this card on a Laibon or on a vampire with Protean [pro]. This vampire gains one level of Abombwe [abo]. Capacity increases by 1: the vampire is one generation older. Cannot be placed on a vampire with superior Abombwe. Becoming, The Type: Action Requires: non-sterile Cost: 2 blood +1 stealth action. Requires a non-sterile vampire. Put this card in play. It becomes a 0-capacity vampire of the same clan as the acting vampire. Move up to 1 blood from the acting vampire and up to 3 Discipline cards from your hand to this vampire. This vampire cannot act this turn. If this vampire has no capacity- increasing Discipline cards, burn him or her. Path of Death and the Soul Type: Master Unique master. Put this card in play. When a minion controlled by another Methuselah is burned, you may tap this card to search your library (shuffle afterward), ash heap or hand for a Master: Discipline card. Move 1 blood from the blood bank and that card to a ready vampire you control.

henrik wrote: > On Jan 2, 4:06 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >>> Is it legal to move 3 Discipline cards of the same kind to The >>> Becoming? >> No. >> >> They're still done in sequence. That sequence occurs before replacing. > > Ok. > How about other restrictions on the discipline cards? Abombwe seems to > be the only current one, and it can only be put on laibon vampires or > vampires with protean. Google "Abombwe protean author:LSJ" http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/9a0fb74c2625a2fc