rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

JYHAD: new card questions

10 messages from 6 participants · 14 September 1994 – 18 September 1994 · rec.games.deckmaster
source archive

Owen P Reynolds

In light of WotC's continued policy of "play the card the way it says unless it's really awful," I looked through my cards for a lark to find any with strange results. Also, a few just seem to have obvious errors: Form of Mist: This is a combat card. The advanced version says that the acting vampire can go ahead with its action despite having been blocked. Here's my question: when you are blocked, you toss away the action card you were using--equipment, ally, etc... . You can only play Form of Mist after you've been blocked and tossed it. Since it doens't say anything about getting the card back, is FoM only useful for continuing with an action requiring no card? Also, what about, say Computer Hacking directed at someone across the table? Would your minion now continue with a normal bleed against that same player, or are "bleed" and "Computer Hacking" completely different actions? (I think any +N bleed card is a bleed.) Enchant Kindred: Action. Bleed at +1. Advanced version: add 2 blood to a younger, uncontrolled kindred. My question: should the advanced version have been at +1 stealth but it was left off by accident? Compare to Govern the Unaligned, which costs 1 blood and does either a +2 bleed or adds 3 blood at +1 stealth. Concealed Weapon: Combat card which I think also was screwed up by accident. Can equip any minion with a weapon which costs no more than 2 or does more than 4 damage. No advanced version. Requires Obfuscate. The use of the word "minion" and the lack of a superior version make it look like this wasn't supposed to require a discipline. Disguised Weapon is point-by-point a better card, also (no cost restriction and has an advanced version which lets you equip during the strike phase.) Skipping phases: The rules point out every phase except untap is mandatory. Suppose I have two armed vampires who both were knocked down to 0 blood in a fight. Can I untap them and then skip my minion phase (so they don't have to tap to hunt, and instead can block for me while I get new blockers or find a way to put blood in them.) This can actually be a good strategy if I can play Fortitude cards on them to keep them from getting torpored. Obediance: A reaction card. Instead of fighting after you block an action, both minions are untapped and the minion you just blocked may not take the same action it just tried to take. My question: If a vampire was trying a +2 bleed and was stopped by Obediance, would it be prevented from performing _any_ bleed action this turn, or just that particular bleed (Conditioning, say.) What if it was rescuing a vampire from torpor? Is it prevented from taking another rescue form torpor action, or just from doing it to the same vampire as before? --

Tom Wylie

Owen P Reynolds <owen@iastate.edu> wrote: >Form of Mist... > Here's my question: when you are blocked, you toss away the action > card you were using--equipment, ally, etc... . You can only play > Form of Mist after you've been blocked and tossed it. Since it > doens't say anything about getting the card back, is FoM only useful > for continuing with an action requiring no card? If a combat card causes the combat to end and the action to resume, this essentially unblocks the action. The equipment/ally/retainer card is still available, and will still be put into play if the action is not blocked a second time. > Also, what about, say Computer Hacking directed at someone across > the table? Would your minion now continue with a normal bleed against > that same player, or are "bleed" and "Computer Hacking" completely > different actions? (I think any +N bleed card is a bleed.) You can use Computer Hacking against anyone you want. This would follow the other rules for bleeding, but would be at +1 bleed. If the Hacked bleed is successful, you get the edge. >Enchant Kindred... > My question: should the advanced version have been at +1 stealth but > it was left off by accident? Compare to Govern the Unaligned, which > costs 1 blood and does either a +2 bleed or adds 3 blood at +1 stealth. Possibly, but it could well have been that they just wanted a completely inferior version of GtU. I'll check on that. >Concealed Weapon... > ...Disguised Weapon... I wonder about these two, myself. It hadn't clicked that CW has no superior version... I'll point that out. >Skipping phases: The rules point out every phase except untap is mandatory. > Suppose I have two armed vampires who both were knocked down to 0 blood > in a fight. Can I untap them and then skip my minion phase... That's how the rules read, but it seems kind of odd. I haven't gotten an answer back on this, yes. >Obediance... > My question: If a vampire was trying a +2 bleed and was stopped by > Obediance, would it be prevented from performing _any_ bleed action > this turn, or just that particular bleed (Conditioning, say.) Conditioning is an action modifier, not an action. I believe that each type of bleeding *action* (i.e. free bleed vs. Computer Hacking vs. Legal Manipulations) is a different action, so a vampire stopped from Hacking via Obedience would still be able to use Legal Manipulations that turn. Assuming this is true, then it could use Conditioning on the Legal Manipulations even if it was used on the Computer Hacking. > What if it was rescuing a vampire from torpor? Is it prevented from > taking another rescue form torpor action, or just from doing it to > the same vampire as before? I'm pretty sure the action is "encounter a vampire in torpor", not "rescue a vampire from torpor" or "rescue vampire V from torpor". I'll double check both of these Obedience questions. Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

Red Adept

In article <owen.779583465@las3.iastate.edu>, owen@iastate.edu (Owen P Reynolds) wrote: [snip] >Form of Mist: This is a combat card. The advanced version says that > the acting vampire can go ahead with its action despite having been > blocked. > > Here's my question: when you are blocked, you toss away the action > card you were using--equipment, ally, etc... . You can only play > Form of Mist after you've been blocked and tossed it. Since it > doens't say anything about getting the card back, is FoM only useful > for continuing with an action requiring no card? You toss away the action card to show that you were blocked. If you continue on the action, I say retrieve it from the graveyard. If you were trying to equip with a laptop and were stopped, you can try again with this card. I see it like this. Lydia is out getting a laptop from her contact, she's stopped by Miranda, but uses Form of Mist to continue on her journey and ends up getting the goods. Looks fine to me. >Skipping phases: The rules point out every phase except untap is mandatory. > Suppose I have two armed vampires who both were knocked down to 0 blood > in a fight. Can I untap them and then skip my minion phase (so they > don't have to tap to hunt, and instead can block for me while I get > new blockers or find a way to put blood in them.) > This can actually be a good strategy if I can play Fortitude cards on > them to keep them from getting torpored. We haven't had this occur yet, but I'd say sure. Their next minion actions need to be hunts....but if you give skip the phase, you can put it off. >Obediance: A reaction card. Instead of fighting after you block an action, > both minions are untapped and the minion you just blocked may not > take the same action it just tried to take. > My question: If a vampire was trying a +2 bleed and was stopped by > Obediance, would it be prevented from performing _any_ bleed action > this turn, or just that particular bleed (Conditioning, say.) > What if it was rescuing a vampire from torpor? Is it prevented from > taking another rescue form torpor action, or just from doing it to > the same vampire as before? I'd say it would be prevented from bleeding in general....a bleed is a bleed, no matter how high the damaging factor is. Conditioning is a modifier, anyway, not an action.....but if you were Hacking, I'd say the action was a bleed against (non-prey), and as the after-Obedience action, you wanted to bleed your Prey....I can see the logic for allowing this. --Red +----------------------------------------------+---------------------------+ | Looking for Creature Bonds and Earthbinds!!! | redadept@cris.com | | If you'd like to contribute, send me E-mail! +---------------------------+ +----------------------------------------------+ Hail Eris! Fnord! | | Ferrets: Eris' gift to mankind, everyone should be owned by one! | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Joe Wells

In article <35aaqr$d67@perv.hal.COM> aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes: Owen P Reynolds <owen@iastate.edu> wrote: >Concealed Weapon... > ...Disguised Weapon... I wonder about these two, myself. It hadn't clicked that CW has no superior version... I'll point that out. The better one of them can only be used on vampires, not on all minions such as allies. -- Joe Wells <jbw@cs.bu.edu> Member of the League for Programming Freedom --- send e-mail for details

Owen P Reynolds

> >Concealed Weapon... > > ...Disguised Weapon... > I wonder about these two, myself. It hadn't clicked that CW has no > superior version... I'll point that out. >The better one of them can only be used on vampires, not on all minions >such as allies. Concealed Weapon (the worse one) can only be used by vampires. It says in the text that allies can use it, but the card requires you to have obfuscate, and no ally has or can get that talent. That's why I think the black obfuscate box may have been added to CW by accident. --

Rick Mc Leod

In <35aaqr$d67@perv.hal.COM>, aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes: >Owen P Reynolds <owen@iastate.edu> wrote: > >>Concealed Weapon... >> ...Disguised Weapon... > >I wonder about these two, myself. It hadn't clicked that CW has no >superior version... I'll point that out. > (Assume Acting V holds IR Goggles, Chainsaw) Isn't the timing of the two a significant difference? Consider the blocking V who would like to equip with a Sengir Dagger. Using CW at the beginning, he puts SD into play. Acting V says, "Whoa!", I think I'll manuever to long range please. Combat ends. Using DW, Acting V wants close range to do a little ripping, and Chooses chainsaw as strike. Blocking V whips out DW, drops the Sengir Dagger on the table, and carves a map to the torpor region on the acting V. !-----------------------------------------------------------------------------! Rick Mc Leod - Systems Wizard, Court Jester, Guardian of the Galaxy Environment MDA P/L PO Box 1692 N Sydney NSW 2058 Australia (02) 956-7966 rxm@mda.com.au/NIC:RM25/There can be only one...fortunately.

Cerebus The Aardvark

aahz@hal.COM (Tom Wylie) writes: >Owen P Reynolds <owen@iastate.edu> wrote: >> Also, what about, say Computer Hacking directed at someone across >> the table? Would your minion now continue with a normal bleed against >> that same player, or are "bleed" and "Computer Hacking" completely >> different actions? (I think any +N bleed card is a bleed.) >You can use Computer Hacking against anyone you want. This would follow >the other rules for bleeding, but would be at +1 bleed. If the Hacked >bleed is successful, you get the edge. Is this a reversal of a previous ruling? I seem to recall you (or someone) saying that the (D) on computer hacking was there so that only your prey could block the hack... Or something. -- | kreme@netcom.com \ 1015 South Gaylord, Denver, CO 80209 #100 | | PGP Fingerprint \ 1D 5E F7 C8 7E C2 F9 87 0F 86 C9 B0 D2 63 9C B2 | | [303/722-2009] Vox \ I'm a Flintstone kid, and you're not! | | [303/777-2911] Data \ I'm not sure she liked the sprite in you. |

Joe Wells

In article <owen.779749940@las3.iastate.edu> owen@iastate.edu (Owen P Reynolds) writes: > >Concealed Weapon... > > ...Disguised Weapon... Concealed Weapon (the worse one) can only be used by vampires. It says in the text that allies can use it, but the card requires you to have obfuscate, and no ally has or can get that talent. Good point. That's why I think the black obfuscate box may have been added to CW by accident. Perhaps some future expansions will allow some allies to have obfuscate? ?????? -- Joe Wells <jbw@cs.bu.edu> Member of the League for Programming Freedom --- send e-mail for details

Tom Wylie

Rick Mc Leod <rxm@mda.com.au> wrote: >>I wonder about these two, myself. It hadn't clicked that CW has no >>superior version... I'll point that out. >Isn't the timing of the two a significant difference?... Yes, there's a significant difference: Disguised Weapon can be used when strikes are declared, Concealed Weapon cannot. There is no time that CW can be used when DW can't; this is one of the reasons why people think that CW should not be an Obfuscate card. Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

Tom Wylie

Cerebus The Aardvark <kreme@netcom.com> wrote: >>You can use Computer Hacking against anyone you want. This would follow >>the other rules for bleeding, but would be at +1 bleed. If the Hacked >>bleed is successful, you get the edge. >Is this a reversal of a previous ruling? I seem to recall you (or someone) >saying that the (D) on computer hacking was there so that only your prey >could block the hack... Or something. This wavered a bit during the first week or two, yes. It has (finally, hopefully) come down on the side of being able to bleed whoever you want to. As with any directed action, only the player being affected can choose to block. Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for aahz@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.